Life as an Undecided
Aug. 31st, 2004 01:54 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
csberryI saw this article today:
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/politics/9545331.htm
It talks about the Undecided Voter...which is a catagory that I fit in this election.
Yet another reminder...I'm a libertarian. I consider myself a pragmatic libertarian. I don't think there are many Americans out there yearning for the IRS, several cabinet Depts, or many other aspects of the federal govt to be killed in a 100 Day itinerary like most candidates in the Libertarian Party.
My first presidential election that I got to vote was in '92. I voted for Clinton because I thought that 12 years of GOP control of the White House was enough. Clinton was a Southern Dem that was a safer choice than a Dukakis or Mondale would have been for me.
In '96, I was sick of the right wing frothing over Clinton. I was pleased with several things he did in office, but disturbed by his health care fiasco w/ Hillary. My voting for Dole was in hopes to finally put the Clinton scandals (Mena, Whitewater, Travelgate, Vince Foster, Paula Jones, Lippo, Buddist Temple, etc.) into the past. That ballot was done less than half-heartedly.
The 2000 election had me voting for Bush. I liked what I had found in research about his work with the TX legislature (which was majority Dem at the time...I believe). Gore did nothing for me. He always came across as phony to me and his politics were more liberal than Clinton's in most areas. I would have voted for a Lieberman/Gore ticket, though.
I am very disappointed with Bush. I would respect him more if he fired more people, replaced Cheney, or would have played more to the center given the lack of support after his ascension to the post.
Kerry seems like an okay guy. But I'm discouraged about his positions (based more on his Senate voting record that what his website says about him). He comes across as a career politician that voted in a way to just stay safe. Unfortunately for me, that means he has the liberal record that a Dem from Mass would be expected to have.
Economy:
I'm not willing to say that the economy would have been much, if any, better if someone else was in office. The recession and the dot.com deathrate was already starting in 2000, so Gore would have been stuck with the same slump. Then 9/11 pretty much fucked over Wall Street. Besides, I've said for a decade that Greenspan is 5000 times more powerful than any president when it comes to the economy.
The whole tax cut thing doesn't bother me because a lot of the arguments when it comes to tax debates is a matter of semantics and use of nuanced data. If the top 1% pay about 30% of the income taxes collected by the federal govt, NO SHIT they will get more actual dollars back than those with incomes less than $20k that pay little to no federal income.
I got a kick out of my mid-year refund in 2001 and the rise in the amount for child deductions has been a blessing for me since Calvin's birth in 2002. I managed to get a job in the past year (in a COMPLETELY different field from my previous career) and prospects are good for my business. Unlike some LJ friends, I have no ire toward anyone about lack of jobs.
Social policy:
As is usually the case, the GOP sticks their middle finger at me when it comes to cultural issues. At least I can buddy-buddy up to Powell for disagreeing on the whole gay marriage, abortion rights, and such.
I can't believe that I agreed with Cheney last week when he said that the gay marriage thing should be decided by the individual states. America is too big of a country for us to agree on many issues, allowing states to have control over prescription pot, gay marriage, and the like is what will keep Alabamians from caring if two queens marry in Boston.
**TANGENT**
I wish one of my gay friends would settle down with a partner because I would love to be a groomsman or best man in a gay wedding.
**END OF TANGENT**
Foreign Policy:
I don't think that Bush lied about Iraq. He may have been eager and was given evidence to support what he wanted to be true, but I don't think he had a big hard-on for Iraq (sorry, Mikey Moore...I still love Roger & Me, though). I wish that he could have been more patient and received more political support from other countries. Not that there was any chance of France or Russia backing us since they were financially benefiting from Saddam's govt. Having Germany on our side would have been nice.
I think that the European govts would simultaneously cum if Kerry were to be elected. That is certainly a positive. However, Kerry needs to tell me more about what he would do differently than "working closer with our friends around the globe." That's like saying "I'm for education!" Who isn't going to say that? Okay, Pat Buchanan...but that's beside the point.
I want a president that will mend fences.
I want a president that will maintain the tax cuts.
I want a president that will unite the US.
I want a president that will cut the size of the Dept of Homeland Defense and streamline the process of gathering and analyzing intelligence.
I want a president that will laugh at Janet Jackson's boob.
I want a president that will not look shady.
I want a president that can throw out a baseball and not have it bounce before it reaches home plate.
I want a president that will inspire Congress to compromise on important bills and not reinforce bull-headed stubbornness.
I want a president that can seem to be above politics.
Bush nor Kerry fit my requirements.
Sometimes I wish I was a Bush-basher. Then my debate would only be "Do I vote for Kerry or Nader?" Granted, Alabama is pretty much a given for Bush, but right now I don't know if I'll vote Bush, Kerry, or Libertarian.
Wouldn't it be nice if there was a provision in the Constitution that if less than 50% of those registered to vote didn't vote, the results would be thrown out due to a lack of quorum? I would think that would inspire more centralism and trianglization to get people encouraged to vote.
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/politics/9545331.htm
It talks about the Undecided Voter...which is a catagory that I fit in this election.
Yet another reminder...I'm a libertarian. I consider myself a pragmatic libertarian. I don't think there are many Americans out there yearning for the IRS, several cabinet Depts, or many other aspects of the federal govt to be killed in a 100 Day itinerary like most candidates in the Libertarian Party.
My first presidential election that I got to vote was in '92. I voted for Clinton because I thought that 12 years of GOP control of the White House was enough. Clinton was a Southern Dem that was a safer choice than a Dukakis or Mondale would have been for me.
In '96, I was sick of the right wing frothing over Clinton. I was pleased with several things he did in office, but disturbed by his health care fiasco w/ Hillary. My voting for Dole was in hopes to finally put the Clinton scandals (Mena, Whitewater, Travelgate, Vince Foster, Paula Jones, Lippo, Buddist Temple, etc.) into the past. That ballot was done less than half-heartedly.
The 2000 election had me voting for Bush. I liked what I had found in research about his work with the TX legislature (which was majority Dem at the time...I believe). Gore did nothing for me. He always came across as phony to me and his politics were more liberal than Clinton's in most areas. I would have voted for a Lieberman/Gore ticket, though.
I am very disappointed with Bush. I would respect him more if he fired more people, replaced Cheney, or would have played more to the center given the lack of support after his ascension to the post.
Kerry seems like an okay guy. But I'm discouraged about his positions (based more on his Senate voting record that what his website says about him). He comes across as a career politician that voted in a way to just stay safe. Unfortunately for me, that means he has the liberal record that a Dem from Mass would be expected to have.
Economy:
I'm not willing to say that the economy would have been much, if any, better if someone else was in office. The recession and the dot.com deathrate was already starting in 2000, so Gore would have been stuck with the same slump. Then 9/11 pretty much fucked over Wall Street. Besides, I've said for a decade that Greenspan is 5000 times more powerful than any president when it comes to the economy.
The whole tax cut thing doesn't bother me because a lot of the arguments when it comes to tax debates is a matter of semantics and use of nuanced data. If the top 1% pay about 30% of the income taxes collected by the federal govt, NO SHIT they will get more actual dollars back than those with incomes less than $20k that pay little to no federal income.
I got a kick out of my mid-year refund in 2001 and the rise in the amount for child deductions has been a blessing for me since Calvin's birth in 2002. I managed to get a job in the past year (in a COMPLETELY different field from my previous career) and prospects are good for my business. Unlike some LJ friends, I have no ire toward anyone about lack of jobs.
Social policy:
As is usually the case, the GOP sticks their middle finger at me when it comes to cultural issues. At least I can buddy-buddy up to Powell for disagreeing on the whole gay marriage, abortion rights, and such.
I can't believe that I agreed with Cheney last week when he said that the gay marriage thing should be decided by the individual states. America is too big of a country for us to agree on many issues, allowing states to have control over prescription pot, gay marriage, and the like is what will keep Alabamians from caring if two queens marry in Boston.
**TANGENT**
I wish one of my gay friends would settle down with a partner because I would love to be a groomsman or best man in a gay wedding.
**END OF TANGENT**
Foreign Policy:
I don't think that Bush lied about Iraq. He may have been eager and was given evidence to support what he wanted to be true, but I don't think he had a big hard-on for Iraq (sorry, Mikey Moore...I still love Roger & Me, though). I wish that he could have been more patient and received more political support from other countries. Not that there was any chance of France or Russia backing us since they were financially benefiting from Saddam's govt. Having Germany on our side would have been nice.
I think that the European govts would simultaneously cum if Kerry were to be elected. That is certainly a positive. However, Kerry needs to tell me more about what he would do differently than "working closer with our friends around the globe." That's like saying "I'm for education!" Who isn't going to say that? Okay, Pat Buchanan...but that's beside the point.
I want a president that will mend fences.
I want a president that will maintain the tax cuts.
I want a president that will unite the US.
I want a president that will cut the size of the Dept of Homeland Defense and streamline the process of gathering and analyzing intelligence.
I want a president that will laugh at Janet Jackson's boob.
I want a president that will not look shady.
I want a president that can throw out a baseball and not have it bounce before it reaches home plate.
I want a president that will inspire Congress to compromise on important bills and not reinforce bull-headed stubbornness.
I want a president that can seem to be above politics.
Bush nor Kerry fit my requirements.
Sometimes I wish I was a Bush-basher. Then my debate would only be "Do I vote for Kerry or Nader?" Granted, Alabama is pretty much a given for Bush, but right now I don't know if I'll vote Bush, Kerry, or Libertarian.
Wouldn't it be nice if there was a provision in the Constitution that if less than 50% of those registered to vote didn't vote, the results would be thrown out due to a lack of quorum? I would think that would inspire more centralism and trianglization to get people encouraged to vote.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-08-31 07:19 pm (UTC)I am a huge supporter of state's rights. I think that the federal government has been overstepping its bounds for decades, perhaps centuries. And what gives the Federal government its power and its girth? Federal Income tax. Our forefathers never envisioned the government we have today. I wonder what they would think.
It really worries me that the Republicans are parading all these very moderate party members out in the limelight. It is an incredibly smart strategy, but I hope it doesn't work. The wool is being pulled over the eyes of America. The best quote I've heard this week so far is from one of the DNC spokespeople. She said "Turn the volume down on the TV and read the platform". That will tell you what the true Republican viewpoint is.