"Candidate X Didn't *earn* my vote!"

[absyntheNsugar]

OK...I have heard this poor logic before and let me set the record straight.

Kerry has earned your vote. He has spent a lifetime fighting the good fight, first for the lives of his fellow soldiers, then against the war that was killing them, then against corruption, and then in the Senate against Washington corrpution (BCCI). He has prepared his whole life to be President, and like a good Yale student, he has read all the notes and is ready for the job. The man, simply put, is qualified.

Edwards has earned your vote. He has built his career from nothing, being the first in his family to go to college, paying for it all by himself. Having done this for 2 years in grad school I can attest this is a major feat. He then continued on to Law School where he became a trial lawyer fighting for the little guy every chance. The man has what Texans like to call 'gumption' and is also qualified.

Kucinich has earned your vote. He took on unpopular positions because it was right in his heart. He faught long and hard and even almost sacrificed his career to stop deregulation in his city of Cleveland. He is also qualified.

Chances are, Kucinich will not be the Democratic candidate, but one of the others will. They are both more than qualified. And much more qualified than the current person sitting in the White House.

[Momof1]

1. ABB earned my vote n/t

[POed_Ex_Repub]

3. Amen n/t

[DuctapeFatwa]

2. All the candidates are technically applying for a job as your servant

Not bestowing upon you the privilege of being theirs.

[ulysses]

5. thank you.

Well, and succinctly, said.

[carpetbagger]

6. But one of them will be president, even if you or I like none.

So if no one earns my vote, I still get stuck with a president.

[DuctapeFatwa]

8. Since so few people vote to begin with, and because the theory of

a causal relationship between which candidate gets the most votes and who takes office has so little evidence to support it, whether the current process results in a legitimate government is a debate I expect to gain in popularity in the coming year or so :)

[sangha]

12. Ridiculous

I'm amazed that anyone would think of POTUS as a servant. Servants don't command armies, appoint judges, or veto legislation. When a servant screws up, someone's tea is cold. When POTUS screws up, people die.

[Eloriel]

14. Is that why they call elected officials "public servants"?

And refer to a lifetime or years of "public service"?

Just asking.

[LuminousX]

26. D'oh!

[carpetbagger]

4. Agreed. Elections are about power, not awards.

Somebody will be president. There's nothing in the Constitution that says presidents have to get Bob Sammel's seal of approval, Absynthensugar's seal of approval, or Ralph Nader's seal of approval. I've swallowed my pride many times, but only twice have I withheld my vote from a democrat running in a general election since the Contract On America ten years ago: one was a local politician I knew personally and disliked (after the election he got charged with child abuse), and the other a candidate whom I politically disliked who broke ranks first by running as an independent in the prior election.

I don't even think it's relevent whether or not the nominee's earned my vote. If they nominate a yellow dog, I'll vote for him.

It's that important.

[DemBones DemBones]

7. If ever there was a time for all Democrats to be

yellow dog Democrats, 2004 is it. Whoever has the D next to his name is the one to vote for.

DemBones DemBones Democrat Right Down to My Marrow

[mermaid]

9. Kerry Did NOT Earn MY Vote...He Earned My HATRED!!

He will get only a check mark from me in November, only because I hate Kerry slightly less than I hate Bush. Read my other anti-Kerry rantings if you want to know why.

[sleipnir]

10. Same for me, but with less hatred

I'll vote for Kerry, but I sure won't support him or give him any money. He's lost me forever as a supporter, nothing short of him prostrating himself on the Capital steps begging for forgiveness will bring me back into his camp. I'm sick of what he has come to represent over the last 3 years. It's not Kerry's service in the past, it was the last 36 months that did it for me.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

13. Misdirected hatred, but if you make the right vote

that's all that matters.

[Mairead]

16. "that's all that matters" ? How utterly saddening.

A person can be deeply, crushingly unhappy for fully appropriate reasons. But so long as s/he goes to work every day and doesn't upset other people too much, that's all that matters to both the law and, I'm ashamed to admit, the helping professions (psychology, psychiatry). Socioeconomic utility is all-important.

Your assessment gives me that same I-think-I-just-ate-something-spoilt feeling. Where did you hide the real Feanor, and don't you know you can be jailed for keeping someone prisoner?

[Feanorcurufinwe]

21. You misunderstand me.

First of all, I wasn't talking to someone who spoke of their unhappiness. I was commenting on someone saying they HATE John Kerry. I don't equate that feeling with unhappiness and I don't usually find people who are espousing hatred to be very open to reason or receptive to healing gestures. Usually the hate has to subside first.

Second, my comment that "if you make the right vote that's all that matters" was meant only in the strictest, narrowest political sense. I did not mean to say or imply that the poster's only value in life was as a vote, or as a cog in our system.

OK? Peace?

[mermaid]

23. Why I Hate John Kerry

Bold, Italics and other emphasiers are my addition, to highlight certain points. I will also note where I make comments by inesrting {Editor's Note} prior to my comment.


Subject: {Trans-News}
2004 Presidential candidates positions on a trans-inclusive ENDA

< Double-click this line for list subscription options >

1a. As president, would you support and work for passage of a federal bill that outlawed discrimination in the workplace based on gender identity and expression?

CLARK: SUPPORT
{Editor Note - Clark's comments cut as he is no longer in the race}

DEAN: SUPPORT
{Editor Note - Dean's comments cut as he is no longer in the race}

EDWARDS:
Comments: I believe discrimination is wrong. I am an original cosponsor of the Employment Nondiscrimination Act, which prohibits discrimination based on real or perceived sexual orientation.
{Editor Note: While Edwards did not take a formal position, he does seem to support ENDA, and, though the wording is not ideal, at least he does say "real or percieved" sexual orientation.}

KERRY: OPPOSE

Comments: I oppose discrimination of all kinds and my office policy prohibits discrimination in the workplace based on gender identity and expression.

I believe that we should focus efforts on getting ENDA passed and signed into law, and I am concerned that adding gender identity and expression to the ENDA legislation is likely to significantly hinder that effort.

(Editor Note: As you can see, by his own words, John Kerry is willing to sell transgender people like me down the river in the name of political expediency! And he asks MY support? After he sends ME to the back of the bus?!?! I think NOT!! Mr. Kerry, since WHEN was ANY civil rights legislation NOT controversial? since when did Democrats advocate leaving some behind, to advance others? since when did we lose our convictions and backbone? Those who support ENDA generally also support adding transgender inclusion. Those against ENDA aren't going to support him because he cuts transgenders from it! When we took a in-person survey, in 1999, only THREE politicians in the Senate and Congress who supported ENDA said they would not support ENDA with transgender inclusion. Barney Frank was one. Ted Kennedy was the second one - John Kerry was the third! Notice they are ALL Massachusetts Senators and Congressmen? Screw Kerry, he just lost my support! He'll GET my vote, only because Bush would throw me off the bus completely...}

KUCINICH: SUPPORT
Comments: In May of 2000 Representative Kucinich signed a Gender Public Advocacy Coalition pledge to publicly affirm that an individual's gender expression or identity is not a consideration in the hiring, promoting, or terminating of an employee in his office.

Mr. Kucinich reaffirmed this pledge in March of 2003.

LIEBERMAN: UNDECIDED
{Editor Note - Though Joe is out of the race, I have left his comments intact, as they are somewhat interesting}

Comments: I do not believe that gay men or lesbians should be discriminated against simply because they do not precisely meet society's traditional stereotypes of how men or women should behave or appear. I would support a law making clear that the ban on sexual orientation-based discrimination cannot be evaded by claiming that, for example, a man was fired not for being gay but for being effeminate. As an employer myself, I have taken a pledge not to discriminate in this way, and would follow through with this pledge as president.

As for the broader category of gender identity, I am now studying it and have pledged to work with ENDA's other cosponsors to explore the issue and whether and the extent to which federal law should address it.

SHARPTON: SUPPORT
Comments: No American should be discriminated against on their job because of sexual orientation.

{Editor Note - Sharpton doesn't seem to "get it" that sexual orientation and gender identity are NOT the same thing. But at least he believs no American should be discriminated against, so that's one point in his favor, anyway}

Source: HRC's web site:

{Editor Note - I do not believe the referenced link actually functions anywmore, but I am including it anyway, as this was the original source of these comments by the various candidates. No answer was recieved from Carol Moseley-Braun's office.}
http://www.hrc.org/Content/NavigationMenu/HRC/Get_Informed/Campaigns_a
nd_Elections/Presidential_Candidates/Questionnaire_Responses/2004_Pres
idential_Questionnaire_Responses.htm

[Feanorcurufinwe]

25. I just want you to know something

BIG FONTS ARE RUDE

They make it harder to read your post, make you look strident, and don't add to the persuasiveness of your argument.

In fact they turned me off so much I didn't even read what you wrote.

[donco6]

34. So you're willing to sacrifice ENDA for not

including gender identity? That's pretty stupid.

Kerry's being realistic, which is important for any politician. There are things that will kill a bill, and then what do you have? Jack Sh*t, that's what.

Let's get the current version passed, then worry about including other groups, such as transgendered. Sorry if it's harsh, but it's just reality.

[Mairead]

33. Fairy Nuff, peace.

(But I'll just point out that 'hatred' is an expression, not a thing-in-itself. It's almost always the outward-directed expression of deep unhappiness.)

[Walt Starr]

11. I guarangoddamntee ya, Kerry did NOT EARN my vote

he's getting it by default because of the SCOTUS argmuent, an argument I might add that I will never again take into account in a presidential election.

He most certainly did not EARN my vote, though. If I were to go on what was earned and what was not, I'd be voting third party come November 2nd.

[RandomKoolzip]

29. You've just proved the original poster's point.

n/t

[Walt Starr]

30. No, I proved he's wrong

and does not speak for me. Kerry and Edwards have done not a damn thing to earn my vote.

[tedoll78]

15. Kerry will.

Think about three Supreme Court appointments. Then think of Kerry naming them. Then think about each of them serving an average of at least 20 years.

20 years of good, liberal court rulings.

If that doesn't weigh anything in terms of earning your vote, I don't know what will.

[Mairead]

17. But no one has offered evidence that they'd be liberal

And judging from his recent votes, I don't think we have any reason to take it as given.

[tedoll78]

18. Actually, in the realm of judges..

Kerry has promised to filibuster extreme nominees of the Chimp's.

[Mairead]

31. "Kerry has promised to filibuster extreme nominees of the Chimp's`"

Given where Kerry's politics are these days, that's hardly confidence-inspiring.

[kiahzero]

19. Candidates don't "earn" your votes

That notion is just silly. You vote for the candidate that it's in the best interest of your goals to vote for.

It's in the best interest of everyone on this board to vote for the Democratic nominee in the General Election. The fact that some fail to see that would be laughable if it weren't so sad.

[Mairead]

32. Perhaps they needn't earn yours, except by their D label

but that's not true for all.

Nominally it's 'in the best interest of everyone' to pick up a penny when they see it lying on the pavement, too, but most will conclude that the increase in their wealth would be so little that it's not worth the effort.

[edzontar]

20. Kerry has not earned my vote. He will GET it for the good of the

Nation and the world.

Because Bush is a menace and the country cannot survive four more yars of this cabal in office.

Thus, in an odd way, i am ABB--but I continue to question the intellectual lameness and herd-like mentaility that informs that "philisophy."


In other words, I plan to continue to work for better candidates, including third party ones if necessary, after Kerry or whomever hopefully wins the election.

[CTLawGuy]

22. dont tell me who's EARNED my vote or who hasnt.

NT

[Scott Lee]

24. Just what would we Deanites do without these autocrats

telling us what to do and how to vote? Honestly, it boggles the mind as to how we get along from day to day, doesn't it?

[littlejoe]

27. A fair and balanced post!

[ozone_man]

28. Kerry earned my distrust.

His voting for the Iraq War was politically motivated, not in the interest of citizens, but in his own interest.

His under handed attack ad (Osama) that he and Gerphardt disguised there involvement in.

Reported deals with AFLCIO to drill in ANWR.

Stealing Deans issues tells me that he has no personal convictions, but instead reacts to which ever way the political winds are blowing.

I will not be voting for Kerry, unless of course, some or all of my distrust (and the list is much longer than this) can be shown to be unfounded.