response 49 of 175:

Oct 28 06:44 UTC 2000

I voted early, and voted Nader. Nyah. :)

response 51 of 175:

Oct 28 07:26 UTC 2000

First off I have to say the politics of fear being promoted by Gore and
his cronies in groups like the Sierra Club and NARAL is really backfiring
for me.  Far from convincing me to vote for Gore it is making me disgusted
with the narrow single issue comparamised stance these groups are willing
to take.

I voted for Clinton/Gore back in 19992 when the slogan was "people first," 
anyone remeber that?  We were promised a national health care system,
strong environmental laws, and and advocacy for gay rights.  What did we
get?  A failed health care plan, weakly defended and soon abandoned, the
"salvage rider" which has allowed timber companies to cut 10s of thousands
of acres of old growth trees in the west, and "don't ask, don't tell," 
which has actually increased the harassment of gays in the military.  In
96 I was disgusted by all the broken promasises I got by voting for the
"lesser of two evils," and I voted for Nader.  I intend to vote for Nader
again for I believe you should vote for the canidate who represents what
you stand for rather than voting based on fear which doesn;t seem ethical
to me. At sdome poimt I believe you have to just say no to corporate
backed business as usual politics.

response 53 of 175:

Oct 28 11:23 UTC 2000

Re #51:  Raven, what else was it that Clinton promsed in '92?  Was it an
administration that would be open and honest or was it open and ethical?

I remember the soundbite on the news, but the exact wording deteriorated over
the years.  Obviously, many campaign promises must fail because they are
unacceptable to the legislature, but Clinton could kept this one promise.

response 55 of 175:

Oct 28 14:54 UTC 2000

The open hostility displayed here and in other locations by cattle-minded
party line democrats toward anyone who would *dare* support Nader continues
to convince me that my highly developed distaste for party politics is
well-founded.  There isn't even an attempt to reason with those who spring
for Nader;  once you've differed withthe party in any way, you apparently fare
no better than the enemy.  I'd be far more impressed with a genuine attempt
to discuss idealogical differences, maybe even a democratic party movement
to reconcile those whom they've lost.  Instead, I hear vague discussion of
voter turnouts, percentages, and utter doom if a democrat does not hold the
executive office.  

I'm almost tempted to vote for Nader just to piss everyone off.  It won't do
any good, though.  The Republicratic party is just too thick-headed to see
past the end of its collective nose.

response 57 of 175:

Oct 28 15:32 UTC 2000

Sarcasm, indeed. Please take a laxative. 

response 59 of 175:

Oct 28 16:43 UTC 2000

I would prefere someone who said "Nyah" to some of the ( get ready for the
woman bashing segment) to some of the women I have talked to who are voting
EITHER way because they find the candidates looks more appealing.  Maybe we
should leave voting for men just to the men, and voting for women just to the
women.

response 61 of 175:

Oct 28 20:44 UTC 2000

Please condsider also that two of the most liberal supreme court justices
David Souter and John Paul Stevens were nominated by Republicans. Thus
even if baby Bush were to win it doesn't automatically mean that a woman
will lose her right to chose as the NARAL/NOW/Gore clique would like you
to believe.

For more on the supremes see: http://commondreams.org/views/102800-105.htm

I suppose I don't want to see baby Bush win because he would probably do
bad things for the environment, etc, however, I don't really want to see
Gore win either because it's just more of the same plus people are more
likely to be complacent about the result since a "democrat" is in office.

response 63 of 175:

Oct 28 23:02 UTC 2000

Yes, I did help select a new leader for the world's most powerful 
nation, and do you think I voted Nader to spite people? To prove a 
point? No.

Sigh. I shouldn't even have to explain this, but ok: the 'nyah' comes 
from all this crap I keep seeing here (and elsewhere) about how a vote 
for Nader doesn't count, that it's a throwaway vote. As I stated 
earlier, the only vote that does not count is a vote that is not cast. 
I'm tired of hearing "but you trashed your vote!" every time I turn 
around. 

If I did not take my vote seriously, then I would have voted Gore, for 
the sake of appeasing those who feel that is the only vote that counts. 
If I did not take my vote seriously, then I would have voted Bush, 
since my whole family is staunchly Republican. I will catch all kinds 
of hell now for voting anyone other than Bush. 

As for Bruce's comment... I agree, it is annoying when people vote for 
a candidate simply based upon looks. But hasn't the more handsome, 
taller, more charismatic candidate always won? (And it's fact about the 
taller presidential candidate always winning, by the way). And I'd love 
to vote for a woman, but last time I checked, there weren't ever any 
mainstream women candidates. 

response 65 of 175:

Oct 29 01:38 UTC 2000

What are you basing that statement on?

response 67 of 175:

Oct 29 05:52 UTC 2000

I've come to realize that Bush is really delivering one-liners, in a
moderately soft superficially reasonable voice. It is a technique used
by stand-up comics. Listen to it. What's *really* funny is that the
audience usually isn't rotfl. 

response 69 of 175:

Oct 29 10:43 UTC 2000

So.  You wanna vote for a predident based on who is the better comic?

response 71 of 175:

Oct 29 17:34 UTC 2000

        Maybe people vote for the shorter name.  That seems to be 
the way since Johnson's win until Clinton v Dole.
        Now to confuse us, both are four letter words.

response 73 of 175:

Oct 29 18:06 UTC 2000

What's lumpy about being juvenile? If everyone wasn't juvenile at one
time or another, then.... (?) .... then, what?