I am worried…can i support Kerry?

[Ben.]

...but I am essentially a moderate right-winger.

aha!    

I think he might mean by European standards... no Gustaf dont turn to the Dark side NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!




I mean here in the UK (where i am at the moment) the "mainstream rightwing " is pretty much on a par with say Jo Lieberman or at a strech John Breaux is quite odd really, its strange how far to the right many in the UK percive the US as being... having said that it hasnt made me shift to the left any more...    

[angus]

...but I am essentially a moderate right-winger.

aha!    

two can play that game!  

[Gustaf]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I never said I was a left-winger.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

For the last few years I have stuck with my Party… I have not been a liberal however; I am moderate to conservative on moral issues, fiscal issues and foreign policy… My views are probably somewhere between Breaux, Lieberman and Edwards… as a person I like Bush I think he is a decent human being I have disagreed with him on many things and I would never embrace the GOP as a whole HOWEVER…

Over the last few days I have come to realise that maybe the section of my party which is at present most powerful (i.e the Pelosi Liberal wing) does not reflect my views on foreign policy or moral issues… however I do not agree with Bus’s handling  of the economy…what the hell do I do?... I am not sure that my party will emerge from its convention with a platform that I can support whole heartedly, Kerry seems to have a good economic policy however with his health care plan it cannot work! Bush seems to want to alter the taxcuts somewhat and give more money to the middleclass in a second term (which makes sense), Bush is strong on defence, maybe a little cavalier but not Goldwater style…

In MO I will vote for Holden and I’ll vote for Farmer however the moderate wing of my party is being ignored… Granholm, Vilsack, Doyle and Rendell all are good moderate Dems… yet the leadership of the party does not at present reflect that Edwards has been the only Dem of late to say “I do not agree with Gay marriage” now this issue is not massively important to me, I support the rights of people to do what they like behind closed doors so long as it is consenting, but I do not believe in diluting the institution of marriage, no other leading Dem has taken a stand against the far left save Bayh on abortion or the likes of Lieberman and Breaux on other issues it is the “Blue Dogs” who have won lately (Chandler, Blanco and Landrieu), the liberals have not…

What do I do?... I don’t know if I can vote for Kerry based on the fact that the platform he will run on may well not be one I agree with, I believe in democratic principles as instituted by the moderate wing of my party in particular the DLC and the “blue dogs” but many liberal dems (not here) have utter contempt for my views… Am I going to end up voting for Bush who largely on social issues and national defence I agree with and believe him to be a good guy personally yet who’s management of the economy has been poor or do I vote for Kerry who on social issues and the economy I disagree with at least in part yet on the environment and the role of government I agree with … Kerry’s record seems to me to be liberal largely because he had the unenviable task of representing MA… I want to vote for my Party and I believe Kerry would be a good president… it is just that the Liberal wing of my party with whom I have profound disagreements looks likely to hijack the convention much as they did in 1864 and then in 1972 and push through a liberal platform that would alienate many moderate democrats such as myself…and a Kerry victory would only strengthen there grip over the throat of the Party…

There is a third option I could just not cast a vote for President and vote for the other offices … what do I do?


PS: Sorry if anyone sees this as taking up needless space with pointless soul searching…

Damn.  That is exactly how I feel.  Like, word for word.  Except that I'm not a Democrat, so I don't have all that pesky traitor's guilt .

I think there are forces within the Democrat party that would like to do very damaging things to our society, transforming it into a secular-humanist's ideal, where there are no sexual mores, where people belong to their communtiy first, and their nuclear family last, where religion is shoved from the public view and discouraged wherever possible.  

I know this isn't all of the Democrats, but it's a large enough element that I can't associate with them.

[angus]

For the last few years I have stuck with my Party… I have not been a liberal however; I am moderate to conservative on moral issues, fiscal issues and foreign policy… My views are probably somewhere between Breaux, Lieberman and Edwards… as a person I like Bush I think he is a decent human being I have disagreed with him on many things and I would never embrace the GOP as a whole HOWEVER…

Over the last few days I have come to realise that maybe the section of my party which is at present most powerful (i.e the Pelosi Liberal wing) does not reflect my views on foreign policy or moral issues… however I do not agree with Bus’s handling  of the economy…what the hell do I do?... I am not sure that my party will emerge from its convention with a platform that I can support whole heartedly, Kerry seems to have a good economic policy however with his health care plan it cannot work! Bush seems to want to alter the taxcuts somewhat and give more money to the middleclass in a second term (which makes sense), Bush is strong on defence, maybe a little cavalier but not Goldwater style…

In MO I will vote for Holden and I’ll vote for Farmer however the moderate wing of my party is being ignored… Granholm, Vilsack, Doyle and Rendell all are good moderate Dems… yet the leadership of the party does not at present reflect that Edwards has been the only Dem of late to say “I do not agree with Gay marriage” now this issue is not massively important to me, I support the rights of people to do what they like behind closed doors so long as it is consenting, but I do not believe in diluting the institution of marriage, no other leading Dem has taken a stand against the far left save Bayh on abortion or the likes of Lieberman and Breaux on other issues it is the “Blue Dogs” who have won lately (Chandler, Blanco and Landrieu), the liberals have not…

What do I do?... I don’t know if I can vote for Kerry based on the fact that the platform he will run on may well not be one I agree with, I believe in democratic principles as instituted by the moderate wing of my party in particular the DLC and the “blue dogs” but many liberal dems (not here) have utter contempt for my views… Am I going to end up voting for Bush who largely on social issues and national defence I agree with and believe him to be a good guy personally yet who’s management of the economy has been poor or do I vote for Kerry who on social issues and the economy I disagree with at least in part yet on the environment and the role of government I agree with … Kerry’s record seems to me to be liberal largely because he had the unenviable task of representing MA… I want to vote for my Party and I believe Kerry would be a good president… it is just that the Liberal wing of my party with whom I have profound disagreements looks likely to hijack the convention much as they did in 1864 and then in 1972 and push through a liberal platform that would alienate many moderate democrats such as myself…and a Kerry victory would only strengthen there grip over the throat of the Party…

There is a third option I could just not cast a vote for President and vote for the other offices … what do I do?


PS: Sorry if anyone sees this as taking up needless space with pointless soul searching…

Damn.  That is exactly how I feel.  Like, word for word.  Except that I'm not a Democrat, so I don't have all that pesky traitor's guilt .

I think there are forces within the Democrat party that would like to do very damaging things to our society, transforming it into a secular-humanist's ideal, where there are no sexual mores, where people belong to their communtiy first, and their nuclear family last, where religion is shoved from the public view and discouraged wherever possible.  

I know this isn't all of the Democrats, but it's a large enough element that I can't associate with them.

there will be a republican, a democrat, a libertarian, a socialist, probably a reform party candidate and maybe a green and a commie.  And an independent with whom I know you are familiar from previous rants.  

don't limit your mind friend

[Ben.]

For the last few years I have stuck with my Party… I have not been a liberal however; I am moderate to conservative on moral issues, fiscal issues and foreign policy… My views are probably somewhere between Breaux, Lieberman and Edwards… as a person I like Bush I think he is a decent human being I have disagreed with him on many things and I would never embrace the GOP as a whole HOWEVER…

Over the last few days I have come to realise that maybe the section of my party which is at present most powerful (i.e the Pelosi Liberal wing) does not reflect my views on foreign policy or moral issues… however I do not agree with Bus’s handling  of the economy…what the hell do I do?... I am not sure that my party will emerge from its convention with a platform that I can support whole heartedly, Kerry seems to have a good economic policy however with his health care plan it cannot work! Bush seems to want to alter the taxcuts somewhat and give more money to the middleclass in a second term (which makes sense), Bush is strong on defence, maybe a little cavalier but not Goldwater style…

In MO I will vote for Holden and I’ll vote for Farmer however the moderate wing of my party is being ignored… Granholm, Vilsack, Doyle and Rendell all are good moderate Dems… yet the leadership of the party does not at present reflect that Edwards has been the only Dem of late to say “I do not agree with Gay marriage” now this issue is not massively important to me, I support the rights of people to do what they like behind closed doors so long as it is consenting, but I do not believe in diluting the institution of marriage, no other leading Dem has taken a stand against the far left save Bayh on abortion or the likes of Lieberman and Breaux on other issues it is the “Blue Dogs” who have won lately (Chandler, Blanco and Landrieu), the liberals have not…

What do I do?... I don’t know if I can vote for Kerry based on the fact that the platform he will run on may well not be one I agree with, I believe in democratic principles as instituted by the moderate wing of my party in particular the DLC and the “blue dogs” but many liberal dems (not here) have utter contempt for my views… Am I going to end up voting for Bush who largely on social issues and national defence I agree with and believe him to be a good guy personally yet who’s management of the economy has been poor or do I vote for Kerry who on social issues and the economy I disagree with at least in part yet on the environment and the role of government I agree with … Kerry’s record seems to me to be liberal largely because he had the unenviable task of representing MA… I want to vote for my Party and I believe Kerry would be a good president… it is just that the Liberal wing of my party with whom I have profound disagreements looks likely to hijack the convention much as they did in 1864 and then in 1972 and push through a liberal platform that would alienate many moderate democrats such as myself…and a Kerry victory would only strengthen there grip over the throat of the Party…

There is a third option I could just not cast a vote for President and vote for the other offices … what do I do?


PS: Sorry if anyone sees this as taking up needless space with pointless soul searching…

Damn.  That is exactly how I feel.  Like, word for word.  Except that I'm not a Democrat, so I don't have all that pesky traitor's guilt .

I think there are forces within the Democrat party that would like to do very damaging things to our society, transforming it into a secular-humanist's ideal, where there are no sexual mores, where people belong to their communtiy first, and their nuclear family last, where religion is shoved from the public view and discouraged wherever possible.  

I know this isn't all of the Democrats, but it's a large enough element that I can't associate with them.

I think we do agree Beef... for me its the old ideals of the democratic party which has always kept me in the party... the secularist tendency within the party is there, but it is not strong or popular enough to be overt... but in the likes of Kucinich and to a certain extent Dean and other uber-liberals it does have a presence on the fringes of the party... as I have said I do worry about it having some incipit influence over the platform and my party's positions however we'll have to wait till the convention... but with moderate dems winning elections (Blanco, Landrieu, Chandler etc...) and the fact that it looks as though the "Blue Dogs" and the "DLC" are going into this election stronger than they where before... I am more confident than I was that these uber-liberals can be pushed further to the fringes... well here's hoping at least...  

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

I think we do agree Beef... for me its the old ideals of the democratic party which has always kept me in the party... the secularist tendency within the party is there, but it is not strong or popular enough to be overt... but in the likes of Kucinich and to a certain extent Dean and other uber-liberals it does have a presence on the fringes of the party...

Barbara Boxer and Nancy Pelosi are not on the "fringes" of the party, though.  They're far too liberal to ever run for President, but they do have a tremendous influence.  When Boxer gets up in front of the Senate and argues that late-term abortions are essential for women's rights, and the Democrats do nothing to distance themselves from this absurd position, it kinda turns me off, ya know?

as I have said I do worry about it having some incipit influence over the platform and my party's positions however we'll have to wait till the convention... but with moderate dems winning elections (Blanco, Landrieu, Chandler etc...) and the fact that it looks as though the "Blue Dogs" and the "DLC" are going into this election stronger than they where before... I am more confident than I was that these uber-liberals can be pushed further to the fringes... well here's hoping at least...  

I think this will happen.  As the Green party steals more and more far-left votes, the Democrats will have to moderate their platform to get support from the center-right.  The danger is that the party is turning into Republicans-Lite, but I can't see them trying to recapture the far-left.  They risk losing support from their rank-and-file working-class voters who don't like radical social liberalism.  The DLC-wing and the Blue Dogs are the future of the party.  But for now, my avatar stays green.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

there will be a republican, a democrat, a libertarian, a socialist, probably a reform party candidate and maybe a green and a commie.  And an independent with whom I know you are familiar from previous rants.  

don't limit your mind friend

I don't quite understand what you mean by this.

Don't think for a minute that I'm alienated from the process.  I will vote for *some* Democrats (the Honorable Russell Feingold, to name one), and *some* Republicans.  I may very well vote Kerry this November.  I'm just not about to become a party loyalist for either side.

Hmm... Just took a look at Feingold's record.  I really like the guy, but his record on abortion sucks.  But I really like the guy.  I can understand what Ben is going through.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

Ben,

Here's a group you would be very interested in:

http://www.democratsforlife.org

[Ben.]

 

Ben,

Here's a group you would be very interested in:

http://www.democratsforlife.org

Seem like decent guys... I am really optimistic about the Blue Dogs and the DLC these days... dame I'm temperamental!

I like Feingold too... How did he vote on the partial birth abortion ban?... Abortion is not a clincher for me as far as votes go, I would prefer a moderate pro-lifer (like Evan Bayh) but as I said its not my number one point (its important though)... but Feingold is a principled guy also a fairly moral one from what I hear a observant Jew and the only guy who voted against the Patriot act and yet he supported the appointment of John Ashcroft because he thought that was the Presidents right to have who ever he wanted no matter who they where... Just for being that principled I reckon he should stay in the senate... but as always it yours and the state of Wisconsin’s call in this matter... so best of luck!    

[angus]

there will be a republican, a democrat, a libertarian, a socialist, probably a reform party candidate and maybe a green and a commie.  And an independent with whom I know you are familiar from previous rants.  

don't limit your mind friend

I don't quite understand what you mean by this.

Don't think for a minute that I'm alienated from the process.  I will vote for *some* Democrats (the Honorable Russell Feingold, to name one), and *some* Republicans.  I may very well vote Kerry this November.  I'm just not about to become a party loyalist for either side.

Hmm... Just took a look at Feingold's record.  I really like the guy, but his record on abortion sucks.  But I really like the guy.  I can understand what Ben is going through.

sorry.  that bit was for Ben.  I see that wasn't clear.  It was just a reminder to anyone who doesn't want to vote for kerry or bush not to fret, as typically you'll have seven or eight choices.  Surely you can find one of those who you can vote for.

Beef,
sure, I'll vote differently for different offices too, of course.  For AG, I often vote libertarian, since individual liberty is important to me.  For state treasurer, I vote GOP, undoubtedly, or whomever is the bigger tightwad.  For gov, well, for gov in this state you get many opportunities to vote, and my own record is all over the map, for Congress I'll vote to reelect the incumbent democrat, for pres I'll vote to reelect the incumbent Republican.  etc.  

[Gustaf]

there will be a republican, a democrat, a libertarian, a socialist, probably a reform party candidate and maybe a green and a commie.  And an independent with whom I know you are familiar from previous rants.  

don't limit your mind friend

I don't quite understand what you mean by this.

Don't think for a minute that I'm alienated from the process.  I will vote for *some* Democrats (the Honorable Russell Feingold, to name one), and *some* Republicans.  I may very well vote Kerry this November.  I'm just not about to become a party loyalist for either side.

Hmm... Just took a look at Feingold's record.  I really like the guy, but his record on abortion sucks.  But I really like the guy.  I can understand what Ben is going through.

sorry.  that bit was for Ben.  I see that wasn't clear.  It was just a reminder to anyone who doesn't want to vote for kerry or bush not to fret, as typically you'll have seven or eight choices.  Surely you can find one of those who you can vote for.

Beef,
sure, I'll vote differently for different offices too, of course.  For AG, I often vote libertarian, since individual liberty is important to me.  For state treasurer, I vote GOP, undoubtedly, or whomever is the bigger tightwad.  For gov, well, for gov in this state you get many opportunities to vote, and my own record is all over the map, for Congress I'll vote to reelect the incumbent democrat, for pres I'll vote to reelect the incumbent Republican.  etc.  

I have 7 MAJOR parties to choose between and I don't want to vote fo rany of them.

[angus]

7 MAJOR parties

(oxy)moronic

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

Ben,

Here's a group you would be very interested in:

http://www.democratsforlife.org

Seem like decent guys... I am really optimistic about the Blue Dogs and the DLC these days... dame I'm temperamental!

I like Feingold too... How did he vote on the partial birth abortion ban?... Abortion is not a clincher for me as far as votes go,

It isn't for me, but I do have a real problem with people who support late-term abortions.  I can understand leaving the question of the life of an early-term embryo or fetus up to personal conviction.  But when you get into the third trimester, clearly ending its life is no different from infanticide.  It's a horrible, horrible, gruesome thing.

Pro-life extremists believe that all human life has the complete rights of an idividual from the moment of conception.
Pro-choice extremists believe that the justidiction of goverment ends at the birth canal.

Unless both sides move from those positions, we aren't going to get anywhere.

[© tweed]

Pro-life extremists believe that all human life has the complete rights of an idividual from the moment of conception.
Pro-choice extremists believe that the justidiction of goverment ends at the birth canal.

I am in between those two positions.

[Ben.]

Ben,

Here's a group you would be very interested in:

http://www.democratsforlife.org

Seem like decent guys... I am really optimistic about the Blue Dogs and the DLC these days... dame I'm temperamental!

I like Feingold too... How did he vote on the partial birth abortion ban?... Abortion is not a clincher for me as far as votes go,

It isn't for me, but I do have a real problem with people who support late-term abortions.  I can understand leaving the question of the life of an early-term embryo or fetus up to personal conviction.  But when you get into the third trimester, clearly ending its life is no different from infanticide.  It's a horrible, horrible, gruesome thing.

Pro-life extremists believe that all human life has the complete rights of an idividual from the moment of conception.
Pro-choice extremists believe that the justidiction of goverment ends at the birth canal.

Unless both sides move from those positions, we aren't going to get anywhere.

Exactly! As I said I think you have to restrict when a person can have an abortion as there is a point where as you say it is simply infanticide… I am usually uncomfortable with actively legislating against people making choices however there are issues such as abortion and other ethical and moral issues where I think society should set limits and make a stand (don’t mean to rant or sound clichéd there )… So I defiantly back the banning of “partial birth abortions” and would personally urge a woman not to have an abortion unless her health was seriously endangered or the Child was seriously at risk of being severally handicapped… so as I said I pretty much agree with Evan Byah’s moderately pro-life position…