My latest plea for Party Unity:

[Tyler Durden]

There is no way to make the Democratic Party resemble the Socialist Worker's Party before November, So I am solidly behind the Democrats because they aren't the Republicans.

To try to live up to the "…perverse 'what should be'…" (Lenny Bruce) is an exercise in futility. As was aptly stated elsewhere, our system is not a parliamentary one, but winner take all.

Unless that changes in the next six months, then the election is not really a political contest; it's a test of the evolutionary suitability of our political system.

This is why:

If Bush Wins, then…

…Will the constitution soon contain codicils condemning anything but Man/Woman Christian style marriage?

Yes,

…Will a woman's right to choose her own reproductive destiny be gone?

Yes.

…Will the Supreme Court reflect the extremist attitudes of the Republican Party and damn the rest of us?

Yes.

…Will the continued theft of the nation's wealth accelerate to a velocity that would have made Jay Gould proud?

Yes.

…Will the demolition of the structures designed to protect the common man soon make "Credit Mobilier" and "Teapot Dome" look like the "United Way?"

Yes.

Then how can anyone with half a brain state that there is no difference between the two parties? Unless you want what Bush has to offer, I have a distasteful but accurate suggestion regarding the election of the Democratic Candidate:

If you do not support George W. Bush for President, then "Shut up and soldier."

[RandomKoolzip]

1. Thank you, Mr. Durden.

Well said, and I agree with all of it. But I'll bet you'll just get a bunch of:

a) "Don't tell me who to vote for!"
b) "But Kerry voted for woof woof blah blah!"
c) "Kerry and Edwards haven't *EARNED* my vote!"
d) "Suddenly Mr. Electability isn't looking so hot, huh?"
e) "You guys are bullies."
f) "I WILL NOT fall in line!!!!"
g) "There is no difference between the two parties."
h) "Based on what has happened on DU in the last year, I'm willing to turn my back on all the gains that the Democratic Party has made."
i) "Well, nobody wanted my candidate, and everybody said bad things about him, so fuck unity. I'm in it for ME."
j) "You're all following blindly!"
k) "You're just a mindless conformist who won't think for himself! Unlike me, who is such a *rugged individual* that I'll unconciously do the bidding of the BFEE."

[SaddenedDem]

2. Why don't you address the rest, though?

Will the Johns allow US jobs to continue to move offshore?

Yes

Will the Johns allow hospital and pharmecutical corporations to kill people with "pay up or die?"

Yes

Will the Johns continue the NCLB stupidity?

Yes

Will the Johns continue to allow civil rights abuses through the USA Patriot Act?

Yes

Will the Johns continue to support harmful legislation like Welfare Reform and corporate malfeasance laws?

Yes

So, what was it you felt garnered my support?

Cause I sure as hell don't see it.

[RandomKoolzip]

3. What makes you think Bush will be better?

Because there really are only two choices: Bush or the Johns. And we can all make a smaller gain that we all wish for or lose more than we ever knew we had this election. I know the choice I will make.

[SaddenedDem]

6. Sorry, but you're incorrect

There are more than 2 choices. You know, like Howard Dean, Dennis Kucinich, Al Sharpton, etc.

And, on the other issue, where's the gain????? If the Johns don't alter the things which matter to me, where's the gain?????? It's an honest question.

on edit:
And if my original questions don't matter to you, then I'm truly sorry some are given the right to vote.

[RandomKoolzip]

8. Either Kerry or Edwards will be the candidate.

Dean was my candidate, but Dean's not in the race anymore, and Sharpton....I mean, really.

Sorry, that's the way it's shaping up. I'd MUCH rather it be Kucinich, but we don't live in a perfect world. In fact, going with DEAN was a compromise for me. And I identify myself as pretty far left; I was a Green until 2003. Most Americans don't. There are more moderates than Greens or progressives. Unfortunate, but true. So compromise is inescapable here.

Maybe Kerry or Edswards won't make life on Earth a utopia with free health care and no violence and puppies for everyone, but realistically....do you really think, that with the House, the Senate, and the SCOTUS owned by the republicans, that if Kucinich or Nader WON the GE, that they'd be able to get bills passed for their more progressive legislation without MAJOR bloodshed in Washington? And then eventual compromise anyway? Don't you think they'd be fought every step of the way, having to deflect attacks from the media and all three seats of government? And from guys like you, accusing them of backing down and being spineless? Even if Kerry gets in, he'll have a lot of fighting to do. Remember, Kerry is a "wacko lefty communist" to a lot of Americans; that's the perception. They don't view him as a pink tutu like we do.

At least with Kerry, there is a proven record of voting liberal on many issues. He's not perfect, and I have some issues with him as well, but he's really the only choice that will make things ANY better. But there are signs for hope. Now that the Dem base has been energized for Dean, Kerry will be taking notes. And with the gains that the party has made in the last six months, there will be a more concerted push to get more progressive candidates into the Senate this year, which may overturn the balance of power.

If voting Green is important to you, I suggest looking at your local elections. I always vote Green in local elections, if given the choice, and progress on the local level is actually pretty important. It's just that this election, the GE, is FAR too crucial to cede to the BFEE.

[SaddenedDem]

13. If that's the case

I refuse to settle for "not as bad as Bush."

[RandomKoolzip]

14. So...."Bush," then.

n/t

[SaddenedDem]

7. One more question for you

Why is "not quite as bad as Bush" a solution for YOU?

I find that approach stunningly naive.

[RandomKoolzip]

10. Hmmm. I find it realistic.

n/t

[bryant69]

11. This is a dumb question

There's nothing "Not quite as bad as Bush" about this. I'm sorry that your particular candidate failed to run a successful campaign, but both John Kerry and John Edwards are much better than Bush on pretty much every level. There's nothing "Not Quite as bad" about it.

This is the old Nader lie; there's no difference between Kerry or Edwards (or Gore) and President Bush. But there are enormous differences between them.

Bryant

[SaddenedDem]

12. It was his/her own word

"we can all make a smaller gain that we all wish for"

So how is that NOT to be interpreted as "not as bad as Bush?"

I didn't say it - that poster did. I simply questioned why it was OK to settle for "not as bad as Bush" knowingly.

I still find it stunningly naive. And still don't see an answer to it.

[Tyler Durden]

16. Here's your answer in two words:

"Recess Appointment," or if you prefer it more direct,

"Charles Pickering."

There is no other salient argument. Spend the next four years working for the change we all want under the protection of a Democratic President or under the damnation of Bush.

[SaddenedDem]

18. Intelligent voters won't accept your fear campaign

Any more than Bush's fear campaign about war has worked on the masses.

"Not as bad as Bush" is no reason to vote. What that does is allow MORE voters to skip the process because it doesn't matter in their daily lives who is in the White House.

So, if you don't give me something to vote FOR, I'll join the rest of the masses on election day and stay home. The Johns are a stay home candidacy.

If you can't recognize that, the Democratic party is sure to lose another critical election and become moot.

The Johns will finish off the Democratic party because of apathy.

[Tyler Durden]

20. Enjoy the Revolution...

...because a Bush Presidency, In my not-so-humble History Minor opinion, not only insures it, but makes its chances of being grossly violent much higher.

You and your "If I can't get who and what I want, I'm taking my ball and going home..." attitude is what made Bush possible in the first place. Apathy is their biggest ally.

Instead of your "all or nothing" approach, why don't you start making plans to influence the New President and his administration? Or work like HELL for local candidates?

Your my way or the highway is tiresome, and its prevalence will bring on the inevitable Polical upheaval faster, and with a vengeance.

Enjoy the Reign of Terror. I'm not staying for it.

[RandomKoolzip]

24. BECAUSE THERE'S NO OTHER OPTION, DUDE!

Please explain to me what our alternatives are.

Oh, wait, lemme guess: voting third party in the GE, right? In other words, voting FOR Bush. So it's either you vote Dem or vote Bush. Neither option turns me on, but one of the options ensures that an openly fascist agenda will not be pursued.

How long have you been voting for? Do you realize how long it's been since we had an GE that wasn't a contest between the lesser of two evils? Compromise is central to American politics, most apparently so in the arena of the General Election. I, frankly, find your platform of "throw a tantrum because I DON' WANNA compromise" pretty naive myself.

[SaddenedDem]

26. There ARE options

Yes, I'm quite aware how long it's been since we had a GE that wasn't a contest between the lesser of two evils. Way too long. And as long as people like you are willing to accept that it will always be that way.

You see, I've been voting for over 30 years. I've seen a lot of "evils" in my lifetime. I've simply decided that the lesser of two evils isn't good enough any more. I've decided the legacy I'll leave my children doesn't result in a lifetime of the lesser of two evils.

I'm sorry that you find it acceptable. It's what is wrong with our country. Giving up real representation has resulted in the Bushes of our lifetime. I've drawn my line in the sand and this is it.

I'll never again vote for the lesser of two evils. "Not as bad as Bush" just isn't good enough this time.

[Tyler Durden]

28. Man who draw line in sand and not cross it...

Usually drown when the tide comes in.

By the way, I have you beat: I've been voting for almost 35 years, all of it as a Socialist, and I haven't got my way yet.

Get real, chum. There are much worse things than compromise. Besides, it isn't the lesser of two evils that got us Bush. It's the theft of the country by the Media, the Rich and the Courts. Better get some allies, fast, or else plan on the futile act of fighting city hall for the rest of your life.

[hippiegranny]

27. stunningly naive?

pot, meet kettle.

[bryant69]

5. I guess it depends on your priorities

Both Johns have health care proposals; ones that have a bit better chance of passing than pie in the sky dreams.

I believe that both will curtail civil rights abuses, if not eliminate them entirely. For one thing, it is extremely doubtful that John Ashcroft would be the Attorney General in a Kerry or Edwards administration. And if you aren't afraid of Mr. Ashcroft, you really should pay better attention.

Corporate Malfeasance laws? Boy there's a scary sounding phrase that doesn't mean anything. But it sure is scary.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[buckeye1]

9. Whats your program?

Notice that there will never be a reply from the freeper.

[SaddenedDem]

15. What's my program???? Bwahahahahahaahhaha

well, there were plenty of replies from me, so I guess I don't qualify for "freeper" status, huh?

I have no "program." I have a desire to make fundamental change in this country and support a candidate who can lead the charge to do so. The Johns don't qualify - by the posters' in this thread own admissions.

[Tyler Durden]

17. Nobody thinks you're a Freeper...

Just unrealistic.

What do I want?

Universal Healthcare
Living Wage Minimum Wage
Universal Pension Protection under Social Security
No more Military.

Etcetera.

Am I going to get them? Nope. Will Bush make it worse? Yep.

I still don't see the discussion.

[SaddenedDem]

19. I still don't see the discussion.

Then you won't see voters at the polls voting for your guy either.

Not as bad as Bush is NOT a campaign. It's an excuse.

[Tyler Durden]

21. Since you can't have it your way....

...then you'll help Bush have it HIS way.

Futile.

[Kahuna]

4. Don't forget a draft to fight fight oil wars!

nt

[Kazak]

22. I'm down...

I may have to hold my nose, but I am definitely voting Dem.

[ArwenJade]

23. I totally agree

I'm farther left than most people in the current Democratic party, but I'm voting democrat because I can't stand another 4 years of Bush. I know people that want to vote on their principles and hate the Johns, but they are the only real choice right now.
I also know people who want Bush to win so there will be a revolution, but there is no assurance of that. Most people are sheep and need to be taught slowly before they realize how the government is treating them.
A lot of bad things can happen in 4 years.

[RandomKoolzip]

25. Thank you for that...

And also, If we give the American people at least four years of Clintonian prosperity and peace, then the American people will understand which party has THEIR REAL best interests in mind.


And YES, I realize I'm not getting ALL of what I want. This is real life. We don't always get what we want. In this contest we've got a narrowly defined set of choices, and one choice leads to facism and possible "end times", the other leads to compromised freedom and democracy. Under the latter, we can work towards an overhaul of the system with the protection of Democratic appointees to the Atty General's office, and a possible Senate comeback. Under the former, we watch more of our freedoms disappear, our loved ones die, and war all the time. Why is this such a hard choice to make?

Sure, I'd LOVE a living wage. I'd LOVE more environmental protection. I'd LOVE for anybody to be able to marry whoever they want. I will work for that in my Senate race and on the local level this year.

All I ask is that we realize how important it is to NOT let Bush get a second term! This really ought to be obviuos.