18 days to go

[lookout123]

OK so we have 18 days till armegeddon, wait,no,i mean the election.
With many on each side convinced the end of civilization will commence with the theft of the election by the other side, the race remains too close to call.

It is extremely unlikely that anyone in the cellar would change their mind on who they will vote for at this point, so let's not waste the energy with proselytizing and name calling - we'll save that for a select few other threads.

My question is what character traits, ideas, or policies does your candidate propose that draw you too him?



and as a second question: if you're candidate isn't your vision of the ideal president - who is?

[flippant]

In my opinion,Kerry had enough moxy to come back from Vietnam as a veteran and protest what he felt was wrong. He had no way of knowing at that time that it would be a good political strategy to reference in the future. He came up against the government on behalf of his fellow soldiers to try and represent a minorty of the population suffering as a result of the terrors of that failed war. I believe sacrficing popularity for voiceing what you firmly believe in is a sign of great character. And what of the willigness to speak for the good of the whole even during a time of consistent strife?..........Does Bush have great(any) character? Nobility? If so, can you name an instance of even a minute bravery he acted out of for the good of the country? (outside of political pressures)
I watched Uncle Tom's Cabin this morning (rarely do I cry) and it struck me that if we were to somehow rearrange time and imagine Bush as president during that period what actions would he have taken on the most basic of human and civil rights?

[DanaC]

I dont understand the vitriol directed against Kerry on the issue of "flip flopping" as far as I can tell the man took a stance on the war which was based on the evidence as presented by the government of the day .........and then when it became clear that the government of the day had lied through it's whiter than white teeth he changed his mind......So.....This is a man who is willing to change his mind when the evidence presented demands it. How is that worse than a man who is unwilling to be seen to change his mind even when the evidence is proved to have been false?

I also dont see any reason as to why any republicans should be fearful of the election being robbed by the democrats.....Thus far the side with past form on this is the Republican party. There's been no attempt by the democrats to steal an election there was however a successful attempt by the Republicans to steal the last election and all evidence seems to be pointing to them making a second attempt this coming November. To suggest that this is a matter for which both sides should be considered equally culpable is somewhat disingenuous.

[flippant]

Dana, I don't know you but I think I'm beginning to like you already. Right On 2 thumbs up!!

[lookout123]

dana, both (probably all) political parties have had less than honest election tactics. for a primer on that you can look into chicago and New York politics. the old D machine was quite adept at turning out their base voters, alive or not.

so yes, both sides do have cause for concern when it comes to dicey election tactics.

[glatt]

Yes, both are bad. The Democrats were bad in Chicago decades ago, and the Republicans were bad in Florida three months ago. Which is more relevant today?

[DanaC]

Oh dicey tactics I can well believe of both sides. However stealing an election on such a grand scale as the last Republican campaign did is rather more than dicey tactics. Your initial post intimated that both sides had reason to fear the other side stealing the election. Given the shenannigans in the last election I'd say the democrats have more of a right to that fear than the republicans.

The whole world watched in dismay as the worlds greatest nation allowed it's presidency go to a man who had not won the election in any true sense. Activities reminiscent of the Congo and certain South American regimes stunned us all into near speechlessness.

We're all watching again and hoping against hope that America, the greatest nation on earth and the model for us all when it comes to freedom and democracy will have a legitimately elected President, regardless of which side wins. ....Y'see.....It's not so much that I hate the American system .....it's more that I spent my childhood being impressed by it and being wooed by Superman and Spiderman and the Incredible Hulk into seeing America as a land of heroes whose motives were founded on great and worthy principles. It took a lot for that faith in America to be shaken and frankly Bush was the final straw :P I still do believe that America can be the beacon of freedom and democracy, fair play and hope that it used to be. It just needs it's people to wrench the reigns of power away from those who have abused them and place them firmly in the hands of someone more deserving of their respect.

[lookout123]

Originally Posted by glatt

Yes, both are bad. The Democrats were bad in Chicago decades ago, and the Republicans were bad in Florida three months ago. Which is more relevant today?

do you honestly believe that the Republicans weren't bad decades ago and that the Democrats were innocent 3 years ago?

my point is that many who are involved in politics will go to extreme measures in order to get power. it has always been that way and it will always be that way. anyone who believes either side is completely innocent and the other is completely guilty is fooling themselves.

[elSicomoro]

Originally Posted by DanaC

The whole world watched in dismay as the worlds greatest nation allowed it's presidency go to a man who had not won the election in any true sense.

To what are you referring?

[lookout123]

dana - america is not so different from what it was when you were a child - you are different. you now hold your own philosophical and political beliefs which you will judge the world against, and against your worldview america is now failing. so you have changed, but so has the media and the information that is available to us. once upon a time the media didn't spend 24/7/365 x4 trying to dig up dirt on any well known individual. in the information age we can find a story to fit any belief so you have a lot more information to filter through your worldview - again contributing to america's failure in your eyes.

[DanaC]

Lookout that's a very good point.

Originally Posted by lookout123

dana - america is not so different from what it was when you were a child - you are different. you now hold your own philosophical and political beliefs which you will judge the world against, and against your worldview america is now failing.

Remember JFK? (no, you probably weren't born yet) "Ask not what you country can do for you, but what you can do for your country." How about Martin Luther King and his courageous fight to win civil liberties, not just for black Americans, but ALL Americans? Both of them assasinated. What leaders do we have today that even approach their caliber? Remember the rights we Americans could once claim under the Constitution? The right against unreasonable search and seizure; the right to a fair and open trial in a court of law by a jury of our peers? These rights are being erroded away - first by the "war on drugs" and now by the Patriot Act. 30 years ago Gitmo Bay would never have been tolerated - now no one utters a word of protest.

Originally Posted by lookout123

so you have changed, but so has the media and the information that is available to us. once upon a time the media didn't spend 24/7/365 x4 trying to dig up dirt on any well known individual. in the information age we can find a story to fit any belief so you have a lot more information to filter through your worldview - again contributing to america's failure in your eyes.

What DO they teach in our schools these days? Ever hear of the McCarthy era? Do you have any idea how many public figures (and private citizens) had their careers and their lives destroyed by rumor and innuendo as the nation and the media became involved in a mass hysterical anti-commie frenzy? 30 years or so ago when McGovern was a candidate for president, the press leaked that he had once been treated for depression. In those days such things were never spoken of, and it was considered almost shameful to admit to such a condition. Talk about the media digging up dirt! Ever hear of something called the "yellow press"? 30, 40, 50, 100 years ago before the big conglomerates took over, any citizen with a printing press could put out his own newspaper. NYC alone had at least 10 or 12 papers if not more, and some of these papers were highly slanted to put it mildly. Ever watch "Citizen Kane" about Randolph Hearst? That took place in the 30's and the Hearst empire was built on yellow journalism. If you are going to comment on changes in the US, I suggest you get yourself a good book by a reputable scholar on the history of our country. Read it and get back to us.

[elSicomoro]

Originally Posted by marichiko

30 years or so ago when McGovern was a candidate for president, the press leaked that he had once been treated for depression.

Right campaign, wrong person...Sen. Tom Eagleton.

[lookout123]

don't confuse her with facts, she might lose sight of her conspiracies.

mari - if you read back you will see that dana was talking about the america she respected as a child. i believe dana is in her 20's or early 30's, that means she was a child during the reagan era. that is what i was responding to. the norman rockwell america never existed for the people who snuck a peak beneath the surface, as she does now.

your references about journalism are valid, but tell me - how many 24/7 news networks were in operation pre-1990? how many political blogs? hell, even the evening news was only 15minutes long before watergate. it is a phenomenon of the '90's and beyond that there are thousands of journalist/investigators digging into every possible moment of a celebrity's life.

so before you tell me to "read a book" and get back to you, stop, reread the thread and see if you have something relevant to the actual discussion we were having.

Originally Posted by sycamore

Right campaign, wrong person...Sen. Tom Eagleton.

Yeah, you know, I actually realized it was Eagleton a few minutes after I hit the reply button, but by then a friend had come over to try to get some important information he needed from the Canadian Government website, and I couldn't get back online in time to correct my error. For an interesting trip down memory lane check out this link: http://www.kennesaw.edu/pols/3380/pres/1972.html

Originally Posted by Lookout123

your references about journalism are valid, but tell me - how many 24/7 news networks were in operation pre-1990? how many political blogs? hell, even the evening news was only 15minutes long before watergate. it is a phenomenon of the '90's and beyond that there are thousands of journalist/investigators digging into every possible moment of a celebrity's life.

Check out my link above for pre-Watergate journalistic smear tactics by the so-called "liberal press." If that's not digging into every aspect of a candidate's life, I don't know what is.

While once upon a time the evening news was shorter and there was no CNN or Internet, we fossils who remember those times still managed to get our daily dose of (mis)information. We did this thing they called "READING". I subscribed to so many news magazines I could barely keep up with them all. There were also plenty of radio shows then just as there are now. I remember going over to a friend's who had a shortwave radio so I could hear the BBC news (less biased, I felt), and even the Swiss national shortwave radio broadcasts in English (I can still hear Swiss Radio's distinctive little broadcast theme in my mind).

As for the America of Dana's childhood, only she can enlighten us as to whether it was the America of Ronald Reagan that enthralled her so.