CAREFUL WHAT YOU WRITE ON THIS THREAD! Intelligent critique is ok but no Bashing.
That's probably why there are votes, but no commentary
I voted for Nader in 2000, but not this time around.
A vote for Nader is just another vote for Shrub.
I'd like to know more about american politics. Can someone explain me who Nader is?
Ralph Nader was a consumer advocate/activist. He helped prompt one of the earliest mass consumer recalls due to a prioduct defect in a car. He ran for Persident in 2000 on the Green Party line, and many Democrats feel he cost Gore the election by taking votes in tight races in some states. You see, in the US, there is not a direct election of the President. There is the elctoral college. When I vote, I'm actually voting for the electors pledged for a candidate in my state. Gore won the popular vote, but lost the electoral college majority, and this is why Naqder is so controversial again, because of the fear that this may happen again.
Hope this helps and wasn't too partisan
Two years ago it would have been Bush most likely, but now I feel much differently. I am starting to disagree with more and more of his policies and issue stances. But, then again, I feel that I know next-to-nothing about Kerry. This seems like such a bleak race! I'm thoroughly confused and have no idea who I am voting for....but hopefully by November I'll make up my mind!
I will be voting for Kerry in November because I find myself in severe disagreement with most of Bush's policies and particularly with his international and health policies. I detest the Republican administration's attempt to cancel overtime for many people. I detest their gag rule policies with respect to clinics overseas that have cost many women and children their lives. I detest their highhanded and arrogant treatment of foreign countries. I think that their Iraq adventurism made the country far less safe, by providing fertile recruiting advertising materialfor al Qaeda for the next 50 years while allowing the Taliban and al Qaeda (the real terrorists) to regroup in Afghanistan. Additionally, this war was extremely badly planned without an exit strategy, and hugely expensive and cost many, many Iraqi lives and an every increasing number of American lives. Bush came into office with a good sized surplus and by injudicious tax cuts primarily given to the rich, he has acquired a huge deficit. Even Greenspan is expressing grave reservations about the long term effects of this deficit. These are my public spirited reasons.
However, there are also personal reasons:
The fact that the Republican administration has had the Equal Opportunity Commission pass a rule that allows my company to cancel my retiree health insurance and push me on to Medicare when I am eligible (Medicare is a much less attractive health option that what my company offers.) is one reason that I would never vote for Bush. The second personal reason that I would never vote for Bush is the Medicare prescription law. This law has a section that allows my company to also cancel both my and my husband's retiree drug coverage. This cool move will cost us about $10,000 every year. The drug coverage does not come with basic Medicare. It only comes if you can enrol in an HMO. Neither of us has good health. Private companies, as they say, do not insure burning houses. We will have to take Medicare, and will not be able to get the drugs through retiree coverage any more because the company will say that we should be able to get the prescription coverage, but we won't. If my cancer recurs, it will cost me my life, because I will not be able to afford the chemotherapy. Additionally, my husband is a diabetic. If you have been following the the Republican health rhetoric, you will find 'personal responsibility' highlighted. In other words, if you are a diabetic or have any disease that they can claim is somehow your fault, you will have to pay for everything. Doesn't matter that my husband's grandmother died of diabetes, his thyroid failed at 34, and that most of his problems have a genetic base. Nope diabetes is your fault. Need a kidney transplant? Dialysis? Huge array of pills? You must pay. It was your fault.
We need universal health coverage in this country and will not get it from the Republicans.
I will be voting Democrat across the board.
hi bronxgirl!thanx a lot for the explanations!
I, too, voted for Nader in 2000 (I was registered in Texas at the time, I didn't help GWB at all...), but this time I will vote for Kerry. While he isn't my favorite candidate (I liked Dean a great deal), he stands for most of what I believe in.
Also, for how I feel about Bush, please re-read Doris's post. As a teacher, I can also rant on about No Child Left Behind, which is the biggest crock of sh*t. No teacher I know wants to leave children behind, we do our best to teach these kids. But standardized tests don't prove anything other than that our kids know how to take tests. Trust me as the teacher to let you know if the student has learned the material sufficiently. If you don't trust me, then I shouldn't be teaching. I don't just pass along students, though God knows it's tempting with some of them. But I accept that there are 21 students who will repeat 9th grade English next year. Two will be on their 4th time through the class....
You want children to do well in school? Then make sure they get breakfast, make sure they come from a home where they feel safe, make sure their parents care about how they do in school, etc, etc.
Tests prove nothing.
Rant over. Have a great evening!
My mother was a school teacher. I understand and agree with everything that's been said. I'm voting for Kerry.
Princess Leppard, I totally agree with you on No Child Left Behind but I wanted to leave something for someone else to rant about! It's not fair to write all the commentary. BTW I was a very serious Dean supporter. And the way this war is all playing out surely makes it evident that Dean was the candidate who best understood the situation, despite the media dumping all over him for his opinions.
The media owes Dean an apology. He had it totally right.
And he was very, very good on No Child Left Behind, right from the days he was a governor and recommended that VT should probably just opt out of the federal funds to avoid the burden associated with NCLB; it would cost less than implementing NCLB. The Republican who replaced him as a governor didn't do it though.
really? then please DO explain why Alaska's students across the board can barely pass standardized tests that are EASIER than the GED??????????????????? They have "dummied" the dang things down so far I think the class of 03 who had horrible scores(I barely passed the Math portion by 3 points... my FRESHMAN YEAR of high school... back when they had trig and calc. on there, now they have the very basic Algebra) should complain and get extra points put on their record!... Really how it the students' faults that the teachers would rather care about making sure the football team has everyone covered and no failing players?No teacher I know wants to leave children behind, we do our best to teach these kids. But standardized tests don't prove anything other than that our kids know how to take tests.
Kenai Central had some of the highest scores in all of Alaska ... and their football team sucked because the kids weren't practicing 24/7 they were studying... granted some of the teachers did fudge the scores so they kids could play... but for the most part if they even had a D they didn't play... we finally won state because we were GOOD... not because someone skimped on the grading...
yeah somehow I don't see how Bush is so totally off his rocker...
My first presidential election vote's going to Bush....
Last edited by Tonichelle; 05-09-2004 at 02:05 AM.