I voted for John Anderson in 1980 because I was mad that

[hedgehog]

Jimmy Carter had not kept all his promises.


NEVER AGAIN!


We do not have a choice between Obama and Kucinich, or Obama and Feingold, or Obama and Sanders

Our choice will be between Obama and

Perry

or Bachmann

or Palin

or Romney

[elocs]

1. That's reality although it is not as pleasant as the Never-Neverland of the DU Alternate Universe

where reality does not apply and all you need to do is to wish or fantasize for it to happen.

[Splinter Cell]

19. Amen.

[Armstead]

22. It's not that cut-and-dried

There other alternatives and difference -- in pragmatic reality.

Such as President Obama actually firming up his public identity and actions to offer a clear alternative and a fighting machine, against the corporate conservationism of the GOP, and use his considerable persuasive skills to actually push for basic liuberal ;positions that would actually help jump start the economy, correct the problems that the supply-side corporate economics the GOP has caused.

[farmbo]

2. Sanity on DU... Finally!

And Staying home is a vote for Perry... Or Bachman... Or Palin... Or Romney

[Raine1967]

4. You are correct... I often post this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GBAsFwPglw&feature=player_embedded

"Now many of our Christians have what I call the goo-goo syndrome — good government. They want everybody to vote. I don't want everybody to vote. Elections are not won by a majority of people, they never have been from the beginning of our country and they are not now. As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down.."


I think it is important for people to note that people like this man HAPPILY encourage such overall disdain from the left. They RELISH in the left withholding their vote.

[Hart2008]

3. Tell us about your favorites "Brie and Chablis"! NT

[Ishoutandscream2]

5. I did, too! My first presidential election that I was able to vote

I was just like you. I was 19, and because of what I did, quite stupid. However, I did realize even at that early age how dangerous Reagan would be. And yet I voted for Anderson. Ah, youth...

[fujiyama]

6. Good post

And from what I can see, Perry is nuts and has a chance to bring the different factions in the GOP together. Unless the Dems are united, they will win this.

[villager]

7. ...though that wasn't the margin of difference in Reagan's win, of course

We might also do well to remember that Reagan's election team treasonously subverted the Iran hostage situation, to aid in that campaign, as well.

In other words, Republicans cheat, steal, and rig elections, and when Democrats do manage to obtain high office in spite of it -- like our current Prez -- they would do well to address such things directly, rather than tirelessly "compromising" with those ruining our country.

[Wilms]

8. Sanity on DU... Finally! n/t

[polmaven]

52. The Anderson vote

may not have been the sole margin of difference, but together with those who decided to punish President Carter by staying home, we got Presisdent Peagan by default.

[KeyserSoze87]

9. A repeat of 1980 is the worst possible thing that could happen to this country right now.

[Enrique]

10. i think we all know this

i know where you're coming from, I'm a Nader voter and I vowed never again, and I'm 100% certain to vote for Obama in 2012.

But every reminder of the fact that I'm voting because I have no choice, and Obama is calculating on my having no choice, is a further irritant. And every mocking comment from Obama supporters is still a further irritant.

It's a long way to the election. These irritants will add up. Myself, I can take a lot of irritation, it's not going to stop me from doing the rational thing, voting for Obama. But others? Younger voters who don't have the perspective we have? Voters in a worse financial condition, more directly impacted by the bad economy and thus more angry? Who knows what they'll do.

[SteveG]

11. I made the same mistake and won't make it again

Obama in '12

[iamthebandfanman]

39. you guys serious?

how is voting for A REPUBLICAN against a democratic president IN THE GENERAL ELECTION the same as obama being primaried by a DEMOCRAT?

[truedelphi]

12. However, by having some candidates who "primary" Obama, there will

be an ability to discuss situations that are simply swept under the carpet. This informational discourse notion is one of the reasons that people originated the protocols for the primarying of candidates to the people. Otherwise, we live in a politburo, or a monarchy (The King and his actions and intentions must not be questioned. He is the KING!)

And for that reason alone, I will be sending off support to the few that come forward that I like, regardless if they get my final vote.

However there are one or two people out there that I would gladly vote for, including RFK Jr.

[Hart2008]

13. +1 "We can do better!" NT

[vaberella]

14. You think so? Because most of my issues are with the Tea Party and I see that being ignored. n/t

[uponit7771]

16. +1!!!!

[truedelphi]

26. The Tea Party is around 15 to 18% of the

Voting Population.

Cower in front of them if you wanna, but to me, it is all a big set up.

[vaberella]

50. Simplistic much. they are 15 to 18% but run the GOP since they have congressional seat.

That is the bloody problem. How the fuck does someone ignore that---97 Teapartiers in the House is no joke and when they highjack the traditional Republican party---there's a serious problem here.

[Tarheel_Dem]

15. I don't see 20% of the electorate making decisions for the entire Democratic Party.

Them's just the facts. Now they can do what they did in 2000, and sit around and bitch for another 8 yrs, in search of some mythical liberal utopia, but that seems to be what they're all about anyway. Bitching for the sake of bitching. The few that encouraged Nader's run have blood on their hands, no matter how much they try to deflect, I hardly think we would have wound up in Iraq under Pres. Gore. But hey, there's still Iran & N. Korea to go after, let's split the vote again. Afterall, it worked so well in 2000. :eyes:

[Armstead]

25. "Bitching for the sake of Bitching" NOT

Much of the "bitching" in the latter 90's was a response to the times when Bill Clinton and the Centrist Democrats pushed policies that were conservative and right wing, and designed to enrich the wealthy and big corporations at the expense of everybody else.

When Bill Clinton, for example, threw his weight behind the deregulation of the financial sector, for example, the "bitchers" were trying to point out what a potentially disastrous mistake that would be -- They warned that it would concentrate too much power and wealth into the hands of a few Financial Monopolies -- and would make it much easier for them to engage in bad behavior and potentially wreck the economy.

Lo and behold, the "bitches" proved to be absolutely dead-on accurate in their warnings (see 2008). And the defenders of the "centrist Democratic conventional wisdom" were dead wrong.

The problem is not the "bitchers." The problem is that the Democratic Establishment -- and, yes, President Obama -- don't take seriously people who have had a good track record in their analysis and valid positions in the positions they advocate for.

[Mimosa]

45. Clinton seemed to believe in supply side economics. n/t

[truedelphi]

27. Pew Survey would dispute your claim of 20% of the populace.

Summer 2008 - Pew Survey

32% of all eligible voters consider themselves to be Democrats.

22% To 26% consider themselves to be Republicans.

That means the majority thinks that most of the time, the two major parties do not represent our needs. (32 + 26 = 58%; 100% - 58% = 42%.)

Therefore, the largest group of American voters (42%) feels their own political convictions lie outside the Right leaning DLC, and the fascist leaning Republican party. Granted one percent of these people are rabid John Birchers, but for the most part these people want something outside the narrow confines of what the Republicans and the LDC are offering us.

For the past thirty years, there has been either a right leaning Democrat in the Wh, or a Republican.

As a result we have had:

1) Endless costly and unwinnable wars.
2) A banking structure that is enforced, managed and supported by the overall structure of the Federal Reserve, the President's economic advisers, and head of the Fed and Head of Treasury. Don't forget that it was Bill Clinton who signed into law the 1999 Banking Reform Act, which disemboweled Glass Steagall. After Glass S. was removed, the "Free Market Capitalism" that the Big Money people love so much took our economy into the toilet.
3) Job policies that helped put NAFTA into being, outsourcing America's good paying jobs to places like Belize, Mexico, Bangladesh and other third world nations. Obama continues to support NAFTA-like policies, even though he said in Fall of 2008 that he would end NAFTA.
4) Endless supplies of money for things the American public no longer wants or needs. Tens of billions of dollars is spent on the DEA and America's prison system, and a good deal of this energy is directly against marijuana. Hard core drug users (Speed, PCP, heroin) only involve some five percent of all "drug users."
On the MIC front, last fall, 150+ billions of dollars were promised by Obama to the nuclear weapons industry, with Obama saying he had to do this to ensure support among Republicans for his SALT treaty. (Sort of like killing the dog to save the dog?)

[Tarheel_Dem]

32. Here's a more recent article on the breakdown, from The LA Times:

From August 3rd (This Month)(This Year)

Liberals still in Obama's corner, latest Gallup poll shows
........

"Conservatives love to use liberals as the boogeyman of big government, but the liberal vote has always been a dicey matter. According to most polls, about 20% of voters is a liberal, substantially less than the about 40% who identify themselves as conservative. Thus the battle for independents often determines elections, especially national ones.

Liberals are also notoriously diverse in ideology and are often seen as ineffective in governing -even by friends and allies. As H.L. Mencken noted last century: “The Liberals have many tails, and chase them all.”"

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/aug/03/news/la-pn-obam...

Notice the phrase "most polls"? Not ONE poll from three years ago. I'll go with these numbers as it seems to be an average.

[truedelphi]

48. If you highlight a different sentence, then you prove my point.

From the text of your response:

Thus the battle for independents often determines elections, especially national ones

[Tarheel_Dem]

53. Not sure you really had a point, but the fact remains that "liberals" make up...

20% of the electorate. If people choose not to identify themselves as such, then what does that say? I still maintain that liberals are much louder than rank & file Dems, therefore they seem to get much more attention.

[tledford]

35. Facts are unwelcome here, don your asbestos suit. eom

[Tarheel_Dem]

44. Did you miss the "facts" in post #32?

:rofl:

[Bluenorthwest]

28. Nader/LaDuke got 2.74% of the popular vote in 2000. Not 20%

That year, just 51.30% of eligible voters voted at all. This tells us that there are far too many votes to be won that are not won. Voter registration and turnout is locally driven. Whining about Nader's handful of votes might feel good, but actually getting more voters to vote would actually solve the problem.
North Carolina delivered your electoral votes to GW Bush in 2000. By the way. Not sure what the Democratic turn out was there. Apparently, not enough. That Nader, he personally prevented your GOTV drives that went on for months in advance, right?
Each State needs to stand and fucking deliver voters. Blaming democracy is really not an option.

[truedelphi]

29. Here's a question for you -

Every single election, over 35% of the electorate sit out the election.

And that is during the Presidential election cycle. At the mid term elections, it is more like 50%

Why is it so important to bitch about the Naderites or others, who only accounted for some 3% for the vote in 2000? What are you willing to do about the people who don't vote? Have you considered spending some time at a local fair sitting in a registration booth?

The non-voters are ten times more powerful than the fringe.

Why not bitch about those who contribute the least - the people who stay at home. You probably have a number of people in your own circle that don't vote. Get them to vote rather than bitching about the 3% !!

[Tarheel_Dem]

34. Firstly, you don't have a clue what I do re: electioneering. Don't ASSume.

Secondly, like you, I can't make anyone vote in their own best interest. If I could, there would never be another Republican in any seat of power at least for the rest of my life. As for my "circle"? We are all extremely active and involved in our local party, both financially and physically.

Additionally, I was just pointing out that self professed "liberals", and I used to call myself one, seem to be a much bigger noise in internet echo chambers like DU, than in real life, and I think the numbers bear me out. I also think there are many lifelong Democrats, like myself, who have tried to put some distance between themselves & this brand new iteration of "progressivism", and that may account for the drop in the number of voters willing to call themselves "liberal". :shrug:

Just a thought. ;)

[JI7]

30. "Bitching for the sake of bitching"

that is so true. Gore's was the first presidential election i was able to vote in and it's the same shit all the time.

[Tarheel_Dem]

31. It'll never change. As long as there's money in "activism" we'll see this same ol' shit....

election after election. Twenty percent does not a majority make, and that just can't be disputed.

[iamthebandfanman]

41. liberals commited election fraud in florida

and forced the supreme court to make Bush the winner?

Wow, i didnt know that.

[TrainToCry]

20. Nope. There will be no Primary. Smarter heads will prevail.

[iamthebandfanman]

38. money whips will be cracked, and all will take heed of the master. n/t

[truedelphi]

51. Yep, and WIlliam Daley sitting at the Obama table tells us

A great deal as well.

[vaberella]

49. The problem is...the problem is always Teabaggers and Republicans. n/t

[Martin Eden]

17. In 1980 I voted for Anderson in the Republican primary ...

... but I voted for Carter in the general election (in Illinois you can vote in either primary).

In the 2012 Democratic primary I would like the opportunity to vote from among several highly qualified candidates for president, and I would very much like to hear them debate.

[GeorgeGist]

18. Sticking with SOS.

Is that progress?

[jefferson_dem]

21. It is if the "same old" is not "shit" ...

And the alternative would be even worse than "shit". Duh.

[frazzled]

23. Well, I voted for Carter, so I offset your Anderson vote

Don't feel too bad about it. The media was totally gaga in love with Reagan. Plus, even if you add Carter and Anderson's votes together (40.98% and 6.61%), they still did not add up to Reagan's (50.71%). In the electoral college it was even more meaningless: Reagan won with 489 electoral votes. Carter had 49 and Anderson 0.

Reagan won because of the economy, the gas crisis, the hostage crisis, and a starstruck media.

[styersc]

24. You've convinced me. No way I'm voting for Anderson in 2012.

Not sure who I'll vote for, but definitely not Anderson!

[iamthebandfanman]

37. he was a republican anyway!

guess we know what kinda democrat this poster is ... ?

Anderson introduced a constitutional amendment to attempt to "recognize the law and authority of Jesus Christ" over the United States....

[Keylime]

33. We shouldn't waste our votes on someone who can't win. NT

[Exilednight]

40. You're correct. We should waste our votes on someone who will sell us out. n/t

Edit: Forgot. :sarcasm:

[iamthebandfanman]

36. You voted for a conservative republican against a democratic president?

noone here is suggesting a republican defeat obama in the primary..

[cally]

42. I didn't work for Carter for the same reason and didn't vote for

him in the primary. It's the one vote I have ever regretted. Never again.

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[hedgehog]

47. IIRC, John Anderson ran as an independent. Now, the only info

I had was what I got off NBC Nightly News and the Columbus Post-Dispatch. At the time, voting for a third party candidate seemed the best way to put pressure on the Democratic Party to stick to principles.

[bklyncowgirl]

46. I voted for Barry Commoner in the same election--I blame myself for Reagan.