[Preechr]

Originally Posted by Perndog

Bush was elected not only by the Republicans and the non-voters, but by a lot of the third-party voters as well. When a liberal independent candidate is on the scene, he draws more voters from the Democrat side of things and thus weakens the Democratic candidate more than the Republican. There are occasional exceptions, but I think it's a better idea to pick the guy you *least* want to win and vote for the other major party, no matter how appealing those independents are, because there are too many strictly partisan voters for them to have a reasonable chance anyway.

http://www.4ranters.com/detail.php?id=30

Originally Posted by Kevin

I think someone who walks into a voting booth, votes for who or what they believe in, even if it means transcending their Party line, is acting in a partisan fashion.

Yes, but that's NOT partisan voting... But, as I said, I know what you mean.

I also agree with many of your points, just not your Liberal perspective from which you've derived them. I believe your own ideas wholly transcend the DNC agenda, and that your preference to them is a matter of the better of two evils... and you are definitely no Republican... hehe...

Originally Posted by Kev

I think it's this dismissive attitude over Iraq that will serve to enrage "Joe Six Pack." If there's one things Americans hate more than public deception, it's probably a condescending dismissal of the cause of said deception.

I think what he sees is the Dems crying foul over every little thing they can find, and (more often than not) over-reacting to what turns out to be nothing. The war did not go as the left predicted, and Joe's proud of that. He's so proud of that that, especially in the light of Clinton's seeming inability to do ANYTHING bout them thar ragheads, he's probably going to vote Bush in 04.

The majority of voters think a neo-con was the guy in the Matrix or something. DNC rhetoric is more than ever preaching to the choir when it needs more than ever to be reaching out to the masses. That means decrying the decidedly NON-Republican things their Republican President is doing on the Homefront. They are still paying the game as if they were the equal of the GOP, which they just aren't right now.

The Dems need to run on issues, not just the defamation of the other guys. Joe's just not buying that tactic because this is NOT 1996 anymore.

Originally Posted by Herbie

A growing government for all of the wrong reasons at that...

They are ALL wrong reasons, but that's a different subject...

And: I am interested, but not in the way you are. I'm more results oriented, and willing to give the guys in charge a bit more leeway, I guess (no matter which side of the same barrel they came from...) I'm also a Libertarian, so I see Bush and Clinton as two shades of grey.

I was also happy to see W looking seriously at a national sales tax, and seriously dissapointed to never even see a report issued before he failed to bully through a meaningful tax cut while signing more checks than any president you remember.

And I had a typo. I'm truly sorry. I hope you will forgive me.

I was referring to the fact that our economy grows every year, so it's stupid to look at raw numbers and announce that we have the biggest deficit ever. It's still a smaller slice of a bigger pie. Deficits, for that matter, are a GOP tool used to fight Democrat spending, and you know enough about politics to know that, I think. To me, that's fine as long as the Republicans aren't outspending the Dems.

As I said, everything has slipped a notch to the left. If you want a Socialist, vote Democrat. If you want a Democrat, vote Republican. If you want an America based on the Constitution, vote Libertarian.

Originally Posted by KTH

...although I'm sure your perception of a Leftist is far more different (and maybe far more frightening) than my own...

I would imagine it most decidedly would be. We can talk about that if you wanna...