Which issue will hurt J.Kerry the most?

[Gustaf]

(3) I know his being from the Northeast is a negative.  But the thing I've always wondered is why are the folks from the South so biased against folks from the Northeast?  Northern voters have no bias against Southern, Central, or Western candidates.  There is no Western or Central bias against anyone.  Seriously, someone from the South please explain this attitude problem.

You won, they lost. It's as simple as that.

I voted taxes, since Kerry will have to run on economy and needs to win middle-class voters.

[Gustaf]

Gustaf,

I'm afraid it's nowhere near that simple. As someone who was born and raised in New York and now lives in the South, I can tell you that it's a very complicated issue.

OK, sorry, I know it was a bit of an exaggeration. I didn't mean that the reason for South-Northeast tension is that simple, but the reason for the South being more anti-North than the other way around comes from being underdogs, etc. That's my theory, anyway. If you have a better one, please.

[Gustaf]

Gustaf,

As someone who has lived in both places, I can tell you that the North is perhaps more anti-South than vice versa...they just do it in a more subtle, condescending fashion.

OK, but I think we're talking of slightly different things here. It's like Finland and Sweden, when we meet each other in sports it's a lot of prestige involved and fierce competition. If Sweden gets knocked out most Swedes will root for Finland, but if it's the other way around most Finns will never, ever cheer on Sweden. It's gotten better in recent years, but is still mostly true. It's the same reason of being the under-dog.

[Gustaf]

If I was Kerry I would worry about it. Stamping your medals into the dirt and hanging with Hanoi Jane. Something to be real proud of. I'm not worried though Bush will be re-elected, Democrats senators are saying that too! LoL What hope for the Democrats this year. Sen. Zel Miller and Dick Morris both were saying Kerry is a weak candidate and is going to get hammered on the National Security front. John "Walter Mondale" Kerry will lose, Bush will win 58% etch it.

58% is pretty unlikely. I doubt Bush gets more than a 10% victory margin. Kerry could even win, if he's lucky...

[Gustaf]

Ok, here's my question. If you were rich and had a lot of power and influence would you want your son sent to the front lines of a war? Did you know JFK was kept back from the front lines by his father begging FDR to keep him back. Yes, I do know about the PT-109 incident, but where it occured was considered a out of the way area of the South Pacific. I dont blame any person of power for keeping their child out of harms way. If I had money and influence I sure would.

well I know it worked like this. but I expect a leader not to see himself above the people. I do not like Kerry but he went and serve and came back and said what he think about the war.

And my friend I served in an Army and in a war.  

What war, since I don't know how old you are?

[Gustaf]

I was 39 last October

Lebanon

OK. The 1982 one?

[Gustaf]

Why there is no "questionable military voting record" on the list? I think that it is Kerry's weak point. He has voted against major military programs like F-16 and F-15 fighters, Bradley vehicle, Abrams tank etc. Sounds really stupid.

Did he vote against whole programs or only against some increase? And when those votings took place? During the Cold War?!

And what is this noise about Kerry and Jane Fonda?? Please can somebody explain?

Kerry and Fonda shared the same anti-american, anti-war, pro-communist, defeatist political movement.  Something to do with 'Veteran's Against the War'.  In Fonda's case it was less shameful because she was only betraying her country, not her fellow soldiers.  Kerry even went so far as to claim his 'brothers' where raping, abusing, and murdering Vietnamese.  

And all of them weren't?

[Gustaf]

Gay Marriage will hurt him most..  but it wasn't on the list.

Are you really serious? Is this Republicans' big gun? I think gay marriage will hurt Bush more.

NOt as long as most Americans oppose gay marriage.

[Gustaf]

I was 39 last October

Lebanon

OK. The 1982 one?

yeah. it was acctually 82-85

OK.

[Gustaf]

This is getting really emotional...

[Gustaf]

This is getting really emotional...

You have no idea how emotional class/cultural/regional issues are in the US.  Basically rural areas in most of the country, and the South as a whole, resent, even hate, the liberal urban elites (and coincidentally their poor racial dependents).  The urban leftist elites despise the above mentioned ruralites.  I can tell you that rural people who are nowhere near the South actually identify or at least strongly sympathize with the South.

Well, that exists everywhere. Rural-Urban conflicts are common everywhere, they've existed in Sweden since mediaeval times.

[Gustaf]

How about Norway?
Politics there *is* rural v urban...

Yeah, as I said, it exists in a lot of places. Just look at Sweden's last referendum...urban right-wingers v rural conservatives and socialists.

[Gustaf]

How about Norway?
Politics there *is* rural v urban...

Yeah, as I said, it exists in a lot of places. Just look at Sweden's last referendum...urban right-wingers v rural conservatives and socialists.

Now that is twisted.

It was a twisted issue. Nazis, libertarians, rural conservatives, communists, socialists and greens all on the same side...

[Gustaf]

This is getting really emotional...

.
You have no idea how emotional class/cultural/regional issues are in the US.  Basically rural areas in most of the country, and the South as a whole, resent, even hate, the liberal urban elites (and coincidentally their poor racial dependents).  The urban leftist elites despise the above mentioned ruralites.  I can tell you that rural people who are nowhere near the South actually identify or at least strongly sympathize with the South.

Certainly. Politics and culture do tend to coincide. It is very interesting that on this board (and in real life) the conservatives are sympathizing with the South and the liberals aren't. Regardless of where they actually live. My region in N.C. has a relatively proportion of people who are either migrants from the North and/or liberals. Very few liberals here identify with the Southern culture even if they grew up here.

That's sad NCLib, that the native southerners have forgotten their roots. Their is so much culture and pride in being a southerner and giving it up for the ways of our Northern neighbors is depressing

As a subtext to the regional splits is the urban/rural split, which could be driving the regional split.

The northeast is the most heavily urbanized section of the country, and also the most liberal.  But even in the northeast, some the rural sections, such as parts of upstate New York and Pennsylvania, tend to vote Republican.

Rural states in the plains and west section of the country vote Republican.  Rural sections of California, Oregon and Washington vote Republican.  Urban parts vote Democratic.

Even in the south, urban areas vote Democratic.  There is a de facto alliance between sophistocated urbanites and poor minorities, although the so-called sophistocated urbanites would mostly run from any real association with minorities.

One interesting thing about the US, that is not true of Europe, is that there is a very strong and deep-seated anti-urban mentality, a feeling that cities are bad, and those who live in them are inferior.  This ties in with, and is reinforced by, the whole race issue, although it would exist even without the race issue.  The elites who live in cities, who are able to buy their way out of the deficiencies of city life (through private security, private schools, etc.) stay in the cities and, through their limousine liberalism, force detrimental policies on those who can't afford to buy their way out of the effects of them.  Non-elites who live in cities are mainly consumed with finding a way out, after which they join their new suburban neighbors in looking down on those who are still in the cities.

The more I think about it, I think the rural/urban split is even deeper than the regional split.

Where do you get the idea that we don't have rural/urban splits in Europe? The urban elite resent rural people enormously and have a very condescending view of them in Sweden, anyway.

[Gustaf]

This is getting really emotional...

.
You have no idea how emotional class/cultural/regional issues are in the US.  Basically rural areas in most of the country, and the South as a whole, resent, even hate, the liberal urban elites (and coincidentally their poor racial dependents).  The urban leftist elites despise the above mentioned ruralites.  I can tell you that rural people who are nowhere near the South actually identify or at least strongly sympathize with the South.

Certainly. Politics and culture do tend to coincide. It is very interesting that on this board (and in real life) the conservatives are sympathizing with the South and the liberals aren't. Regardless of where they actually live. My region in N.C. has a relatively proportion of people who are either migrants from the North and/or liberals. Very few liberals here identify with the Southern culture even if they grew up here.

That's sad NCLib, that the native southerners have forgotten their roots. Their is so much culture and pride in being a southerner and giving it up for the ways of our Northern neighbors is depressing

As a subtext to the regional splits is the urban/rural split, which could be driving the regional split.

The northeast is the most heavily urbanized section of the country, and also the most liberal.  But even in the northeast, some the rural sections, such as parts of upstate New York and Pennsylvania, tend to vote Republican.

Rural states in the plains and west section of the country vote Republican.  Rural sections of California, Oregon and Washington vote Republican.  Urban parts vote Democratic.

Even in the south, urban areas vote Democratic.  There is a de facto alliance between sophistocated urbanites and poor minorities, although the so-called sophistocated urbanites would mostly run from any real association with minorities.

One interesting thing about the US, that is not true of Europe, is that there is a very strong and deep-seated anti-urban mentality, a feeling that cities are bad, and those who live in them are inferior.  This ties in with, and is reinforced by, the whole race issue, although it would exist even without the race issue.  The elites who live in cities, who are able to buy their way out of the deficiencies of city life (through private security, private schools, etc.) stay in the cities and, through their limousine liberalism, force detrimental policies on those who can't afford to buy their way out of the effects of them.  Non-elites who live in cities are mainly consumed with finding a way out, after which they join their new suburban neighbors in looking down on those who are still in the cities.

The more I think about it, I think the rural/urban split is even deeper than the regional split.

Where do you get the idea that we don't have rural/urban splits in Europe? The urban elite resent rural people enormously and have a very condescending view of them in Sweden, anyway.

I don't doubt that.  My impression had been that Europe didn't have the same deeply-ingrained notion of urban inferiority as the US does.

Well, no, it's rather rural inferiority here. To an extreme extent.

[Gustaf]

Lets see we are now mostly a Import nation, our morals are slowly declining with legalized abortion and now trying to legalize homosexual marriage. Look at the kids, so many of them today dont even care. I hope that changes.

Yeah, b/c children in the good old days really cared...about what?

And the stuff about being an import nation, please. Modern economy, globalization, hello? And how does the legalization of gay marriage destroy the moral fabric or whatever.

[Gustaf]

What you're missing is that those problems only occur b/c of the social taboos you have. The marriage rate in Sweden is low b/c people only marry once they're sure of what they're doing. I think that's much better. And there is no link between homosexuals marrying and heterosexuals divorcing. Moreover, thinking that it would be good for children to grow up in dysfunctional families where the parents hate each pother is just insane. It can b eperfectly OK for kids to grow up with divorced parents, if the parents handle it the right way.

[Gustaf]

What you're missing is that those problems only occur b/c of the social taboos you have. The marriage rate in Sweden is low b/c people only marry once they're sure of what they're doing. I think that's much better. And there is no link between homosexuals marrying and heterosexuals divorcing. Moreover, thinking that it would be good for children to grow up in dysfunctional families where the parents hate each pother is just insane. It can b eperfectly OK for kids to grow up with divorced parents, if the parents handle it the right way.

Not social taboos. Fact. Any good Christian or religious person who had any faith would agree. Homosexuality is WRONG. End of story. Its not natural, people arent "born that way", its something they choose and they are WRONG.

Oh, please, it isn't a fact. Are you telling me that animals, ike rats, who are homosexual chose to be? And why on Earth would people choose it, considering the prejudices they'd encounter? And why exactly would it be wrong?

[Gustaf]

If they are born that way then what would be the answer to the very very disturbing increase of homosexuality?

There is no increase of homosexuality. Perhaps the fact that we don't kill them anymore kind of makes a difference? Like there was probably an increase of conservatives in the Soviet Union in the 90s.

And, on animals, there are homosexual animals of many different species, believe it or not.

[Gustaf]

Do you think Homosexuality is a natural act?

I just learned that nature and natural are unscientific terms...but I guess my answer would be yes anyway.

[Gustaf]

I do.... Perhaps my mind is just too simple to believe that individuals would purposely punish themselves and be discriminated against by the likes of you just for the hell of it.

I wouldn't prevent one from getting a job or a car. They are wrong thats my belief and the government that I PAY should not be encouraging or supporting it.

They pay for it too and probably don't think they should have to pay for getting discriminated.

[Gustaf]

They are not being discriminated against. Their style of life is immoral, senseless, abnormal. And BTW sodomy is illegal in quite a few states.

The fact that you think they're immoral, senseless and abnormal doesn't mean that they are not being discriminated against. And a lot of things are the above without being prohibited.

[Gustaf]

It's the acceptance of these things that leads to the destruction of a society. I mean, in your world everything is acceptable almost. I mean dont you have any moral bounds? If your wife cheated on you because she saw that it was ok on t.v. would you accept that? Is it acceptable that America got flashed by a not so pretty woman on tv at the SuperBowl?

Everything isn't acceptable in my world. Far from. Things that are morally repulsive, that there are sound moral arguments against, such as cheating, stealing, etc I am against. I find a lot of things distasteful and wrong. I dislike the colour orange, modern 'art', violent action movies, etc. I think they're a bad influence on society. But I don't like the governemnt buttin into it and regulating stuff like that. I want to live in a free society where people can do things that do not hurt other people. And homosexuality does not.

[Gustaf]

Yes, but for the example of the Super Bowl. Janet Jackson exposed herself on national t.v.. Don't you think its ok for the FCC to fine them for such an action? Remember, the FCC owns the airwaves and leases them out to radio and t.v. stations. It's not like you can get on t.v. and just broadcast whatever. MTV is what is encouraging children in a bad way. The use of curse words like common words is also to be denounced. I think its the job of the govt, whether it be state or local to fine organizations for flagarent violations of conduct.

Well, I didn't approve of the Janet Jackson thing. But all of those things are ruled by the laws of the market. People who want to watch MTV can do that and oay for it, those who don't don't. If you can convince enough people of your way (teh goal for any Christian, right?) you win and they disappear.