|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198
Hard-core CEG'er
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198 |
Voting records indicate how a politician perceives a given context, and the voters make their choices dependent upon whether they like how the candidate makes those perceptions. After 20 years in the Senate, we can make a pretty good guess at where John Kerry stands as it relates to military spending, health care, etc. And those stances are quite liberal. After only a few years in the Senate, the only conclusions we can draw about Edwards is that he is extremely liberal.
Every time the Republicans bring up John Kerry's voting record, the Democrats accuse them of playing dirty politics and making personal attacks. So there must be something wrong with his voting record, no?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 713
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 713 |
Originally posted by Nate S:
Originally posted by 99MystiqueATX:
That being said, Bush, IMO is a horrible speaker!
you can tell that he was on coke at one point in his life! 
what a dumbass 
98 svt sil/blu 3.0 oval heads full P&P, msds headers,bat kit,2,1/2exhaust 30 inch glasspack and 2 spintech mufflers 14.78@94mph
with my mechanical arm i can shift gears in less then a twentieth of a second for sale $7000
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,220
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,220 |
Quote:
Voting records indicate how a politician perceives a given context,
If I supported the military and rejected almost every military-funding-related bill because I wanted it to have more money in it, the voting record would look like I hated the military, which would be patently false.
Quote:
After 20 years in the Senate, we can make a pretty good guess at where John Kerry stands as it relates to military spending, health care, etc.
A guess, yes. But only by researching why he voted a certain way could you really reach a good conclusion on his view of the issue.
Quote:
Every time the Republicans bring up John Kerry's voting record, the Democrats accuse them of playing dirty politics and making personal attacks. So there must be something wrong with his voting record, no?
The Republicans (and the Democrats from their side as well) just hope that by saying "Candidate X Voted Against Blah" he wants your children to die (or some other stupid rash conclusion) without actually getting into why someone voted that way. It's not exactly "dirty politics" but it's the same sort of creative truth omission and half-stories that Michael Moore is guilty of.
2003 Mazda6s 3.0L MTX
Webpage
2004 Mazda3s 2.3L ATX
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,718
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,718 |
A consistent voting record on certain topics can definitely show a person where a candidate's priorities lie and what their overall ideology is.
Again, the time period that votes were held on a certain topic does have to be taken into consideration, too. Context often get's thrown by the wayside when doing political comparisons of voting records on candidates.
Even so, this still does little to enamour me of Kerry so far; the more I look into his stint in the Senate, the less I like. There are certain areas that I'm not too hot on GWB, either; Governor or President.
On the biggies that, as a citizen, I'm concerned with, Bush has held the line...
Ultimately, a voting record is one of the best tools you've got to help make a decision. Taken alone, campaign promises and platforms are close to sewage in making up a person's mind, IMHO; the fact of the matter is that if Candidate A or B wins, he has to get the House and Congress talking the same language and a majority of them at that. Even within party lines and having majority control, it's not that easy.
I've never really cared for what a politician promises, especially during election time. I find it much more relevant to consider what they've done and what they haven't...
JaTo
e-Tough Guy
Missouri City, TX
99 Contour SVT
#143/2760
00 Corvette Coupe
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,489
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,489 |
Originally posted by Davo7SVT:
His service in Vietnam certainly doesn't enhance his ability to be President.
i think kerry's battle experience really bothers the bush supporters because they know bush has never even gotten his uniform dirty.
who would you have more respect for? a boss that's actually worked your position before or a boss that was just assigned to be your boss and has no clue what you do?
i have much more respect for a leader who has first hand experience of the situation he's sending our troops into.
'03 Saab 9-5 Aero
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 5,725
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 5,725 |
Originally posted by BP:
Originally posted by Davo7SVT:
His service in Vietnam certainly doesn't enhance his ability to be President.
i think kerry's battle experience really bothers the bush supporters because they know bush has never even gotten his uniform dirty.
who would you have more respect for? a boss that's actually worked your position before or a boss that was just assigned to be your boss and has no clue what you do?
i have much more respect for a leader who has first hand experience of the situation he's sending our troops into.
ditto. i thought the speech last night was direct, concise, and poignant. Kerry has important leadership qualities that this country hasn't seen in a number of years. and he directed his speech to the middle class, which was an important move for him to gain swing votes. the ultra-rich certainly won't vote for him, but it will be a real battle for the middle class, and also for minortites, gays, service men and women, recent citizens, and elderly.
i think Bush may get more younger voters because of his "cowboy" image. (he's almost more of a celebrity than a president to our youth, from what i hear.) but we all know that the smallest percentage of voters are under 25, so, i don't think that will help him much.
i also think Kerry struck a chord with his criticism of Bush/Cheney's "super secret" precedings and courts and rules and laws, all in the name of national security. i don't think the majority of people like the way Cheney has handled his running of the country in a cave while Bush plays golf and says stupid things with a Burger King crown on his head.
this will be a tough race. hopefully the man who wasn't supposed to be president in the first place, will end his term in only 4 long, painful, war-ridden, hateful, diffciult years...not 8.
For Sale:
- Sony PSP with a Baseball 2k6 and the movie Crash. $100
- 1973 Karmann Ghia Convertible w/ Auto-Stick. Needs Restoration. $1200 OBO
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198 |
Originally posted by sigma:
If I supported the military and rejected almost every military-funding-related bill because I wanted it to have more money in it, the voting record would look like I hated the military, which would be patently false.
Is that really true though? Given who Kerry is, we can reasonably assume that he did not vote the bills down so that they could have more money in them. If that was true, you'd hear his campaign screaming that. Plus, if you loved the military so much, wouldn't you at some point vote for something?
Originally posted by sigma:
A guess, yes. But only by researching why he voted a certain way could you really reach a good conclusion on his view of the issue.
Then why isn't Kerry's campaign giving the reasons why he voted all those things down?
Originally posted by sigma:
The Republicans (and the Democrats from their side as well) just hope that by saying "Candidate X Voted Against Blah" he wants your children to die (or some other stupid rash conclusion) without actually getting into why someone voted that way. It's not exactly "dirty politics" but it's the same sort of creative truth omission and half-stories that Michael Moore is guilty of.
Exactly. For once, the Democrats are getting a pretty good taste of their own medicine. We've been labeled as baby killers, water polluters, etc. simply for votes and legislation we've pushed. No one was there to say "You should try to understand why we've done that".
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198 |
Originally posted by baco99:
hopefully the man who wasn't supposed to be president in the first place,
 Read the Constitution if you really still think George Bush won unfairly.
Funny how the moveon.org crew can't.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 5,725
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 5,725 |
Originally posted by Davo7SVT:
Originally posted by baco99:
hopefully the man who wasn't supposed to be president in the first place,
Read the Constitution if you really still think George Bush won unfairly.
Funny how the moveon.org crew can't.
sorry. it might not be rational, but it's my opinion. i didn't think Bush was qualified to be President in 2000 and i feel even more strongly about that after seeing his antics for 4 years.
For Sale:
- Sony PSP with a Baseball 2k6 and the movie Crash. $100
- 1973 Karmann Ghia Convertible w/ Auto-Stick. Needs Restoration. $1200 OBO
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,867
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,867 |
Originally posted by PackRat:
Originally posted by 99MystiqueATX:
What happened to separation of church and state??
It never existed as a law.
And what the hell does "separation" have to do with a President mentioning God?
The rule is this: The state shall not "establish" an official state religion. That's it. There's nothing more to it. There's truly nothing to prevent a government official from referencing his own religious beliefs in public speech. (Well, except politics...)
There've been several Supreme Court rulings that "In God We Trust," although offensive to atheists, does not constitute "establishment."
Function before fashion.
'96 Contour SE
"Toss the Contour into a corner, and it's as easy to catch as a softball thrown by a preschooler." -Edmunds, 1998
|
|
|
|
|
