Vote '04

**lemon boy** · 01-12-2004, 11:16 AM

Sorry if I didn't get your paradigm I tried to get as many as possible.

Just wanted to get a quick barometer from a pretty liberal place.

**bagtagley** · 01-12-2004, 11:23 AM

"Dammin I'm trying to tell you about fucking my wife in the ass and you're asking all these personal questions."

Chapelle

**Skidawg** · 01-12-2004, 11:38 AM

Last election I voted my conscience, which I felt was the right thing to do. This time I'm not.

**truth** · 01-12-2004, 11:57 AM

I'm voting for phUnk.

KQ · 01-12-2004, 12:07 PM

http://prodtn.cafepress.com/2/7292192_F_tn.jpg http://prodtn.cafepress.com/0/7469410_F_tn.jpg

**Beaver** · 01-12-2004, 12:12 PM

I will not vote. Only because I don't live in that country.

**shamrockpow** · 01-12-2004, 12:41 PM

Originally posted by Skidawg
Last election I voted my conscience, which I felt was the right thing to do. This time I'm not.

Lemme guess? Ralph Nader?

Great idea, but look what we ended up with. So for all the 2000 Naderites that said that Gore and Bush were "all part of the same major party political machine" - I hope you fucking get your act together in '04 and get out the vote for whoever the democratic candidate is...

**trainnvain** · 01-12-2004, 12:54 PM

http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/040109/danziger.gif http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/040107/matson.gif http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/040109/conrad.gif

Someone needs to get their act together....
http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/040108/locher.gif

I'll vote, I'll try to be positive. But the only positive words I can muster are TERM LIMIT

**Mcwop** · 01-12-2004, 01:39 PM

After much researh and deliberations I like Lieberman the best of anyone Dem or Repub. He would be tough on terror, is sensible about repealing tax cuts for only the truly rich, and has a pragmatic environmental record versus strict command-and-control style policies. Not sure how restrained he would be on new spending (though he does not have as many big $$$ proposals as others), but all the candidates suck in this area, including the current President.

**seldon** · 01-12-2004, 01:46 PM

cannot vote, i am not 18. but if i did i'd fall into the "anything but bush category".

disclaimer: i live in san francisco. there are 3 republicans in my school of 400. we almost elected a green party mayor. i am not a green party member. (though i'll show up at any party if its free

).

KQ · 01-12-2004, 01:46 PM

Originally posted by Mcwop
After much researh and deliberations I like Lieberman the best of anyone Dem or Repub. He would be tough on terror, is sensible about repealing tax cuts for only the truly rich, and has a pragmatic environmental record versus strict command-and-control style policies. Not sure how restrained he would be on new spending (though he does not have as many big $$$ proposals as others), but all the candidates suck in this area, including the current President.

Not a snowballs' chance in Hell..............

**Platinum Pete** · 01-12-2004, 02:00 PM

Next Monday in Iowa will say a lot.
I don't think Dean will take it, but that won't hurt him much by itself. If Gephart doesn't take Iowa, he's ruined. The non-Dean-Dems are working pretty hard to deny him Iowa, NH, and SC. If he loses all 3 (no one will win more than one), he could be fucked.
I'd like to see Gephart win Iowa, Kerry win NH, and and Clark take SC. That would stir things up well.
In the end I think I'd be happy with a Clark or Kerry (and maybe Gephart) for Prez and Mosely-Braun as the running mate. Dean deserves thanks for making noise and getting people excited, but I don't think he can do the job right.
What I'd really like to see is Al Sharpton beating the shit out of Karl Rove in a cage match.

~ discuss

**Yossarian** · 01-12-2004, 02:02 PM

$50 on Sharpton. Takers?

KQ · 01-12-2004, 02:10 PM

http://sharpton2004.org/uploads/xrjejpgdjucz.jpg http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/us...rove/rove2.jpg

**summit** · 01-12-2004, 04:48 PM

McCain/Leiberman 04 (my impossible dream)

That woudl be and incredible duo for this country.

The only problem with those two are antigun.

Edited to add:

Meanwhile, in the real world...

The only two dems that stand a snowballs chance are Kerry and Clark. I like Clark except he is flip flopping and I read a fascist streak in him that is almost as big as Ashcroft. And Kerry (and Ghephardt) still stinks of failure from the midterm elections.

Bush is praying with all his heart that he gets to run against Dean because that would be no contest.

**lemon boy** · 01-12-2004, 04:53 PM

McCain Lieberman?

Come on -

I'm taking Powell/Lieberman

Actually, depending I may be writing in Powell.

Looks like the shrubbies all have jobs and showed up at the end of the day

**Buster Highmen** · 01-12-2004, 04:55 PM

Originally posted by Platinum Pete
Dean deserves thanks ... but I don't think he can do the job right.~ discuss

Can you explain? Dean is a financial conservative with a lot of appeal to moderate Republicans. He's been a Gov, has political experience and stuck to his principles in an initially unpopular anti-Iraq war stance.
The rest of 'em seem like the same fucking old story to me and spineless to boot.

**grrrr** · 01-12-2004, 04:58 PM

I'm in the "other" category. I will wait until 630 on election night and look at the results. If there is a chance of beating Bush, I might vote for the Democrat.

Otherwise, I might write in Wesley Clark, who I don't think will get the nomination, being too conservative for the Dems right now.

**summit** · 01-12-2004, 05:03 PM

Dean is a class warrior and a trial lawyer. Not what Wallstreet GOPers want.

Dean may not want to run a deficit, but there aren't enough fiscal conservative GOPers who can stomach Deans extremely liberal social policy agenda to make a misquito shit's worth of difference.

Furthermore, Deans total lack of military experience is yet another weakpoint in this security oriented time.

Dean only real support will come from the hardcore left. This makes him easy to beat and this is why Bush is praying to run against him.

**grrrr** · 01-12-2004, 05:07 PM

Originally posted by Buster Highmen
Can you explain? Dean is a financial conservative with a lot of appeal to moderate Republicans. He's been a Gov, has political experience and stuck to his principles in an initially unpopular anti-Iraq war stance.
The rest of 'em seem like the same fucking old story to me and spineless to boot.

Sorry Buster, as a moderate (neither Republican nor Democrat), I don't think Dean would be the man. The republicans are salivating over the possibility that he would get the nomination.

But you're right, most of the democrats are pretty cookie-cutter.

**summit** · 01-12-2004, 05:09 PM

I agree with grrrrr

For the record I have no party affiliation. I am a moderate centrist independent.

**Tippster** · 01-12-2004, 05:15 PM

Originally posted by SummitCo 1776
...Furthermore, Deans total lack of military experience is yet another weakpoint in this security oriented time...

Riiiight... yet Bush being in the Texas Air Natl. Guard (and going AWOL for a year to work for his daddy's friend) during Vietnam is certainly causing me to rest easier. Cheney didn't serve, neither did Rumsfeld....

The only thing worse than a hawk is a chickenhawk. Personally I couldn't give two shits if the president was in the military or not. It didn't make a whit of difference during the previous administration.

But he got a (consentual) blowjob. Bad, Bubba....bad!

**The AD** · 01-12-2004, 05:22 PM

I just read in the paper today that Dick Cheney now says he would support a Constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriages.

It repulses me that anyone is even considering amending the Constitution for something so ridiculous. Just one more reason for "anyone but Bush/Cheney" in my book.

KQ · 01-12-2004, 05:26 PM

Everything is going to Hell in a handbasket. Did you see this in today's papers?

Report: U.S. to push national air passenger database
02:31 PM PST on Monday, January 12, 2004

By RAY LANE / KING 5 News

SEATTLE - There’s another big potential big change the next time you head to the airport, and it comes with plenty of controversy.

Despite stiff resistance from airlines and privacy advocates, the U.S. government plans to push ahead this year with a vast computerized system to probe the backgrounds of all passengers boarding flights in the United States.

The Washington Post reports Monday that the government will compel airlines and airline reservation companies to hand over all passenger records for scrutiny by U.S. officials, creating a huge database on the backgrounds of every passenger before they board an aircraft.

The order could be issued as soon as next month.

Under the plan, all travelers passing through U.S. airports will be scored with a number and a color that ranks their perceived threat to the aircraft.

A red rating means a passengers would be prohibited from boarding. A yellow a passenger would get additional questioning at the security checkpoint, and a green rating paves the way for a standard trip through security.

Also factored into passengers' scores would be intelligence about certain routes and airports where there might be higher-rated concerns about security.

Another program that will introduced this year would speed frequent fliers through security lines in exchange for 'volunteering' personal information to the government.

The new security screening plan would be used with a system introduced last week to fingerprint and photograph millions of foreign visitors once they arrive in the U.S.