Who pledges to vote Green or 3rd party if the Dem candidate sucks?

[JVS]

Just a thought here, ABB lets the party move right without consequence. Who wants to let them know that that is not acceptable?
I do!

[jrthin]

1. Let me be blunt, if they ran a dog

against Dimson, I'd vote for the dog. I cannot take four more years of Dimson's policies and lies.

[Not a robought]

3. A knotted log would suffice as well n/t

[MUAD_DIB]

4. Don't knock dogs

some of them are smarter that Chimpy.

[LoneStarLiberal]

5. I Agree

We're all in deep, deep trouble if Bush wins another four years' worth of time in the White House.

I am normally not an advocate of voting anything other than your own personal interest, but in this case I am an advocate of voting your ideological interest. Another Bush Presidency would be a pareto-inferior situation, a situation where ALL of us, no matter what our ideological differences, will be left worse off.

[ShaneGR]

30. I'll vote Green when Jesus comes back to Earth and creates.....

everlasting peace & prosperity therfor making it ok for me to vote for a party who cannot win, based on my own selfish desire to turn my nose up at the world and say, "It's all your fault because if you had only voted for Ralph Nader all of our problems would be solved even though he has never been elected to government office and has zero political experience. I am right and the Democrats are just like the Republicans because, well, um, they both love corporations even though 95% of the corporate money is going Republican right now! Yeah, I'm right!"

Yeehaw!

[Colin Ex]

2. Heh...

I've said it before and I shall say it again -- if the Dem candidate sucks, I'm voting for Nader. Or the Socialist Worker candidate -- I'll have to take a look at that guy.

But I'm not going to help put a sucktastic candidate into office.

-C

[bowens43]

14. Yes, you WILL be helping

to put a 'sucktastic' candidate into office and we may not be able to survive another four years of his arrogance and ignorance.

[Colin Ex]

21. Paraphrasing Harry Truman (I think) --

Give a man a choice between a Republican and a Democrat who acts like a Republican, and he'll pick the Republican every time.

-C

[cprise]

53. Heh

If it weren't for Nader and steady Green pressure, Dem politicians would be quoting Mein Kampf right about now.

The DLC has locked progressives out of positions of power and influence in that party.

[JVS]

75. LOL

good one!

[lifelong_Dem]

81. Actually, "steady Green pressure" has pushed the Dems to the RIGHT

The more votes the Dems lose on the left, the more incentive they have to chase votes in the middle. The reason is, a vote in the middle actually counts as two votes - a vote cast for the Dem candidate, and a vote not cast for the Repug candidate. The Dems need to make up the votes lost by the lefty-left leaving the party somewhere, and the middle is the most efficient place to do this.

All the Greens have done is empower the right. That's all they have accomplished and that's all they ever will accomplish.

[JVS]

85. If we all bend over, everything will be OK!!!

:eyes:

[ShaneGR]

92. Pretty much, the Greens are a virus

The middle has been the only cure. Unfortunately. Because, in my experience, even when you reach out to them and move farther to the left, they'll just move even farther away and make it impossible (From an electability standpoint) to really work with them.

[Iverson]

149. borrowed image from German fascism?

Dehumanizing a group of people with whom one does not agree is a classic propaganda tactic of the far right. So now you liken Greens to a virus.

I cannot adequately express my contempt for this mentality. I can only alert you to the danger of going down the same road as the fascists did once upon a time.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

6. What if Lieberman wins the primary?

It seems lots of people are on the "anyone but Bush, or Lieberman of course" bandwagon. Not me.

I'm a moderate swing voter. I haven't made up my mind on who I will vote for yet, either in the primary or the general election.

If the Democrats want my vote, they have to give me a reason to vote for them. Believe me, though, Bush is a big reason to vote Democratic.

[Hep]

8. make no mistake

Even Lieberman is miles away from a republican.

[MALiberal]

7. Go Ahead and Give Ashcroft a Second Term....???

Thank to the Green Party we are now in Iraq and Bush is King. Your vote really does matter...It is not simply like choosing one toothpaste over another . Any vote that won't take the Republicans out of office is a vote FOR WAR, FOR BIG OIL, FOR More Government Handouts to Pat Robertson and the like. Haven't the current crowd of kooks running the government been given enough power already? I think getting tthe republicans out of office needs to be priority #1.
:kick: :donut: :nuke: :puke:

[JVS]

10. We wouldn't be in Iraq if Democrats had provided firm opposition

So your fear-mongering holds no moral high ground. This is a protection racket and we're being shaken down.

[FubarFly]

107. "We wouldn't be in Iraq if Greens had provided firm support in 2000"

So your rightous indignation holds no moral high ground. This is a national crisis and we're asking you to help.

Pretty please?

[JVS]

109. Greens provided firm support for their candidate

I voted for Gore anyway, so don't accuse me of being a green. I'm a disgruntled Democrat. But I've become a swing voter now. And if Gore hadn't been afraid that demanding an investigation of disenfranchising black voters in Florida maybe he'd be president now. When will you start picking on a party your own size?

[FubarFly]

114. I'm not picking on anyone

I'm just pointing out that we can play the blame game until we are blue in the face, but if the neo-cons stay in power, what's the point?

It's not a matter of seeing the forest from the trees, it's more a matter of seeing the clearcutting from the stumps.

Defeating Bush in '04 should be the first priorty. I wish we could come to an agreement on this point.

[JVS]

116. Exactly neo-cons must go

Which is why I want the Democrats to nominate someone who will get rid of them, not merely tone them down.

[FubarFly]

118. Agreed

See, that wasn't so hard.

:-)

[lastliberalintexas]

133. Ummm, no

I don't excuse the Dems who voted for the invasion. But, even if EVERY single solitary Dem in both the House and Senate voted against the Iraq resolution, we would still have invaded. Minority party = less votes. Please don't kid yourself on that one.

[JVS]

135. Sorry you are incorrect

"The Senate vote sharply divided Democrats, with 29 voting for the measure and 21 against. All Republicans except Sen. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island voted for passage."
http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/10/11/iraq.us/

21 against +29 for + 1 republican against= 51 =no war

A real pisser huh.

[lastliberalintexas]

141. Sorry, I forgot about Chafee

:dunce:

I do think that Shrub would have marched to war no matter what the vote was, though. His entire administration has been about nothing else. Again, that is NOT an excuse for those who voted for the resolution.

I was only surprised that Shrub even went to Congress. :shrug:

[bowens43]

9. I will vote for the candidate most likely to defeat

the idiot. That will NOT be a green or other third party candidate. If bush is the man you want then by all means, vote green or third party but don't bitch and moan when bush wins and continues his policy of continuous , unending war.

[JVS]

13. You mean Democrat approved endless war.

[bowens43]

15. No, I mean bushes endless war.

[JVS]

18. That war belongs to all who voted for it in the house and senate too

Don't steal their warrior glory!

[bowens43]

22. If you don't see a difference between the repubs and the dems

you haven't been paying attention. One thing is certain, a third party candadte will do NOTHING to change the situation.

[JVS]

25. Over half of the Democratic Senators voted for war

If the republicans hadn't even shown up it still would have passed! I don't see enough of a difference to call these guys Democrats.

[Cassandra]

48. If * hadn't lied to them about what secret info he had...

maybe they would have voted against war. I would vote for any Democrat to be rid of these thugs.

[JVS]

52. Yes, Bush is more responsible for this, but they still worked with him

and they could have stopped him.

[Nazgul35]

93. Your logic is flawed....

If the dems had a chance to defeat it they would have voted against it...but since they knew the repugs were gonna railroad the issue past them (why do you think Bush offered the issue prior to the election, and not after like his father did), why committe electoral suicide...you see, the general election is run in the general public...more so for senators as their constiuency is more moderate then the House districts are.

By not understanding the relationship of differing consituents, seperation of powers, and federalism, people frequently blame politicians for problems that they have no control over. The greens are an extreme left ideology, just like the Christain coalition is an extreme right ideology...but unlike the greens, the christain colation captured a political party, not by running from it, but by becoming a major interest group within the party by learning where to apply the proper pressure within the party...and the presidency is not the place...

You wanna make a difference....get active in democratic races at the local and state level elections, control the state governments as a group within the democrats during redistricting....otherwise...leave us alone and stop screwing up the process....

A good read for Greens would be a book by Gary Cox, called "Making Votes Count," which explains how electoral laws determine the behavior of politicans and specifically explores the concept of strategic voting...

[JVS]

94. Then why was there a split

Obviously some Democrats were willing to vote against the war despite a perception of political cost.

I'm tired of every action being parsed so as to eliminate responsibility of those in the Senate. There isn't much higher you can go, it is feeble to be afraid to vote your consience at that high a level. I will take votes in the Senate at face value, these guys have to stop passing the buck.

[Nazgul35]

105. responsibility to whom?

to you? Or to there consitutency of which there are 50, and then the 435 in the House, in addition to the millions of state and local governments, each comprised of politicians who represent cross cutting constituencies of which you are but a small faction of that opinion....

I would argue they are being responsible to the people who voted them into office....these people are a majority (plurality) of those who decided to vote within the constituencies I mentioned above...

If you have a problem with a politician, perhaps you should ask why they are returned 95%+ of the time to office?

1) Money....no matter how much you have, if the moral indignation you so aptly represent was present, they wouldnt stand a chance...

2) Safe Districts...we choose to vote in pathetically low numbers for state races, the very people who decide what the district looks like...

I sense that you feel like you percieve that there is a moral high road that must always be expressed, even if it may cost that individual reelection...but you must remember, there are 183 million ideas about what is moral in this country, and who's to say who is right or wrong? I personally believe that ideology should be REMOVED from politics and we would all be alot happier...

Remember...for every ideolog on the left, there's one on the right...so you cancel each other out and the politicians are left with the people who know the least about what's going on...I'd suggest that you take some time to examine the electoral districts of your so called morally upstanding democrats and see how many were up for election that cycle and of those who were, what were the electoral circumstances for each....I beleive you'll find you moral integrity variable for those who voted no as nothing but a spurious relationship...

[JVS]

106. Ok here is what I meant based on what I heard you say

I said that the fact that a majority of Democratic Senators voted for war indicates that they wanted war.

You implied that if they didn't know that the Republicans were going to vote for war then they wouldn't have voted for war, no?

My reply is that if you don't want war don't vote for it. And that those who did vote for it wanted it.

On edit:
So I guess by responsibility I mean not distancing themselves from their decisions.

[IndianaGreen]

11. Will Kerry repent, and call for the troops to come home ASAP?

Will Lieberman renounce is past association with Bill Bennett, and stop trying to impose censorship on films, books, and music?

Will Edwards stop parroting the same crap that Lieberman does?

[JVS]

16. I certainly hope so

But as long as everyone is parroting ABB, they really have no incentive to do so.

[bowens43]

19. Maybe , maybe not.

But we can be absolutely certain that the only thing a third party candidate (at least a left leaning 3rd party candidate) will accomplish is helping to give bush another 4 years.

[Pepperbelly]

111. I wouldn't immediately call them home ...

so I guess you wouldn't vote for me either.

The iron is in the fire and now we have a responsibility to stablize what we have ripped asunder, hopefully with the help of the UN.

[IndianaGreen]

146. BULLSHIT!

You don't reward the criminal for the crimes he has committed. Only fools still think that Bush went to Iraq to protect the US from a clear and present danger. Only the most gullible would believe that Bush really wants freedom and democracy for Iraq.

Even Republicans had to admit that Bush provided false information about Iraq's WMD activities in order to get the public to support the invasion.

It was the OIL!!!!!!!!!

What we need is to get the Security Council to vote on a UN Mandate for Iraq. The UN Mandate will put Iraq under UN governance and security, until such time as Iraq is ready to elect a government.

The US would withdraw its troops immediately upon the UN administration being installed in Baghdad.

End of the war. No more casualties!

Troops will be home NLT Thanksgiving!

[southpaw]

12. Only... I repeat, ONLY

If the 3rd party candidate actually has a better chance of Beating Bush will I consider voting for them! Short of that, I will PROUDLY AND WITH GREAT GUSTO vote for whomever the Democratic party runs against Fortunate Son.

Give me four to eight of Lieberman. Beats the hell out of the alternative.

[Walt Starr]

17. Well....if David Dukes were to win the nomination

I might.

[JVS]

20. SPLITTER!!! SPLITTER!!!

:-)
Just joshing you!

[LSdemocrat]

23. Remember Michael Moore's Ficus?

If the dems ran the ficus, I'd vote for it.

[JVS]

24. But a ficus wouldn't continue the conservative policies we hate

a DINO would.

[JasonBerry]

26. That Is Sectarian Thinking

Sectarian and purist to the extreme. Look at what we have in GWB, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, on and on and on. But with your thinking only a "pure" Democrat would be acceptable to vote for.

This thinking always splits up the left. Funny you mentioned the Socialist Workers Party. Do you know how many off-shoots of the SWP there are today? I can off the top of my head think of 5 or 6, but in reality it's in the dozens. Then, take the largest of the those and there are 3 or 4 grouplets that have broken from them! Ad Infinitum. Why??? Sectarian, purist thinking. Or, let's say it the way most people would understand it - totalitarian thinking! How dare others think differently and I don't get my way! - I'll just start my OWN party! There's only ONE WAY!!

It's like if you could vote on your neighbors - (wouldn't that be nice)??? Your current neighbors had loud parties everynight until 6AM - about the time you had to get up and actually work. So, you want quiet neighbors and they come up for a vote. The family that wants to move in says they have a dog. OH NO! Possibly a little noise! Nope - get lost! I'll take the loud parties every night until 6AM until I find a 76 year old grandma that wants to move in where I KNOW it will be perfectly quiet. So the vote: The parties or the dog. After you vote and assure that the all night parties go on - and you can't vote for another four years..........you stay awake, cursing the night thinking, "What would have been so bad about a bark now and then?" Silly analogy? Yes. Pretty close to what you're arguing? Yes.

[JVS]

28. I didn't mention SWP

It was someone else.

And speaking of Totalitarian thinking: ABB is pretty damn close.

[JasonBerry]

35. Uhhh....the point of my post?

Respond to that. I don't especially care who mentioned the SWP. My point I hope was understood. You conveniently sidestepped it.

[JVS]

38. I don't like being misquoted

And you damn well should care who says what!

[JasonBerry]

66. Uh....the point of my post???????

Who said what about the SWP was not the point. However, sorry to confuse you with another poster. Okay, angry individual, (calm down...three deep breaths....)

What about the POINT of my post?

[JVS]

68. Ok. apology accepted, now to the point.

Sectarianism is not always the best thing to have happen, I agree. But whether in a family, a religion, or a political party, when one element within a group is systematically scapegoated and ignored a splitting up is sometimes necessary. What I see currently in the party is centrist extremism (in other words the right side of the party is dominating the more liberal members) I was told in a thread today that because I am a liberal and not a swing/moderate that my vote doesn't count. I understand that there need to be compromises between factions, but being told "Shut up, we're in charge here" is not compromise it is subservience. A while ago someone posted something about Bush behaving as an abuser. Painting everything in an if we don't do this my way we'll be screwed light. I posit that the right wing of the democratic party is acting in a similar manner. I grew up with an abusive person and I recognize it when I see it. ABB is basically a quick way of saying "vote for me or terrible things will happen" I won't stand for it. I can compromise, I will settle for a candidate unlike Bush in merely 2 areas Economy and War. Would I like more? yes. But I will not accept less.

[Pallas180]

27. VOTE THIRD PARTY & YOU GUARANTEE A BUSH WIN.

fOOLS.

[JVS]

29. No, putting a DINO up for president guarantees a Bush win

I'm a swing voter damnit! I demand Respect! I'll vote for a good Dem, but no more dogshit ok.

[MadHound]

60. Vote for ABB and you guarantee a corporate win.

Look it isn't about D vs R anymore. Its about corporations and the haves of our society against the rest of us. Gee, did that wonderful Democrat Clinton REALLY do anything for the little guy? Let's see: Ripped out the social safety net under the guise of welfare reform. Relaxed the media monopoly rules with the '96 Telecom act. Brought into being NAFTA, WTO and a host of other globalist alphabet acts. Furthered the erosion of privacy with draconian WOD laws. Meanwhile the average family's real world income went down the drain, the gap between rich and poor continued widening to chasmic proportions, and the average Americans standard of living dropped 3.1% from '93 through '00.

Don't you folks get it? Just because a politician has a D behind his name doesn't mean he/she is for the little guy. Much more likely is that he/she is working for the same corporate master as the politician with the R behind their name. And as we all know, money is what talks in this world. In the '00 election cycle over forty corporations and corporate PACS gave sums of $100,000+ each to both parties, with Phillip Morris the big winner at 2.6 mil to the 'Pugs and 2.3 mil to the Dems. This is what is known as hedging your bets.
This is the way that corporations insure that they will retain control no matter which party is in power.

I understand that many many of you have very strong ties, both emotional and historical, to the Democratic Party that was. I myself have been a tireless worker for the Dems for over thirty years. But the party of your youth, the party of your parents and grandparents is no more. It has sold it's soul for the thirty pieces of silver given to it by it's corporate masters. Individual Democrats may still have your best interests at heart, but these Dems are quickly becoming abborations. In todays big money politics the only interests that consistently looked out for are the moneyed ones. The rest of us are lied to, patronized, taken for granted and written off as expendable. So the voting rolls go downhill. So what, THAT IS WHAT THE CORPORATE MASTERS WANT. A pliant, apathetic populace is much easier to deal with than a voting bloc that is energized and active, because if that happens that means that something has to be done(money has to be spent) to pacify the masses. That means that corporate politicians can't pass laws without scrutiny. Better that the populace is cynical and apathetic, voting for the "lesser of two evils" rather than voting for somebody who would actually come in and clean house.

One of the main reasons that I will be voting Green in the '04 elections is that they take no corporate money. I'm not trying to flaunt my moral purity, or getting on a high horse with this. I am simply tired of the corruption that big money brings. And if you wish to think that I'm helping put Bush back into office, well you're wrong. I am simply refusing to play the big money political game, whose only true winners are the wealthy corporate masters who rigged the game. So what if we get a president with an R behind his name rather than a D? It is the difference between being boiled slowly or being boiled quickly, either way you wind up dead.

[lifelong_Dem]

83. Please educate yourself

http://www.damnedbigdifference.org/

[MadHound]

101. OK, I've looked at your site, looks like more partisan shit to me

Though it is good to see that its sponsored by ADA, the site looks pretty partisan. I also find rather offensive that it is still trying to blame the '00 Gore debacle on the Greens. Puhleeze!! I've refuted that particular myth, others on DU have refuted that particular myth. That fact that this site is still rehashing this myth says something for them, and its not good.

Tell you what, why not educate yourself(and I won't even send you to a partisan site). Go down to your local bookstore and pick up two books. The first is Kevin Phillips "Wealth and Democracy" the second is Greg Palast's "The Best Democracy that Money can Buy." Read those, then we can talk.

[jiacinto]

31. Why don't we just rename this board Green Underground

once and for all?

Because that is what this board is a lot of the time. Why don't we rename it "WewanttodefeatDemocratsin2004underground.com"?

Do you have anything to lose? Do you have children enrolled in Headstart? Are you a woman or a minority? What about education and the environment?

Will you be affected at all by those policy decisions? Why do I have a feeling that you won't be making any of the "sacrifices" while "things get worse before they get better"?

[Pallas180]

32. Split- Divide - Lose . Isn;t the GOP brilliant?

.

[JVS]

33. Hey, I'm not a green

I vote Democrat almost always, but I think that the Party needs a threat to keep them honest. Who knows? I could be bluffing. To me the most important issues are ending the war and improving the economy. And I don't think that mimicing the republicans is going to do it.

[jiacinto]

40. A threat?

Just realize that your "threat" is going to hurt a lot of innocent people.

[JVS]

44. If the Dems elect someone who continues the war a lot of innocents

will get hurt. Maybe instead of promising to vote for anyone but Bush, more Democrats should be focusing on getting a candidate who will do the right things.

[jiacinto]

45. The war isn't my only issue

And I am more concerned about Americans than I am about Iraqis.

[JVS]

49. The war isn't my only issue either

I'd like to see healthcare and better schools, but I'm not going to be so picky. War and Economy will do, even if the candidate is repugnant in other areas, I'll just hold my nose.

[sangha]

58. Picky?

By all means, sir, do not trouble yourself over the plight of the poor. Your sensitive nose is far more important.

[JVS]

63. Economy was also in my 2 part litmus test

because I am poor.

[sangha]

70. Your compassion

is underwhelming.

[JVS]

71. If that is what you need to believe

I guess I'm just a heartless bastard for wanting an end to war and the government to work for a better economy.

[Name removed]

148. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JVS]

153. Big tent

I'm tired of the dictatorship of the center.

[JasonBerry]

37. I agree, Carlos

You write a lot I don't agree with as I am firmly planted on the left. However, you are 100% correct. I am on the left - the DEMOCRATIC left - and surely NOT at the expense of another Bush administration. No way.

[redeye]

34. Sorry...

...I'm with the ABB crowd. However, the Greens ain't gonna run Bush, so it's okay to be ABB and vote for a Green, I guess.

I don't promise anything, but if the Dem candidate has the upper body of an elephant and lower body of a donkey (i.e. runs Democratic, talks Republican), rest assured I'll vote Green.

[JVS]

36. Glad to hear someone with the courage to demand better of the Dem. Party

This is the time to challenge the party to live up to its potential, not to lamely resign yourself to accepting any old canditate.

[Robb]

43. NO Dem candidate will be as RW as Bush.

So it's a simple equation.

If you think the RW is the problem, you either

a) Vote for a less RW Dem who could beat Bush, or

b) Vote for a far less RW Green who has no chance.

And yes, you better believe it's a racket and a shake-down. I maintain NO politician is trustworthy, before or after an election. Hell, I'd love to have had Nader in office. What the heck, maybe some totally new ideas would've helped.

But rest assured: NO ONE ON THE RIGHT WILL VOTE FOR A GREEN CANDIDATE. And if you believe there are nearly the same number of conservatives and progressives that vote, that means there will be more votes for a single conservative candidate than any of the multiple progressive candidates.

Look at it this way: admit, at a minimum, that there would be less chance of progressive legislation under a 2nd Bush term than even a Lieberman administration.

Unite under the guy that can take out Bush. Divide after the election and pursue whatever progressive issues you want. But again, remember that there will be little chance of pursuing them under another four years of GOP control.

[JVS]

57. They will be if we let them.

Which is why we need to be open about it being unacceptable.

[lcordero]

39. I feel that one vote has correctly reflected the Dems

and that's the moveon.org primaries.

Dean captured 44%
Kucinich capture 24%
Kerry captured 16%

68% has been captured in between the two peace candidates.

I didn't like the rigging of the election in November 2004 and I will take it as an affront if the DLC/PNAC rigs the Democratic Primaries in 2004.

The 18 to 25 year old block has been mobilized against Republicans. Do the Democrats want that block to vote Democratic or for the Greens?

The military vote has turned against Republicans in general, do people here want them to stay at home when they can possibly vote for a Democrat?

[JVS]

41. Oh yeah

If the Dem credibly says No war, no draft, and we're gonna get you guys some jobs, I'll vote for him in a second. But if not, i'm open to other possibilities.

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JVS]

46. I don't want to support a candidate who supports war

If I were a Republican, I'd vote Republican. Hell, if I were a Republican I'd be pretty happy to be facing weak opposition. I'm a registered Democrat but I won't be scared into voting for just any Democrat. The issues matter.

[molly]

55. Who is scaring you into voting for just any DEM?

I will vote for WHOMEVER our candidate ends up being - even Snoopy the Dog.

[JVS]

61. The ABB platform is based on an appeal to fear

I could very well vote for the Democratic candidate, but not out of fear. If I vote for the Democratic candidate it will be because I want his/her plans enacted.

[LiberalLibra]

47. This would be a PERFECT PRESCRIPTION for 4 more yrs of Bush hope ........

....you all like Bush :freak: that much. :wtf:

[Cheswick2.0]

50. no since the third party candidate always sucks and can't win

:shrug:

[StandWatie]

73. Yeah, fuck those democrats..

They can never defeat the omnipresent, eternal, Federalist Party :eyes:

[molly]

51. Why in the world would anyone do something THAT STUPID!

[JVS]

56. Why would anyone do something as stupid as pledging unconditional support

to a party's candidate. It is putting a big sign on your forehead which says "IGNORE MY VIEWS"

[molly]

74. Why can't the Greens start at the bottom like both other

major parties? They need to gain some credibility and not just theory....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=68249&mesg_id=68249&page=

[JVS]

86. Good question.

I don't know why.

[LiberalLibra]

95. Nader/Greens start at the bottom & work their way up like everyone else...

....are you insane??? Take the chance of having to prove to the elecorate they can actually run a country, manage an economy, deal with international affairs, all at the same time?? Naderites/Greens may also have to deal with bad publicity if and when they screw up, which is human nature to do on occasion. That would border on credibility and we certainly can't have any of that, now can we??

(sacasm off now)

[SammyWinstonJack]

54. Not voting Green or 3rd party

ANY CANDIDATE THAT GETS THE DEM NOMINATION GETS MY VOTE! It's as simple as that for me! I want Bush* out in '04! If not sooner!

[JVS]

59. Presenting Democratic 2004 hopeful Ari Fleischer

[SammyWinstonJack]

110. Perhaps I should have made it clearer

:shrug: Any of the current candidates running. Afterall, that is who you are referring too, are you not? You seem a little antagonistic because many here are not agreeing with your Green or 3rd party vs. ABB. Really, Democratic 2004 hopeful Ari Fleischer! That is just plain silly! Again, I am not voting Green or 3rd party BECAUSE I want Bush* out in '04 if not sooner! You however, are welcome too vote for anyone that helps get Bush* re-selected!

[JVS]

112. If Wesley Clark could be drafted so could Ari Fleischer

There seems to be a lot silly bullshit going on in the party.

[Hoppin_Mad]

62. Not I - I'll even vote for Lieberman over Chimpy -eom-

ccc

[DEMActivist]

64. *raises hand*

Voting ABB is the selling of America and democracy.

[JVS]

65. THANK YOU!!!

good to know I'm not the only one who sees it that way

[ButterflyBlood]

67. I will vote for the best candidate with a chance of winning

and all the Dems are better than Bush, no matter how badly they suck.

[Imalittleteapot]

69. NO pledge here.

Voting Green or 3rd party is a vote for Bush.:spank:

[JVS]

72. A vote for Bush is a vote for Bush. A vote for Trickledown is a vote for

trickledown. A vote for war is a vote for war. No matter who casts it.

[LynneSin]

76. So you're saying you want another 4 years with Bush?

Because I sure as hell don't.

Lieberman, as sucky as he is, wouldn't have Ashcroft, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle, Powell, Rice, etc as part of his administration

And since Lieberman has stuck with every filibuster we've had on this ring-wing judicial nominees be shoved down our throats by that idiot, pretty much he deserves my vote (should he get the nomination) over any green candidate out there.

You do recall that judicial nominees are lifetime appointments and many of these nominees are in their 40's. That means Bush could be out of office and we'll be dealing with the horrible choices these judges make decades after he's gone. As proud as I am of how our democrats have held tight on the filibusters, they aren't going to make it another 4 years with Bush in the White House and that may not be by their choice.

Plus giving Bush another 4 years will be the mandate he needs to pre-emptive strike at any country or any person without any worry of "How will this affect my re-election cause".

I appreciate the fact that you've set noble standards for yourself when it comes to elected officials. But if anyone else was sitting in the White House right now I would laud you for your values.

But we are fighting for our lives, our country and the constitution that was graced upon us some 227+ years ago. Voting for "sucky" candidates is a no-brainer for this progressive thinker, because no matter how much they suck, they will never EVER be as bad as Bush.

I defy you or anyone else here to give me one reason why I should vote for anyone but a democrat

[LynneSin]

77. So you're saying you want another 4 years with Bush?

Because I sure as hell don't.

Lieberman, as sucky as he is, wouldn't have Ashcroft, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle, Powell, Rice, etc as part of his administration

And since Lieberman has stuck with every filibuster we've had on this ring-wing judicial nominees be shoved down our throats by that idiot, pretty much he deserves my vote (should he get the nomination) over any green candidate out there.

You do recall that judicial nominees are lifetime appointments and many of these nominees are in their 40's. That means Bush could be out of office and we'll be dealing with the horrible choices these judges make decades after he's gone. As proud as I am of how our democrats have held tight on the filibusters, they aren't going to make it another 4 years with Bush in the White House and that may not be by their choice.

Plus giving Bush another 4 years will be the mandate he needs to pre-emptive strike at any country or any person without any worry of "How will this affect my re-election cause".

I appreciate the fact that you've set noble standards for yourself when it comes to elected officials. But if anyone else was sitting in the White House right now I would laud you for your values; heck I'd be out there with you supporting the Green cause!

But we are fighting for our lives, our country and the constitution that was graced upon us some 227+ years ago. Voting for "sucky" candidates is a no-brainer for this progressive thinker, because no matter how much they suck, they will never EVER be as bad as Bush.

I defy you or anyone else here to give me one reason why I should vote for anyone but a democrat for president

[JVS]

78. No, I want the Democrats to stop acting like Republicans

[AntiCoup2K4]

132. So do I

But how do you propose moving the Democrats to the left when all the power is in the hands of the extreme right wing?

Wouldn't you rather have a functioning Democracy (as opposed to an unelected fascist dictator) first, and then improve the Democrats AS the party in power?

[JVS]

134. By letting the Democrats know that one more step to the right will fail

Then we work on them to get them to go more to the left. They've been given too many passes.

[StandWatie]

79. why they are worse than Bush..

Because for four years I'd have to listen to the DU equivalent of the Bushbot's at freeperville covering Bush's ass every day with the refrain "Would you rather have Al Gore, shut up about Dear Leader", but it would be "Would you rather have Bush, shut up about Dear Leader" thereby cutting the whole opposition in half.

[DEMActivist]

80. You're saying you'd vote for Bush if he had a (D) by

his name.

And if that isn't prostituting your vote just for the sake of "winning" then nothing is.

[LynneSin]

88. Who are we kidding

You're posing a hypothetical situation (would you vote for Bush if he had a D next to his name) vs. reality: Our country cannot survive another 4 years with Bush in the White House. Only in the most bizarro alternate planes would we see Bush with a (D) next to his name.

You've given me nothing to change my mind. And after watching Arlen Spector, someone who claims he supports women, homosexuals and the disabled, voted for skank like Bill Pryor, my case has been solidified 2000000% more!

[DEMActivist]

90. So your solution is to vote for someone who supports BUSH?

That's really productive. Vote for a Bush with a (D) by his name just because his name isn't Bush.

Yeah, that'll save us.

on edit:
People who pledge ABB are just like the 4 Georgia Democratic state senators who switched to Republican when the republicans took the governorship. They are people who are incapable of principaled choices and loyalty to anything; people who only care about winning for winning's sake.

[LynneSin]

91. How many judges did Lieberman support

Think about this, in a few years the war will be overwith and we'll move on with life.

But those judicial nominees are with us for LIFE

Let's do the math:

Bill Pryor is in his late 40's and can serve a lifetime, how many decades could Bill Pryor be feasibly sitting on the bench making decisions again women, gays & Lesbians, the envirnoment, the working folks, disabled, etc.

Now add in the Owens, Pickerings, Kuhls, Estradas, Holmes and I'm sure a dozen more Bush has lined up to get put on the court. Plants everywhere across the country that can help overturn laws that repukes don't like that were passed in DC.

Our filibusters are working, but what if Bush gets re-elected? Do you think they can keep filibustering for another 4 years? Bush & Frist have already talked about changing filibustering laws to make it EASIER to get these judges through.

I hate the war, it is horrible. But what these judges could very well do to our country could destroy our nation. I mean, what part of LIFETIME APPOINTMENT is challenging to comprehend? Lieberman has stuck with the filibuster and therefore if he gets the nomination (which you can be damn straight he won't if I can help it), you better believe I'll vote for Lieberman with a bigass grin on my face. Heck, I'll even go out and help get the vote out for him.

Would you like for me to pull Joe's voting record with Women, the Environment, etc. etc?

There is one person in this world that has the same political ideologies as myself and that's me - everyone else is a compromise.

Once again you've said nothing that will change my mind or many others here at DU that believe "Anyone but Bush"

[DEMActivist]

96. How many WARS does Lieberman have to support?

Before you realize he's just as bad as Bush?

How many Rose Garden photo ops does it take?

[LynneSin]

98. 30 years with Judges like Bill Pryor will cause more wars

than what we have going on now.

Seriously, do you have ANY other reason why I shouldn't vote dem? I mean, unless you think it's a great idea to have judges who want to take away our rights to choose, to live the way we feel best, to have our envirnoment, our health, heck to even think for ourselves?

But go ahead and use the Rove strategy, you're doing a great job of it. Get dems divided over the war so they vote Green and we'll get another 4 years of Bush and restructure the entire country so we have a Christian Taliban government. You're playing quite nicely into their hands!

[StandWatie]

104. hysterical much?

Your little milquetoast dems aren't stopping anything important, if the US is going straight to hell like you think someone should be charting a way different course than Bush, steering off a little with some judicial decisions is just polishing brass on the Titanic.

[LynneSin]

117. Rove applauds your strategy

Personally, I'm not buying it.

Negativity such as this will only guarentee another 4 years of Bush. All the moral preaching of voting 3rd party will be mute as our country is destroyed with another 4 years of Bush.

There are other ways to support the Green party, including a boatload of other races that we could help get Greens elected. Heck, I could have been a potential Green voter since my ideologies are very simliar to the Green party. But attitudes from the Green making me feel like a 2nd class citizen because I want Bush out of the white house will keep me from ever pulling a Green lever

[StandWatie]

158. and your bluedog attitude..

damn near makes me wish I would have just voted for Bush to display not only my displeasure with the "third way" but it's sycophantic followers who think Green voters are the only voting block in history that can be insulted into submission.

[dpbrown]

82. Absolutely not

Over half the House Democrats followed Dennis Kucinich's lead in voting against the war.

Bush is an abject failure and sociopath who has led this nation and the world to war, bankruptcy and ruin.

The use of force resolution will always be a red herring for people intent on smearing the opposition to Bush.

Any of the Democrats will be hundreds of times better than Bush, although Dennis Kucinich is by far the best candidate.

[Quahog]

84. FOUR MORE YEARS! FOUR MORE YEARS!

Chimpy now more than ever!

Overturn Roe V. Wade, slap down those murdering feminazis! YEAH!

Invade Syria, Iran, the whole Middle East! Eat lead towel head! YEAH!

Abolish the Endangered Species Act! Die you fucking panda, you're a steak dinner now! YEAH!

Two words for you sissy doves: Star Wars! YEAH!

Let's have the draft back! Drop and give me 50, poor mud races! Your turn to fight for massah! YEAH!

Total citizen awareness, suckahs, we're gonna track it all, baby! What are those condoms doing in your grocery bag, faggot? YEAH!

Taxes abolished for corporations that donate a minimum of $1M to Bush! Let the working poor pay off the deficit! YEAH!

Abolish all air quality standards! Suck my fumes, you tree hugging fucks! YEAH!

Department of Education? Goodbye! YEAH!

Department of Energy? Kenny Boy, take the wheel! YEAH!

Alternative media outlets? Are you fucking kidding me? We know what you wrote on the web site, terrorist! You contradicted the regime! Off to Guantanamo, suckah! YEAH!

The world is OURS, these stupid fucking demonrats are gonna vote SOCIALIST and GREEN!! YEAH BABY!!! OOH, I'm COMING, I'm COMING!!! AHHHHHH!!!!! YESSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!

[bushisanidiot]

87. Who Pledges To Give AWOL 4 More Years if The Dems have a Sucky Candidate?

same question.

[Terwilliger]

155. 4 more years? Who gave him any years?

[election_2004]

89. If Lieberman is the nominee...

Sorry, but I'll have no choice but to go third-party. And the sad part is, I wouldn't be so sure that a third-party Independent wouldn't have a decent shot at beating Bush or Lieberman.

Otherwise, if the nominee is Kerry, Dean, Edwards, Gephardt, Kucinich, or Graham - - my vote will be going to the Democrats. End of story.

[VOX]

97. If your house were on fire, would you use a squirt gun...

...to feel better about not wasting water?

Our big-picture "house" is totally aflame, and there will be nothing left of this country if we give the fascists a pass, which voting 3rd party would effectively do.

Does anyone here not comprehend the gravity of the situation? There is a clear and present danger of our country going utterly, completely fascist. Hell, we're a pre-fascist state already. The right wing is in the process of grabbing up the various arenas of power -- the presidency, the congress, the judiciary, state and local government, corporations, the media, the military, law enforcement -- on and on. The intention is clear -- the right wing plans to hold control of everything from here on. If this process is not aborted in 2004, we will have a full-blown fascist state on our hands, and there's damn little we can do after that to ever change it again.

And no, I do not believe that letting it all go to hell is the best way to start over -- too many people will be murdered in that process.

Anyone but Bush in '04.

[molly]

99. Good one!

all one has to do is look at what has happened in the House - also in the Texas House. Then get a copy of the tv mini-series "Hitler".
Most 3rd party candidates have never even worked in Washington for crissakes!!! We need seasoned people that can jump in and get the job done and this country fixed quickly. They shouldn't wear training wheels at our expense.

[JVS]

100. I'd use a hose

The fact that some of what we are being offered are squirtguns only adds insult to injury. BTW squirtguns won't put out a blazing house, and neither will Republocrats

[molly]

102. Do you fit in here somewhere?

"Third, and most of all, I kept noticing in 2000 that most of the people who lectured me on how corrupt Gore was and how Nader was the courageous choice were people for whom the outcome of the election, on a personal level, didn't really matter. Some were young people, whose idealism is to be admired but who were by and large demographically insulated from some of the harsher realities of American life. But most were older, white, left bourgeoisie, tenured and cocooned in the carapace of self-righteous satisfaction, whose own lives wouldn't change much one way or the other no matter which party won"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=103&topic_id=2558&mesg_id=2558&page=

[JVS]

103. No

I voted for Gore and I don't regret my vote. The Republican "win" in 2000 has made my life worse. But a candidate who is not willing to undo what Bush has done will not make my life better.

[Mairead]

123. Right on!

[leftyandproud]

108. flame me

I refuse to vote for anyone who doesn't earn my vote. We'll see who gets the nomination. Kucinich? Definately Dean? Maybe
Anyone else? looking doubtful

[slackmaster]

113. Negative

A vote for a third party candidate is half a vote for Bush and half a vote against the Democrat.

[Mairead]

115. If Kucinich is the nominee, I'll vote Dem

Otherwise, unless Kerry suddenly hears a come-to-Jeezus call (he's very 'flexible') I'll be voting Green.

Right-wing Dems don't like that? Too bad! Hold your noses and nominate Kucinich!

[JVS]

119. Great post!

Good to see some pressure for the left.

[LynneSin]

125. You know you have no pressure whatsoever on us Dems voting Dem

Seriously - you think you have us sweating?

We're walking away thinking this is another annoying attempt to make us feel bad about the fact that we are voting dem no matter what.

I'll sleep like a baby tonight thinking of my decision because I know I'm doing whatever is needed to get Bush out of the White House. I have a feeling that 99.99% of the rest of us "Anyone but Bush" feel the same exact way!

[JVS]

128. ABB is an attempt to silence the left and I won't comply

[Mairead]

129. Nope, all we're doing is rejecting the pressure you guys

are trying to apply. If you want our votes, then nominate someone we can vote for. Or stop trying to guilt-trip us and accept that, if you claim the right to vote for the person you choose, you must accept that we have that same right.

[LynneSin]

137. Personally, I'm not starting these damn stupid threads

asking "Who are you going to vote for if democratic 'so-n-so' gets the nomination"

I start threads like "What are you going to do to help get Bush out of the White House." Seems we have enough quality candidates out there that we just have to focus and work hard. A few months ago Dean and Kucinich were nobodies that folks thought it was a joke either was considering the nomination. Today, they are running very strong against the established names like Kerry, Gephardt and Lieberman (btw, I know there are other candidates). Heck, I'll be the first to admit I thougth Kucinich was wasting his time and boy has he impressed the hell out of me (only reason I went Dean is I'm still wary about his waffling about choice, but it just plopped him in 2nd in my book).

Along with working with the Dean meetup group I'm working joining a group of Quakers/Peace advocates to learn how to register voters in Delaware (seems there is some process you have to go to and we'll be focusing on urban area registration). I'm writing letters to the editors questioning Bush and still going to my occasional protest.

This is what we should be focusing on - how do we get good candidates on the ticket. We have 7 months until the first primary and we're already at each others throats and not solving a damn thing I might add!

Worry about who we'll vote for in November when the decsion is made. Fight hard to get a great nomination on the ticket now!

[Mairead]

140. Wooo! Good going, Sister!

I think you should be over in the 'bright' side of the Force, but well said anyway!

[chadm]

120. Nominating anyone but Kucinich...

Is a vote for Bush, because you leave the Greens no other choice.

[Mairead]

130. Beautiful!! :-))))

...and so true!

[FlashHarry]

121. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No.

No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

122. A Few Points

Ralph Malph Nader gave the election to Bush.... He got 97,000 votes in Florida. Exit polling has demonstrated that out of every four Ralph Malph voters two would have voted for Gore, one would have voted for Chimpy, and one would have stayed home. Everything else is commentary.

The Greens want to pull the Democrats to the left..... Yippy... That leaves the right and center for the Repugnicants.

Ralph Nader's delivering the White House to the Republican junta was the bigggest betrayal since Judas Iscariot.

I have a home... I have a little money... I'm a heterosexual white male...I can weather five more years of the Republicant junta in Washington.... I wonder if the masses that the Greens puroport to speak for can...

[BeachBuckeye]

124. A vote for ANYONE other than a Democrat in the next election...

Will do incalculable damage to this nation and to the world. Surely any thinking person would know that voting for ANYBODY but Bush would be the prudent thing to do. Its a matter of priorities and if far-left Democrats are worried about the direction of the Party then let them worry about it AFTER we get Bush out of office.

[Mairead]

126. Nope, if you're so worried about it, then the responsible thing to do

is to nominate a candidate that all can support: Kucinich.

It's no good saying 'you must hold your nose because I won't hold mine'.

[CityDem]

127. Lieberman = Green Vote for me

No chance I will ever vote for Lieberman.

[alaine]

136. I'll vote dem because God isn't stupid.

When I get there (wherever is after here) I know I will be held accountable, and I know if I say, " but, but God, I was voting my principles", God is gonna look at me and roll his/her eyes and say, "you knew what would happen if you did that" and send me straight to hell.

Where Ralph Nader will be pestering Satan about using cleaner burning fuels.

[Alexander]

131. I pledge never to vote Green in my entire life.

In fact, there's a 99% chance I'll vote for the Democratic nominee, and the 1% is left for strange political happenings and incidents that could physically keep me from voting.

Even the worst Democrat is better than Bush. Lots of people bash Lieberman here. Granted, I'm no fan of his either (note which state I come from, BTW), but he's done a hell of a lot of good for Connecticut. He may be pro-business, pro-war, and pro-censorship, but he is also pro-environment, pro-choice, pro-gay rights, pro-gun control, and he voted against Ashcroft and consistently supports the filibusters against Bush's fascist judicial nominees. He is about as liberal as Bill Clinton, and perhaps even to the left of him.

Splitting the ticket helped bring down Gore in 2000. In less than 10 minutes I guarantee you I could find all manner of statistics, polls and other information basically proving that Nader severely damaged Gore's chances. You say that you have proved the point wrong, well, my friend, I have proved it right on several occasions. For starters, I find it incredibly difficult to believe that not even 538 of the 97,000 Nader voters in Florida would've changed their votes for Gore had he not been stupid and put his name on the ballot in that VERY important state, thus avoiding the whole Supreme Court bullshit.

The last thing we need is 4 more years of Bush. Right now, our primary objective should be to get rid of the Republicans. Once that's done, I'll he happy to discuss how liberal our government should be. But if all you do is bicker with others about how we should run things IF we ever get in the majority anytime soon, you will simply draw time, money and energy away from the campaign to get rid of these fascist thugs.

I'd love to have a government led by Dennis Kucinich (hell, I've met the man), but I understand that the majority of the American people does not. If we're going to win, we have to apply the same general tactic the Republicans have been using - they campaigned as centrists and now govern from the right. If we are ever to win, we have to appear at least somewhat centrist, because a Nader-like candidate will never in a million years win the presidency. He/she would simply be too contrary to what most Americans want.

[Brian Sweat]

138. All of the candidates for the Democratic nomination

are far superior to George Bush and all of the loony third party candidates like Nader, Brown and Hagelin.

[PretzelWarrior]

139. you're F@cking nuts if that's how you really feel.

oh well. what am I gonna do? There are some folks for whom politics is merely an academic exercise so they vote their "conscience" while power hungry war lords are allowed into the white house and without conscience abandon those in greatest need in our country by abandoning programs to help needy. Plus they destroy thousands upon thousands of innocents abroad.

yeah....I won't vote Green. Green Party is my close second for greatest enemy of America. Current administration is NUMBER ONE and the greens helped them get there.

[Patriot_Spear]

142. You must be a heroine addict...

...to be so deluded to think that a Green has any hope in hell of winning the next election.

Smarten up- before it's too late for all of us.

[JVS]

143. There is a long time till the election

I may change my mind. It really depends on finding a candidate who will undo Bush's handiwork.

[Patriot_Spear]

151. I'm ABB...

But it's shear fantasy to think that the Green party is going to better than its 2 percent from the last election.

I suspect this is an exercise in Trolling...! In which case you've succeeded magnificently.

[aquart]

144. You still haven't a clue.

You're willing to surrender the nation to fascists without a struggle.

Come to think of it, you take as much responsibility for the mess you've already made as Bush does. So maybe that's the company you want to be in.

You're not a third party, sweetie. You're a fifth column.

[JVS]

145. Thank you for sharing

We all surrendered to Fascists on inauguration day 2001, or 9/11 2001 at the latest. I don't remember any struggle. We were all so proud that America didn't have tanks on the street because of a fraudulent election! The issue was not dealt with promptly and now you try to blame me.

[Pallas180]

152. On cable today: Dean leading all candidates and party to the left. YAY!

not to worry.

now if nader and the greens will stay out of it, we might
get a real democrat in the WH

[JVS]

154. That is good news

[Alexander]

147. To JVS's credit

He/she did vote for Gore in 2000. So JVS didn't contribute that much.

However, there is still damage that can be done, and hopefully, JVS, you will change your mind. We can worry about how liberal the country should be AFTER we get into power. Worrying about it now is counter-productive and totally irrelevant, since we're not in power. The #1 priority should be to GET RID OF BUSH. If you're not on this bandwagon, that's your problem. But right now 45% of America is.

[JVS]

150. When I see a little room on the wagon I'm in

I just hope that the wagon isn't too full of manure to fit me.

[fishnfla]

157. yeah, heaven knows we dont need any more!

here's the day i vote Green: between forever and never

[Iverson]

156. JVS, along these lines

When you abandon the discourse of the left, there is an inevitable shift to the right.

This is my complaint with the centrists' ultimately circular reasoning that we must all pander to the center and right because they are not receptive to the left, thereby shifting the political landscape even further to the right, necessitating more accomodation. Repeat ad infinitum.

A few people get it.