Well, here we go. Tomorrow is Election Day. About damned time!
I don’t think there’s anyone out there who isn’t completely tired of the whole process. In fact, I’ll bet they do it this way so that when your candidate loses, you’ll be so fricking tired of the whole thing, you’ll just say, “Yeah, whatever. Is the football game on yet?”
Well, just so the two or three of you who did not skip this post as soon as I said “election” can go on with your lives, I’ll get this out of the way quickly: I am voting for John Kerry.
Some of you are saying, “Well duh.”
Others are screaming, “Why, God, why?”
I say the same thing when I look at poll numbers that have the electorate split between the two candidates. How can such an utter failure of a President as George W. Bush be making this such a close race? To quote a line from Saturday Night Live: “How could anyone be losing to this guy?” To vote against him, there are a thousand reasons (at last count, 1546, actually). If you can think of a President who messed up on every issue before the nation (and I mean every fricking issue), I’d like to know who it was.
Is our economy better? No.
Is our health care system better? No.
Is our education system better? No.
Is the environment better? No.
Foreign relations? Hell no.
Are we safer? As the jeering face of Osama bin Laden reminds us, Bush can’t even get the bad guy he vowed to catch “dead or alive” three years ago.
One popular counter argument from Bush supporters goes like this: “Anyone who votes for Kerry is just voting against the President. Nobody says they’re voting for John Kerry.” Like it’s a bad thing to vote against someone.
Since when? When did “throw the bums out” become wrong? Does it mean that your vote doesn’t count? Just because you don’t like the policies of an incumbent, you have no business voting? Puh-leeze. If you’re voting for John Kerry just because he’s “anybody but Bush,” then good for you! That’s just as valid a reason to vote as any other, and don’t let anyone make you feel guilty for it.
For me, a big chunk of my vote will come from an anti-Bush stance. I don’t like the way he took us into a war under dubious pretense. I don’t like the PATRIOT Act. I don’t like his support of an anti-gay marriage amendment. I don’t like his environmental policies. And I really don’t like that damned smirk.
However, I am voting for John Kery. He has a plan to deal with Iraq that sounds better than “just hang tough.” He has a plan for getting health care coverage to the majority of Americans. He has a plans for education and the economy and a hundred other things. And even if all of them are just dreams on paper, they’re more than what Bush has published.
But there I go voting against someone again…
Well, campaigns with an incumbent are about the performance of the guy with the position, and Bush can’t give me a reason not to vote for John Kerry. At least, one that is a) coherent and b) more applicable to Bush than it is to Kerry. So, Kerry it is then. If he does a bad job, I can make another decision in four years.
It is a sad commentary that the greatest country on earth cannot give it’s people a choice in candidates that it’s voters will want to vote for, rather than against.
That having been said, I’m voting against President Bush. As entertaining as those Rumsfeld press conferences are…..
Stand by, hanging chads.
i’m voting -for- Kerry.
what is most disheartening about voting, for me, is not that the candidates are dorks in their own specials ways, not that Bush is somehow alive in the polls (who is voting for this guy? who? why?), but that i’m not even sure my vote will ‘count’ in my state. i realize NYC is a more liberal-slanted city, which is good, but is the population large enough to balance out all the upstate hunters who are voting against Kerry simply because they’ve been told “he’s for gun control; he’s going to take our guns away” ??? what also gets my tummy in knots is worrying that we might have another fudged ballot/voting process, again. i am deeply, irrevocably emotionally scarred by the Chads.
and i’m so nervous about tomorrow.
How dare you vote against someone you don’t like…oh wait a minute, it’s the same thing I’m doing. In fact it’s what I’ve been telling all those I know who are voting for a thrid party candidate or god forbid writing someone in.
You mean, you Peace-loving, Dope-headed, Liberal, Faggot-lover that you are going to try to vote for John Kerry, doncha?
Yes, I think that’s exactly what I said, jc. 🙂
Solly, you know what’s worse? We’re both covering our respective states for the Command Post’s Election 2004 blog!
And I’m voting FOR Kerry, because I want a President who can make compound sentences.
Uh… John Kerry’s plan for healthcare is to spend a bajillion dollars and have the federal government basically take it over. Great plan.
His plan for social security is to do nothing, but do nothing thoughtfully. ‘Cause it won’t collapse until after he’s out of office anyway.
His plan for the economy is to raise taxes?!?! That’s not a plan I can really get behind. If he was planning on reducing spending (as opposed to spending more), I’d be more willing to listen.
I’m not sure what his plan for the environment is, but Congress has made it quite clear that Kyoto will never be ratified even if he wants to sign up for it.
As far as education goes, the last thing we need is MORE meddling by the federal government. My wife teaches 1st grade and No Child Left Behind requires too much time as it is. If Kerry is going to do any more than that, she may just quit and go do something else. She won’t have any time to actually teach anything.
As far as foreign policy goes, given the Oil for Food Scam and other UN debacles, I’m not all that interested in wooing the UN, France, Germany, or Russia. I’m not sure what allies we’ve pissed off that he wants to get back, but if he’s going to have to substantially change our foreign policy to do so, I’m not sure I’m for it.
If he decides to reopen bilateral talks with North Korea, then China, the 800 lb. gorilla right next to NK will back out of the existing talks and let us take over the problem again. Bush stopped bilateral talks precisely to force China to get involved. If they think we’ll handle NK, then they’ll do nothing. If we convince them that we won’t, then they have to.
I don’t think Kerry will pull out of Iraq prematurely, but many of his supporters hope and expect him to. If he does, then we’ll see a major disaster in that country.
Bolie IV
And Bolie the Republican Bot’s plan is to hop from blog to blog spouting off anti-Kerry rhetoric the night before the election. We all have our little roles to play. And I’m bored, so what the hell.
“John Kerry’s plan for healthcare is to spend a bajillion dollars and have the federal government basically take it over. Great plan.”
I like it. What’s Bush’s plan? *crickets*
http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/health_care/
“His plan for social security is to do nothing, but do nothing thoughtfully. ‘Cause it won’t collapse until after he’s out of office anyway.”
As opposed to spending it into oblivion, like Bush has done?
http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/health_care/medicare.html
“His plan for the economy is to raise taxes?!?! That’s not a plan I can really get behind. If he was planning on reducing spending (as opposed to spending more), I’d be more willing to listen.”
As you are so fond of saying, “uh…” no. Show me where the plan of either candidate is to “raise taxes.” And don’t drag out the same, discredited “Kerry voted to raise taxes 98 times” thing. Read factcheck.org instead of iheartthegop.com for a change.
http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/economy/
“I’m not sure what his plan for the environment is, but Congress has made it quite clear that Kyoto will never be ratified even if he wants to sign up for it.”
http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/environment/
“As far as education goes, the last thing we need is MORE meddling by the federal government. My wife teaches 1st grade and No Child Left Behind requires too much time as it is. If Kerry is going to do any more than that, she may just quit and go do something else. She won’t have any time to actually teach anything.”
Perhaps if No Child Left Behind were more than just words on paper, Bush might have won a point with this one.
http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/education/
“As far as foreign policy goes, given the Oil for Food Scam and other UN debacles, I’m not all that interested in wooing the UN, France, Germany, or Russia. I’m not sure what allies we’ve pissed off that he wants to get back, but if he’s going to have to substantially change our foreign policy to do so, I’m not sure I’m for it.”
http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/national_security/
“If he decides to reopen bilateral talks with North Korea, then China, the 800 lb. gorilla right next to NK will back out of the existing talks and let us take over the problem again. Bush stopped bilateral talks precisely to force China to get involved. If they think we’ll handle NK, then they’ll do nothing. If we convince them that we won’t, then they have to.”
Baloney! China’s not stupid. They know as well as we that a nuclear-armed North Korea is dangerous. So does Russia and Japan. Being willing to talk is not a sign of weakness. It’s a sign of LIFE!
“I don’t think Kerry will pull out of Iraq prematurely, but many of his supporters hope and expect him to. If he does, then we’ll see a major disaster in that country.”
I don’t know what supporters to which you refer. Everyone knows the kind of mess we have to clean up. Cutting and running is not in the cards.
Thank you for playing, though. Come again.
http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/health_care
They don’t actually say what their plan is, just that it will cut costs. So how are they going to cut costs? Through government subsidies? Mandated prices? Magic?
The “artificial barriers” to generic drug competition are patent laws. So are they going to break patents? Eliminate patents for drugs? If so, then what will they do to give drug companies incentives to develop new drugs?
I like how they are going to reduce paperwork and administrative processing. The federal government doesn’t have a great track record in this regard.
Drug reimportation from Canada will just drive Canadian drug prices up, not reduce American prices. Americans pay most of the fixed costs of drug development while foreign countries tend to just pay the marginal costs. If we stop paying the fixed costs by buying Canadian, the drug companies will have to raise prices there, too.
So Kerry is proposing a “plan” that will cost a lot of money and/or won’t work.
http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/health_care/medicare.html
So Kerry says the plan will be solvent until 2042 (which is one of the longer estimates I’ve seen) and his plan is to basically ride it out for his 4-8 years in office. He proposes to expand the benefits, though, which seems to me like it would cost more. In one of the debates he said he’d bring together experts to determine what to do, but he would not reduce benefits or extend the retirement age. Bush’s plan (partial privatization) was developed after meeting with experts. What if Kerry’s experts recommend privatization? Will he reject their idea and send them back?
http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/economy/
First of all, sending jobs overseas in the long run helps the economy by reducing costs. In the long run, jobs do not vanish, they just shift. Someone in another country will now do a job while the American who was doing that job will do something else. We’ve had this happen before. Jobs leave the country, more are created to fill their places. Presidents don’t actually create or destroy jobs. They may have some influence, but not much.
He’s proposing elsewhere to raise spending. But in his “economy” section, he’s going cut taxes and balance the budget. So is he going to take all them oney from the wealthy? They already pay most of the taxes as it is, on average. There’s a lot of smoke here, but not much in the way of a workable plan.
http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/environment/
Kerry says he’s going to clean up the environment without saying how. It sounds great, but I’m not sure how he’s going to do it. Typically, growing the economy will produce more pollution. You can increase efficiency to some extent, but government regulation rarely does that well. I live in Houston. We process about half of the petrochemicals brought into the country. If the chemical plants here were all required to meet all current emissions laws 100%, they would all shut down. They couldn’t afford it. They’ve been slowly working to clean up, but they just can’t do it overnight. If they did shut down, the US economy would be crippled. As an aside, Houston suffers from dirty air in part from these plants. So all the folks who use the products produced by these factories gain the benefit while I breathe their crap. Then I’m expected to not mow my lawn, avoid driving during the day, etc… to meet the Clean Air Act rules. I don’t get a choice. So Kerry is going to come in and be even more heavy handed about it? Great…
http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/education/
Wow. More programs that cost money. My wife will be delighted to hear that she might be one of the teachers “asked” to stay for the Shools open ’til 6 program. It’s not enough that she goes in early to get ready and grades papers in the evening.
So the Federal Government is going to take over administration of the nation’s schools? Or is it going to hand out a bunch of rules that the local districts have to comply with? I guess if it’s handing out money, that’s okay. But where is this money going to come from? Above, Kerry is talking about reducing taxes and balancing the budget.
And is he really going to take on the Teachers’ unions to make it easier to fire incompetent teachers? I’d like to see that, but doubt it will happen.
http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/national_security/
So are we going to stand by our principles even if the world disagrees with us? Or do we chuck our principles and go along with the world? Sometimes you have to choose… Which way will Kerry choose? For the US or for the world?
Countries don’t have friends, they have interests. If he’s looking to have the US be liked, he’s going to be disappointed.
I’m not sure who is going to be in his coalition of the able, but France and Germany have apparently no intereste in really working with us, they are too busy aligning against us to solidify their power in the EU. They have a lot of strong financial interests in the Middle East and would rather not see their boat rocked.
Again, he proposes using more resources which requires more money.
Also, ending our dependence on Middle Eastern oil is only going to be accomplished by one thing. Nuclear power. All of the renewable, clean, alternative energy sources put together can’t provide nearly enough power to keep our economy going (and growing). What do you think the odds are that Kerry will promote nuclear power?
Also, the Chinese aren’t stupid. They’d rather manipulate us into dealing with North Korea. They tried that initially, by agreeing to sponsor talks with use and NK and then claiming to merely be “hosts”. We walked out until they agreed to be full participants. If they think we’re engaged with NK, they’ll back out and let us handle it. At least that’s what they’ve been doing up until this moment. I guess Kerry could charm them into wanting to cooperate, but I don’t think that’s likely.
BTW, I’m not a republican and I’m not pro-Bush, per se. I think he’ll be a bad President, but a better one than Kerry. I decide other races on their merits and don’t vote straight tickets, by any means.
Bolie IV
Sorry to have called you a ‘bot, Bolie. I’m just so sick of the arguing that my head’s not screwed on straight.
I disagree with you almost completely, but that’s why I’m voting one way and you’re voting another. The bickering over the election will (please, God) end today. I don’t want to carry it on in my comments section. Thanks.