Is there a difference between Bush and Kerry?

[jpgray]

To define our terms (i.e. "what do you mean by difference?"), you can take this question in the same way a similar argument was posed in 2000. To paraphrase: "There is no difference between Gore and Bush."

[mikehiggins]

1. Bad poll! Bad! This poll should be spanked, not kicked.

Clearly there is a great deal of difference between Kerry and Bush.

Even questioning that makes the questioner suspect.

Somewhere in Texas a village is missing an idiot.

Kerry will send him home.

That is ALL the difference I need.

[jpgray]

4. LOL. Well, people know my opinion on this, but I was curious.

And I won't pounce on anyone who votes "there is no difference". There are plenty of threads already that attempt to contradict that statement, so if they want a fight, those threads are available.

[Goldom]

2. yes.

Kerry won't appoint Ashcroft, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, Powell, Rice, Scalia.... even if you think the man himself is no better than bush, think of all the other people...

[hellhathnofury]

3. I need a shade of gray vote.

[The Magistrate]

9. Among Shades Of Grey, Sir

There are striking differences....

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[saltpoint]

5. I voted 'yes.'

Anyone who is unable to make the distinction between Dubya and any of our Democrat candidates is a Zell Zombie.

Democrats win in 2004.

[BL_Zebub]

15. Now that's an erroneuous statement on it's very surface.

Zell zombies WANT every Democrat to be just like Bush.

[BL_Zebub]

6. Kerry's taller, and his nose is bigger.

And he actually went to Vietnam, instead of dodging the draft and then deserting the National Guard.

But that was thirty years ago.

As of right now, with the criminals both are tied to, and the agendas that both support, there is very little difference.

[jpgray]

8. As you can see, the terms of the "difference" are defined in the post (nt)

[HuckleB]

11. Really?

Tell me about how small the difference is on the environment?

[THUNDER HANDS]

7. does the Pope crap in the woods?

Is a bear Catholic?

[HuckleB]

10. 3 years of Bush should make this obvious.

Nader was very wrong in 2000.

Heck, I knew he was wrong, but I didn't think he was that wrong at the time. I really didn't think that there would be much of an effective difference between Gore and Bush. (I still voted for Gore, mostly because of the matter of nominating judges.)

I WAS WRONG! I WAS VERY WRONG! THE DIFFERENCE IS RATHER LARGE, to be quite subtle about it.

Please! Let's not go down this path again. The country can't afford it. This isn't a scare tactic. This is reality. This is based upon looking at what has happened under Bush. And it's very different than what happened under Clinton, what would have happened under Gore, and what would happen under Kerry. Make no mistake about it.

[mountebank]

12. Interesting question actually if one considers "political spectrum."

I find myself touting the political spectrum often these days when talking about John Kerry. On one axis: liberal v. conservative (or communism on one extreme, super-capitalism on the other). The other axis: authoritarianism v. libertarianism (note small L).

On the liberal v. conservative axis, obviously there is a real and substantive difference between Kerry and Bush and this is why we will all vote for Kerry (with a few crazy exceptions) if he is the nominee.

But on the other axis, there is not a substantive difference between Kerry and Bush. The people will have no more control over their political situation under Kerry. It will certainly SEEM less jack-booted superficially, because John Ashcroft won't be there looking like a Nazi. But the people will not have any more power with Kerry. In this way, they are not substantively different.

[jpgray]

13. Here's a political compass of the race

They may weigh some things differently than you or I, but their research and historical plottings are fairly accurate. Here's the site

[mountebank]

22. How is Kerry farther down than Edwards?

I just don't see how that's possible. Or Howard Dean for that matter!

[jpgray]

23. Kerry has a pretty liberal Senate record (for this country)

Dean's record in VT has a lot of problems that are connected with running a small state, some of it dealing with compromises on environmental issues to attract corporations. His environmental/corporate record isn't bad, but he did have to make some compromises. Here's the statement made by the site. Check the criteria for specifics on how the compass is constructed.

We've scrutinised the statements and, more tellingly, the voting records of the hopefuls of the two major parties, in response to requests from many of our American visitors.

Within the United States , of course, real (and imagined) differences between the candidates are more greatly magnified. However, compared to other western democracies, especially those with a finely-tuned system of proportional representation, most mainstream political activity in the US is concentrated over a more narrow ideological range. We note too that conservative Democrats tend to have more in common with Republicans than with the liberals within their own ranks.

Despite drop-outs along the way, we've left in all the initial players as their differences (and similarities) remain of interest.

[AndyTiedye]

24. Bush is further to the right than that

and he is MUCH MORE authoritarian w.r.t individuals, but not large corporations.

The pendulum has swung way too far to the right

[Terwilliger]

14. a lot changed since 2000

you remember that year, right? When it was clear that the DLC was in charge of the party and Ralph Nader's statements were perfectly spot-on?

Now, after years of crunching through the reality, Dem candidates are far further left-leaning than they would be otherwise. I mean, think about it...how many TRULY disgruntled Dems would there be right now if all the top candidates hadn't had to shift to the left to energize the base.

[jpgray]

17. I don't agree with your premise--some candidates moved right if anything

Dean moved left, Kucinich stayed basically the same, and Kerry moved right. For Edwards, Clark and Sharpton I'm not familiar enough with their history to make a confident determination. If you mean that they have pumped up their populist/anti-Bush rhetoric, I'm not sure that's indicative of an ideological change.

If we were running Lieberman v. Bayh or something in the primary, then yes, we would have some seriously disgruntled Dems. But Kerry, Dean and Kucinich were all pretty much where they are now in terms of ideology. I don't detect a major shift, unless it's to capitalize on the anger and frustration of the Democratic base.

[beyurslf]

16. Would Kerry... or any of the Dems running... nominate Pickering to the

Court?

'nough said!

[LuLu550]

18. was there a difference between Gore and Bush?

N/T

[jpgray]

20. See Terwilliger's post above--he makes a point along those lines

About how perceptions made it seem that the moderate DLC was basically controlling the party, and in that scenario many leftists were skeptical about the differences between the more subtly malevolent campaigning Bush and DLC-backed Al Gore.

[JackRiddler]

19. wrong question

of course there are differences. Reluctantly I may vote for Kerry, given the issues of judges; gender and race in America; and the importance of correct grammar and semi-coherent speech in a role model such as the president. (Plus he is waaaaay sexier than Bush.)

But what if you asked:

Will Kerry consolidate the gains in domestic repression gained by Bush on behalf of the corporate oligarchy?

Will Kerry repeal the PATRIOT Act?

Will Kerry bring peace and democracy to Iraq?

Will Kerry invade another oil-rich country one day?

Is Kerry the right face for continuing the Bush program with a more human touch?

Is Kerry the right man for the 95 percent of humanity affected by the Presidency but not allowed to vote for it?

Is he going to stop the war on drugs, or Plan Colombia, with all the tragedy and death it has caused?

Regime rotation!

[polmaven]

21. Of course there is a difference.

If ANYONE is saying there is no difference between a Senator with one of the most liberal voting records in THE HISTORY of the modern Senate, and the man who is redefining conservatism and dragging it further and further right....Well, I guess it really does depend on who you support, and if you are able to take a downturn in fortunes graciously.

There is a HUGE difference between any one of the Democratic candidates and George Bush. Any one of them will bring sanity and competence back to the Oval Office. ANY one, from Dean to Sharpton, in alphabetical order.

[krkaufman]

25. Ridiculous thread. n/t

[jpgray]

26. What is ridiculous about it? (nt)