Jusunlee.com Forums Pages (2): [1] 2 »
Show all 24 posts from this thread on one page

Jusunlee.com Forums (https://www.jusunlee.com/forums/index.php)
- Random Thoughts (https://www.jusunlee.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?forumid=2)
-- Anyone Voting? (https://www.jusunlee.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=16092)

Posted by NyXpun on 09-28-2004 01:08 AM:

Anyone Voting?

yea go anyone but bush
vote kerry his flaws do not compare with Bush's flaws

Posted by AZN Pinoy BOI on 09-28-2004 02:47 AM:

i'm not voting

__________________


wana chat?
aim: LiQUiD PhLiP o1
xanga: AZNpinoyBOI

Posted by Alchemist on 09-28-2004 04:13 AM:

Re: Anyone Voting?

quote:
Originally posted by NyXpun
yea go anyone but bush
vote kerry his flaws do not compare with Bush's flaws


Prove it

Posted by aaqthree on 09-28-2004 04:22 AM:

Yeah go anyone but Bush or Kerry.

A note for anyone who hates the Patriot Act: Kerry helped write it.

I hate Kerry as much as I hate Bush, I'm voting Nader.

However, I understand why people vote for Kerry over Bush. Fed up with one, maybe the alternative might be better.

There are some things that Kerry really is the lesser evil on. Gay rights comes to mind - Bush wants to abuse the constitution to keep gays from marrying, Kerry just wants the states to keep gays from marrying. A minor difference, but it might be important.

As for the war, there's little reason to believe Kerry is anti-war. He is not an anti-war candidate, that should be obvious. And this election is holding back the anti-war (and, in general, the anti-imperialist) movement.

Posted by NyXpun on 09-28-2004 03:33 PM:

Re: Re: Anyone Voting?

quote:
Originally posted by Alchemist
Prove it


Kerry's flaws - we dont know what he really is for

Bush's flaws - brought us into a war, back into another deficit especially with another tax cut, All hes really been focusing on is the war. hes been lying to us about everything about invading Iraq (ie WMDs connection to 9/11 etc)
well if u been remotely following whats been going in the world u should know yourself.
why do u think so many ppl call him the worst president ever

o yea what is voting for Nader going to do no offense to u or Nader but isnt that part of the reason why the other election went that way?

Posted by aaqthree on 09-28-2004 05:56 PM:

Those aren't Kerry's flaws.

We know he's a pro-war candidate. That's a flaw in my book. We know he wrote part of the Patriot Act. That's a huge flaw.

I'm voting for Nader because I have no other choice. Voting for Kerry will NOT affect the things that concern me most - the Patriot Act, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the support for some of Israel's unlawful policies (like the building of the wall on Palestinian land. Note: I am very much against Palestinian use of terror, but I am also against Israeli use of terror and neither one should be condoned. Building the wall on Palestinian land makes the wall an offensive measure, not a defensive one; one that is meant to annex more of Palestinian land and leave thousands of Palestinians homeless).

Voting for Nader is also part of a larger goal to build an independent third party. Voting for Cobb would accomplish the same thing, but who is more recognizable? Nader, a guy who has had decades of pushing reform after reform, or Cobb, some random dude that a minority of the Greeens decided should be their candidate (*in some states)?

There are many things wrong with the political process. Elections should be reformed - first off, we need proportionate representation and run-off voting. If we had run-off voting, people would vote for what they want instead of just against what they don't want. Elections should also be publically, rather than privately financed, get rid of those special interests running our elections and give them back to the people.

That's what voting for Nader is about.

And by the way, voting for Nader in New York State means nothing. Then again, if I were in Florida I'd probably vote for Nader anyway. Gore didn't lose the election because of Nader, he lost it because there were thousands of black voters whose votes were not counted. He also lost because he's an idiot who ran his campaign to be very similar to Bush for awhile.

Kerry's doing the same thing. If the Dems lose again, they should rethink their whole strategy of shifting conservative.

Posted by Alchemist on 09-28-2004 08:02 PM:

I might vote for Nader because he's pretty honest. Not sure though. Too bad James Higgins isn't running for president, I'd vote for him.

Posted by NyXpun on 09-28-2004 09:48 PM:

good points yea but so u are saying that voting for Nader might develope a third party ok this election is too big to do that right now
i know u guys dont like Kerry i dont like him either.
but u guys thinking risking Bush getting re-elected (which actually might happen) is better? u guys think that Giving Bush another chance at this is better off?

when he attacks Iran and North Korea widening the deficit blah blah blah and so on in the next couple lets see what u guys think of your decision cuz i dun think we and the rest of the world can take this for another four years.

cuz i rather get someone else in and hope it gets better then put the same person in and see it get worse.

aaqthree your points are good and all but this is the real world and in the real world those things are not realistic

getting rid of special interest contributions by corporations will never go away. government needs the corporations on their side to run the country cuz they can affect the economy directly.
also since like 1960 every president had at least 85% + of their cabinet filled with people from a business background. <- another reason why special interest spending will probably never go away

also the third party thing their best chance was in 1996 with Perot but something happened.

Posted by aaqthree on 09-29-2004 07:03 AM:

And in this "real world", the Democrats have catered to the same special interests that Republicans have.

So what's the point? Voting will be bullshit either way. Unless you actually stand behind your vote, that's the only way to actually make a difference.

The Patriot Act violates the Fourth Amendment (protection from "unreasonable" searches...basically the government can't just go in and say, "We think you are a threat, we'd like to search your home" unless they have a warrant or something concrete). Both candidates fully support this unconstitutional law, which I resent greatly.

"Giving Bush another chance at this is better off?"

No. That's why I'm not voting for Bush. As far as I'm concerned, he lost the last election, but might actually win this one due to Democratic incompetence.

But I will not subjugate myself to the doctrine of lesser evilism.

quote:

when he attacks Iran and North Korea widening the deficit blah blah blah and so on in the next couple lets see what u guys think of your decision cuz i dun think we and the rest of the world can take this for another four years.


I will think that everyone who voted for Bush was retarded, they voted for a guy they knew sucked.

And if Kerry gets elected, and continues with the invasion of Iraq, and does not repeal the Patriot Act, or bombs a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan, or creates more prisons than Clinton, or any number of things that previous presidents, both Democrat and Republican are guilty of, then I will think that everyone who voted for Kerry, especially the liberals who disagreed with Kerry on most of his positions, were just as retarded as those who vote for Bush.

As for invasions of other countries...let's do a little research.

How many wars in the twentieth century were started by (or at least, the US first got involved in under) Democrats?

Vietnam - JFK (and remember...this ended with a Republican in power)
Korea - Truman
WW2 - FDR
WW1 - Wilson

This is, of course, not counting various things that occurred under the Clinton administration (sanctions in Iraq that killed over 500,000 according to the UN, bombing of al-Shifa plant in Khartoum, standing put during the Rwandan genocide, bombings in Somalia, Afghanistan, supporting Colombian bombings that killed tens of thousands), the Carter administration (mainly, support for the Afghan "moujahedeen"...even before the Russians entered the picture).

quote:
cuz i rather get someone else in and hope it gets better then put the same person in and see it get worse.


That's worse false hope than mine. At least I recognize that the current system will not allow the things that I hope for - that's why I want to create multiple, independent third parties so that we can actually have a real democracy eventually.

quote:

getting rid of special interest contributions by corporations will never go away. government needs the corporations on their side to run the country cuz they can affect the economy directly.
also since like 1960 every president had at least 85% + of their cabinet filled with people from a business background. <- another reason why special interest spending will probably never go away


No, people in power take special interest contributions because they are greedy. Not because it "helps the economy" or whatever. It's very simple - they sell their platform to the highest bidder pretty much.

And you did not provide a reason why "special interest spending will probably never go away". You merely made a statement about special interest spending.

Posted by Alchemist on 09-30-2004 02:56 PM:

Nader was on the Ali G show, that's it, I know who I'm voting for.

Posted by wonmin on 09-30-2004 11:28 PM:

kerry, but im too young to vote

__________________
------------------------------------------------

wonmin*

Posted by MellowYellow on 10-01-2004 07:45 AM:

I'm not a passionately political person at all but truthfully... I don't want to vote for EITHER. You know why? Either way we're fucked. You think they're so different but they're not as much. Look closer on the issues. The only reason that everyone is pushing Kerry is because of Bush. Why can't anyone just examine Kerry as one? If Kerry is in office and we're STILL screwed... comparing him to Bush isn't going to do us jack diddly.

quote:
Originally posted by NyXpun
cuz i rather get someone else in and hope it gets better then put the same person in and see it get worse.


What I DON'T want is for Kerry to win by default. It seems like it's going to turn out that way though. Reading NyXpun's quote just helps to prove that this mentality of "because we have no other alternative" is further perpetuating itself. The only reason people say that is because they don't know what the hell they're talking about. All of the college students are basically "peer-pressured" to vote [for Kerry]. When I'm walking around campus and people tell me to register to vote... they mean register to vote [for Kerry]. You heard [er read] me. I'm just really dissapointed for this year's election.

Like I said... either way we're screwed.

What I also DON'T want is for Nader to win by default.

I don't want to vote anymore. [Shut up. That doesn't mean I'm not going to.]

__________________
I hate google cache.

Posted by aaqthree on 10-01-2004 09:24 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Alchemist
Nader was on the Ali G show, that's it, I know who I'm voting for.


Me name be Ralph Nader,
Me gonna make an appeal.
Save the rainforests,
Aight, keep it real.

Posted by Alchemist on 10-01-2004 09:47 PM:

Your location says clumbyaaa, seriously you Columbians need to learn how to spell. That's the F.Y.R.S.T. thing your school needs to do. The S.E.K.O.N.T. thing your school needs to do is to get better and building stuff. I'm thinking of changing my location to Story Book

Posted by NyXpun on 10-07-2004 02:19 AM:

Creating a third party will not help(which creating a another major party is practically a pipe dream)


Third Parties want votes so they can qualify for big Special interest donations given to them


If You ever Taken a Socialogy class or pay attention to the world you would know that Government always favors big coroporations
and it will never change it actually has been getting greater as years passed.
It has been like this since the country started
yea even though i am for democrats it doesnt matter what party is in power(and if third party somehow makes it there, it will be the same)

the Top 20% control more then half of the national income

read something before saying something ignorant(no offense) like special interest spending will go away when the government does so much to make things better for big business/coroporation
i.e. tax breaks law breaks(means bending the law for them)
also this doesnt matter what party.



how are u guys so sure that things will not be different if Kerry was president? Because that is what people say if they do not know anything or havent made up their minds. u guys are just taking the easy way out by not picking one. Yes most College students are just anti Bush. and yea most of them are ignorant.

yea Kerry is going to continue the war. but what u actually thought he was going to pull everything out? is that why u say they are the same? Kerry and Bush have different plans for the war. I am sorry i dont have much information on that but if u read it yourself u can see the difference.

the only real thing that they are the same on is that they both are going to continue the war. look at everything else

u know what war issues isnt the only reason im voting for kerry
actually war is so fucking dumb that i dont give a f*ck
im in a low low middle class family my umma barely makes 25 000
and appa doesnt pay child support.

Bush's policies f*ck me and my family even though both parties do more for corps, Democrats at least do more for us little people

i rather look at other things that kerry is for since he is democrat not the f*ckin war u and the rest of america is focusing on

there are more issues then the god damn war.

and also what with my quotes? u should think about them
how does this quote do anything bad
"The sign of a first rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed views at the same time"-F. Scott Fitzgerald
if u do not know what that means then wow

Posted by Alchemist on 10-07-2004 03:36 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by NyXpun
Creating a third party will not help(which creating a another major party is practically a pipe dream)

i rather look at other things that kerry is for since he is democrat not the f*ckin war u and the rest of america is focusing on

there are more issues then the god damn war.


quote:
Originally posted by aaqthree
We know he wrote part of the Patriot Act. That's a huge flaw.

Voting for Kerry will NOT affect the things that concern me most - the Patriot Act, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the support for some of Israel's unlawful policies (like the building of the wall on Palestinian land. Note: I am very much against Palestinian use of terror, but I am also against Israeli use of terror and neither one should be condoned. Building the wall on Palestinian land makes the wall an offensive measure, not a defensive one; one that is meant to annex more of Palestinian land and leave thousands of Palestinians homeless).


There are many things wrong with the political process. Elections should be reformed - first off, we need proportionate representation and run-off voting. If we had run-off voting, people would vote for what they want instead of just against what they don't want. Elections should also be publically, rather than privately financed, get rid of those special interests running our elections and give them back to the people.

That's what voting for Nader is about.

Posted by Alchemist on 10-07-2004 03:39 AM:

aaqthree you need to take a socialogy class, otherwise you don't know what you're talking about.

Posted by aaqthree on 10-07-2004 04:41 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by NyXpun
Creating a third party will not help(which creating a another major party is practically a pipe dream)


Many third parties want to promote legislation like the abolition of the electoral collage, instant runoff voting, proportionate representation, and campaign finance reform that will actually help create a real democracy.

Third parties allow for more people to actually have a voice; most people are against the war yet the two parties are both running pro-war candidates. This is supposed to represent the views of most Americans?

quote:
Third Parties want votes so they can qualify for big Special interest donations given to them


Some do. But that doesn't explain why people like Nader want to push through campaign finance reform that will make private funding of elections illegal.

quote:
If You ever Taken a Socialogy class or pay attention to the world you would know that Government always favors big coroporations
and it will never change it actually has been getting greater as years passed.
It has been like this since the country started
yea even though i am for democrats it doesnt matter what party is in power(and if third party somehow makes it there, it will be the same)


Another reason for voting for a third party, both parties are, in effect, run by the same people then.

And yes, some third parties are not interested in special interest funding. The leftist third party movement that Nader voters are hoping for supports McCain-Feingold, and say that it does not go far enough.

quote:
the Top 20% control more then half of the national income


Cool. And the top 1% controls about 38% of the nation's wealth, more than double the amount controlled by the bottom 80%. Democrats are not helping.

quote:
read something before saying something ignorant(no offense) like special interest spending will go away when the government does so much to make things better for big business/coroporation
i.e. tax breaks law breaks(means bending the law for them)


I didn't say special interest funding would go away. I fully recognize that the current system supports special interest funding. I do not foresee that changing unless we continuously struggle against it.

However, that does not mean we should just give in to these special interests. There are movements that want to put a stop to the privatization of elections, and if we truly despise special interests and soft money, we should support those movements. Voting for Nader is a step in that direction; voting for Kerry does not address the problem (oh my! another position Nader has that's against the status quo, that Kerry and Bush do not. hmm...).

Just because that's the way it is does not make it right.

quote:

also this doesnt matter what party.

how are u guys so sure that things will not be different if Kerry was president? Because that is what people say if they do not know anything or havent made up their minds. u guys are just taking the easy way out by not picking one. Yes most College students are just anti Bush. and yea most of them are ignorant.


I'm so sure because of what you said: "also this doesnt matter what party."

Kerry is a pro-war, pro-Patriot Act candidate. Those are his positions, that's why I do not want to vote for him.

There are other reasons I would not want to vote for him. He will do nothing to help the gay rights movement, though in that he is clearly the "lesser evil" (at least he won't constitutionally ban gay marriage...he just wants to stop gays from marrying on a state-to-state level).

quote:
yea Kerry is going to continue the war. but what u actually thought he was going to pull everything out? is that why u say they are the same? Kerry and Bush have different plans for the war. I am sorry i dont have much information on that but if u read it yourself u can see the difference.


The fact is that they both support an unjust war. People say Bush can't admit his mistakes, but Kerry has not once apologized for authorizing the use of force.

My problem with the war is its imperialistic roots. There is a pattern of imperialism that America has taken since the end of World War 2, where America continues to try to dominate the rest of the world. Democrats and Republicans alike fit this pattern. Kerry rejected it when he spoke out against the Vietnam War. He rejected it when he rejected the first Gulf War. However, he clearly does not reject it in the cases of Afghanistan and Iraq.

quote:
the only real thing that they are the same on is that they both are going to continue the war. look at everything else


Like the Patriot Act.

quote:
u know what war issues isnt the only reason im voting for kerry
actually war is so fucking dumb that i dont give a f*ck
im in a low low middle class family my umma barely makes 25 000
and appa doesnt pay child support.

Bush's policies f*ck me and my family even though both parties do more for corps, Democrats at least do more for us little people


Give them crumbs and take their bread.

quote:
i rather look at other things that kerry is for since he is democrat not the f*ckin war u and the rest of america is focusing on

there are more issues then the god damn war.


Yes. But the most important issue to me is the war. Why? Because foreign policy is the thing I care most about. I believe that the life of an innocent human is equal, regardless of whether you are Iraqi, Palestinian, Israeli, Sudanese, Arab, American, or whatever. Therefore I am outraged at the atrocities in Afghanistan and Iraq.

quote:
and also what with my quotes? u should think about them
how does this quote do anything bad
"The sign of a first rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed views at the same time"-F. Scott Fitzgerald
if u do not know what that means then wow


Don't ever make assumptions about my intelligence.

You've made a lot of assumptions in this post, I just haven't called you out on them before, because this is the biggest one you did.

Now let's see...you've called me ignorant of the way things work. I've read NUMEROUS works about capitalism, American foreign policy, terrorism, and the Islamic mindset (which, of course, will not change very much by bombing the hell out of them). I've read extensively about histories of class struggle in America (which relates to your claims about special interest domination). I've read books written by Ralph Nader (including one that I own, interesting read about how the Democrats have become much more conservative in the last 30 years, Crashing the Party). I've met, in person, Nader's running mate this year, Peter Miguel Camejo, and heard him speak about corporate welfare, the Iraq war, the Patriot Act, and the beginnings of a leftist, grassroots, Green Party movement.

So as far as politics go, I'm far from ignorant.

As for your little quote, sure I'll take a crack at it. First, it might be better to have the full, actual quote:

"The sign of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing views in the mind at the same time and still have the ability to function."

It's just a generic statement on open-mindedness. He's making the point that you SHOULD be able to see multiple perspectives.

Unfortunately, I'm not a Fitzgerald fan.

I am, however, an Orwell fan fan. So I'll quote him:

quote:
Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them. . . To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while take account of the reality which one denies.


Orwell is not talking about open-mindedness here - he's talking about the system of lying and deception - especially to yourself - in order to believe that the Party (in this case, either party) is doing the right thing.

I refuse to commit doublethink, or crimestop for that matter. I will not believe that what we are doing in Iraq is wrong and vote for someone who believes in that war. I will not believe that the Patriot Act is an infringement upon our rights and vote for someone who supports that law.

Of course there are other issues related to this election. I personally am more interested in foreign policy and civil liberties/civil rights. And Nader's policies reflect my positions the most, though not entirely.

(As an aside, it's interesting to think about the Bush administration in terms of the parameters set by doublethink. Especially the part about telling deliberate lies while believing in them)

Posted by KeN VeRsUs RyU on 10-07-2004 04:50 AM:

my goodness. Everybody using their debatin skills and poli sci h.w. to answer this threads. truly amazing.

__________________

xanga.com/an1_mixtape

Posted by aaqthree on 10-07-2004 04:09 PM:

Unfortunately I'm not in any polisci classes.

Wanted to, but it didn't fit into my schedule (conflicted with compsci, and compsci has precedence over everything, haha).

I do intend on minoring in PoliSci though.
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:06 PM. Pages (2): [1] 2 »
Show all 24 posts from this thread on one page