I have finally decided how to vote

Remove all ads!

I have finally made up my mind on how I’m going to vote on 11/2/04 and for some reason I’ve decided to share it with everyone.

My big difficulty was trying to make my libertarian views match with the two candidates of importance.

George Bush

Pros

1. Bush is a man of conviction. He does what he believes is the correct course of action and responds accordingly. He does not sway in the breeze of public opinion.
2. In favor of reduced taxes. Although he has been painted as giving tax cuts to the rich in reality he has eliminated the tax burden for most lower income people and shared the wealth of tax cuts with people who actually pay taxes
3. Foreign affairs- He tried to build a consensus with the U.N. Ultimately when it wasn’t feasible he did what he believed was in the best interest of the United States. If other nations are with us that is great, if not that is fine too.

Cons

1. Bush has disappointed me by increased spending. I am a firm believer in limited government and was saddened to see a Republican president and Congress spend like there was no tomorrow.
2. I have a lot of respect for people who find comfort in their religious beliefs. However, I believe the religious right has too much influence in our nation. Not being a part of the majority makes me unconformable.
3. Freedom of speech- Call this the Howard Stern agenda, but I do not like the indecency fines the FCC has been assessing. I believe people should have the right to do and hear as they please as long as they don’t hurt another. Sensitive people need to get over it or not participate. It is a parent’s responsibility to safeguard their children’s moral upbringing, not the government.

John Kerry

Pros

1. Firmly Pro Choice- As mentioned above I do not consider it the government’s responsibility to determine who may or not have an abortion
2. Freedom of speech- It remains to be seen how a Kerry government will respond to these concerns of mine. I’m hopeful that it would mean a lessening instead of an increase in regulation.

Cons

1. Flip Flopping- In my experience with Kerry (he is my senator) he is not a man of conviction. He changes direction depending on which way public opinion is going. I have a problem with this. The man who is in charge is supposed to be in charge.
2. Foreign affairs- Kerry seems to have a need to reach a consensus with everything. This attitude frightens me as I do not believe he will know what to do if he is dealing with people that do not want a consensus. I want what is best for the United States not what is best for the World.
3. Taxes and spending- Kerry has never seen someone else’s dollar that he didn’t want to spend or to tax. As disappointed as I have been with Bush’s spending I can’t help but think that it will get worse with Kerry in charge.
4. Personality- Kerry is just not a likeable person (my opinion)

Conclusion

After much soul searching I have decided that my pocketbook must suffer for the freedoms I expect and love. It is for this reason that on Tuesday I will be voting for John Kerry even though it pains me greatly. I’m sure he is going to do a tremendous amount of things that are going to annoy the hell out of me, but I worry too much about government taking control of our freedoms.

Heaven help me.

 

I will neither congratulate nor condemn your choice, Snook, as it is yours and yours alone (that said, I was very surprised at the end). Living in a NON-swing-state that you do (as do I), your vote is ultimately more a vote of principle rather than practical. You and I could stay home tomorrow and not make the slightest difference in the outcome, as both of our states won't even be close to tied.

I will however say that I'm impressed at the way you came to your decision. No hyperbole, just weighted contemplation of the things that matter most to you personally. A process that is unfortunately far too lacking in most voters. So for that, major Kudos.

As for me...my vote should be as clear as a bell for anyone who's ever read my posts. My vote is for a man of wisdom. Of compassion. Of clarity. A man who knows the value of a powerful defense, but doesn't overplay his hand or engage in unnecessary conflict. A man who's moral character is matched only by his endearing proficiency...with Bonzai.

Naturally, I'll be writing in Mr. Kesuke Miyagi.

 

If your wallet is your greatest concern I do not think you should worry. Sure Bush may have lowered a few taxes but a deficit have to repaid sometime. Hopefully for you Kerry wont make it bigger.

As a libertarian I would think the choice would be rather easy, true the republicans are supposedly more financially liberal but that just seems to be according to themselves. Their actions have always been the opposite during the times they have ruled that I know anything about. Reagan also racked up a nice high deficit. As an outsider I must also say that both dems and reps are very liberal when it comes to the economy with only slight differences. The republicans and especially Bush's trackrecord of social control and attempts at quenching dissent paired with the fundamentalistic christian world view should have made your choice easier for you than it was.

Now oyu just have go down to Pennsylvania to vote tomorrow and you will be set.

 

@ The bunny

Wax on/ Wax off

@Joacqin

I'm sure there will be more than enough voter fraud (on both sides) that my driving to PA will not be needed.

 

I have to admit that I am surprised. Some of your reasons are the same as mine: Bush, may be a silent threat to our personal liberties. He claims to promote freedom on-the-one-hand, while chipping away at the Constitution at the same time through John Ashcroft and the Justice Department; his expansive use of executive power; and his disrgard for the legislative branch of our government. The Iraq War is not the main issue, as much as the media would have us believe.

But ultimately it is Bush's poor leadership and his lack of ability to represent those other than his political base that have brought me back to the Democratic party, at least in this election. When Bush said he would be a "uniter, not a divider," I took a wait and see attitude. Four years later, I'm still waiting.

[ November 02, 2004, 00:51: Message edited by: Chandos the Red ]

 

@TGS: I'm in the same boat, with the proviso that I live in a swing state and can't afford to vote my conscience. Nice analysis of the issues and pros and cons. Thanks for sharing.

Tell ya what, if you vote Michael Badnarik for me, I'll vote Kerry for you.

 

As I said "candidates of importance"

However, you may be on to something. As the Bunny said my vote will not really matter I may as well vote for Badnarik. My only problem with that I haven't paid any attention to him as I never considered him relevant.

Arrghh, now I have to do some more web surfing tonight.

 

TGS, nice too see you voting for not only USA's best, but also the world's.

 

Well, that was a surprise. What's next, Snook? A public announcement that you're gay? (Not that there'd be anything wrong with that. )

 

Some of the votes have already been cast:

Americans in NZ 'in knots' over election

This is a story from today's New Zealand Herald talking to some ex-patriot Americans who have cast their absentee votes. By my highly scientific count, Kerry is winning by 5 votes to 2 so far!

 

Wow, I feel lonely...

 

At least you're going to vote. Well done TGS for not being bought.

 

Speaking of personal and civil liberties and the Bushies, I wanted to share this link. I know that "The Nation" is a fairly "liberal" publication, and may have a somewhat left biased, but this view of the Rehnquist Court is shared by some others as well.

I just recently finished reading a book on Thomas Jefferson and Chief Justice John Marshall, "What Kind of Nation," written by well-known writer and legal scholar, James F. Simon. The book is largely a narrative of the struggle between President Jefferson and Marshall over the consitutional role of the Supreme Court. Simon is hardly a straight Jeffersonian advocate, often taking Marshall's Federalist viewpoint, and striking a balance between these two very different views of how our Contitutional government should be crafted. But in the book's epilogue, Simon attacks the current Rehnquist Court for its intrusion on civil liberties, saying that many of its decisions have been to "cut off governmental protections from individuals."

This is from "The Nation" article:

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20041108&s=shapiro