catapult magazine

I’ve noticed in these discussions that there are several cino members who won’t be voting for either Bush or Kerry. You like Kerry a little bit better than Bush, but will either not vote at all or you’ll vote for a third party candidate. I know why Bush-supporters dislike Kerry, and I don’t want this thread to fill up with regurgitated Bush campaign ads. What I would like to hear is why specifically those of you who don’t approve of Bush have decided not to vote for Kerry.

I think Andrew Sullivan nails what is wrong with Kerry (and Bush) in his viewpoint column in the most recent issue of Time. http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101041101/nandrew.html The problem with Kerry (and Bush for that matter) is his lack of a consistent position. Many of Kerry’s positions seem inconsistent with his other positions. For instance, as Laryn wrote “I don’t think his [Kerry’s] position on abortion stands up to scrutiny; this is the area where the democratic platform falls flat in its claim to stand up for the weakest, defenseless members of society.” This is just one example. (To be an equal opportunity independent, Bush has just as many or more inconsistencies in his positions.)

Hey folks, don’t act sheepish about pointing out Kerry’s flaws by feeling obligated to point out Bush’s. As Dan said, this is all about Kerry. It’s not supposed to be pro-Bush, so therefore by the same rule of logic, it isn’t to be anti-Bush, either.

Just wanted to insert some additional levity into the discussion.

I am not a fan of Mr. Bush but I could not vote for Kerry for two reasons which may only actually be one reason.

¹ His support for a woman’ right to choose an abortion and his intent to make this a litmus test for Supreme Court justice candidates.

² His personal conviction that he can have personal convictions on important issues (eg. abortion) but won’t ?impose? them on others if they happen to spring from his religious beliefs.

A little more levity:

The Spectator (British magazine) calls Kerry “Nuancy Boy,” a play on “Nancy Boy.”

Alright my turn,
Most of you don’t know me personally but if you have talked with me face to face between March 1 and now, you would know I am not a fan of John Kerry at all. Yet here I sit in an office that is doing everything it can (as a 501c3 non-profit) to get him out of office. We are working our tail ends off here to see change on Nov. 2. And yes, I see change coming. Please, God. So the problem is right there. I am working for, hoping for, praying for change. On so many important things, that change will not come with Kerry. That my friends is the beauty of our republic and two-party system.
What principles and non-changes am I referencing? What is wrong with Kerry?
Palestine/Israel: Kerry is more pro-Israel and pro-right-wing occupation than the last couple of presidents. This is an extremely important issue to think about and advocate for now more than ever. If you are not up on it, Palestinians are living in apartheid-like conditions behind a huge wall and it is only getting worse. Supposedly some settlers are pulling out of one area to appease dissent, but high level Israel officials have admitted this is a facade to increase occupation and invasion elsewhere.
“War on Terrorism”: Kerry has out-bushed Bush on this one. No question. Bush is promising to keep America safe, Kerry is promising to hunt down and kill the terrorists. Those darn evil folks! Scrap any argument about inconsistency, unclear principles, Kerry is not afraid to advocate more international violence. Obviously, anyone with a conscience for peace in the future prefers Kerry to Bush (unless you let the whole Israel thing mess you up…), to hopefully avoid violent conflicts with Iran, N. Korea, etc.
These are my stop-gap issues that do not allow me to vote for Kerry. I went to the rallies, I am supporting moveon and act, I’ve marched against Bush, but I cannot and did not vote for Kerry (absentee voted in CA several weeks ago).
For the record, Kerry does deserve votes from some progressives even though he is where he is mainly because he was the winnable candidate in February. He deserves votes because Edwards has an incredible awareness of social justice issues, as the candidate to be chosen by minority/inner-city voters everywhere, he will HAVE TO do some positive things to please that voting block in his first term or else he is giving up on 2008 already. He is advocating raising minimum wage, repealing tax cuts, etc. Socialist vision, yes, and some extremely important moves towards an economic democracy rather than economic tyranny. But please people, vote all your values, vote for peace, and don’t go against principles just because you would prefer one candidate or another.
From the district, ajh

I am a bit loathe to join this thread, because I’d hate to sway people’s votes toward Bush (then again, maybe I shouldn’t kid myself into thinking I have that much power). But here I go anyway because I’m a Kerry fan only to the extent that the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Many of the beefs I have against Kerry are similar to Andrew’s (By the way, Andrew, isn’t the 501-c-3 you work for supposed to be non-partisan? :)). Kerry’s avowedly pro-Israel (and hence anti-Paletine) stance is very troubling, as is his “tough guy on terror” persona. I have a feeling that his out-Bushing Bush on the terror issue is mostly about acquiring undecided voters, but I still think it’s slimy. How can you say you are against the death penalty on the one hand and on the other say you “hunt down and kill” all the terrorists on the other? Additionally, like Bush, Kerry seems to think that there are a certain number of terrorists out there, that they are born that way, and as long as we root out these genetically determined “bad people” we will have no more enemies. Although Kerry’s foreign policy is bound to be a little more palatable than Bush’s, I’m afraid with him in office we’d continue to make terrorists by antagonizing the world.

One thing I like about Bush is that he does seem to hold strong convictions. I disagree with many of those convictions, but at least he has them. Kerry, on the other hand, seems to take the stereotype of the sell-out politician to a whole new level. Even his rhetoric about faith (which he recently started pulling out to compete with Bush’s on-the-sleeve-piety), seems just that, rhetoric. I know it is not my place to judge the sincerity of his faith. But in terms of its salience for his life as a politician…there doesn’t appear to be much of a connection.

These last critiques is more of the Democratic party in general, but whatever happened to standing up for the rights of the little people, and supporting local economies? I think Kerry’s position on these issues is also flimsy. He talks about being a man for the middle class, but what about the poor? It is especially difficult for me to find a man who appears to live high on the hog to be a worthy spokesperson for social justice.

Another “little people” issue: the unborn are obvious not a huge priority to Kerry. Granted, the Democratic party has basically categorically shut down pro-life Dems, but that still isn’t a good excuse.

So, what is a girl to do in light of an inability to vote for either candidate? Because I don’t live in a swing state I have the luxury of writing someone in. Now my quandry is that I can think of so many great write-in candidates, and I don’t know who to chose from: my dad, an elder at my church, Kucinich, Nader, myself (joke—I think I ’d even trust Bush or Kerry more than myself)?

This is just an aside, but what the heck was Kerry doing in one of the debates when he insinuated that married people who struggle with homosexuality should leave their spouses?

I’m sorry I got off-topic for a bit, but it is hard not to make comparisons on a topic like this.

I forgot: I’m very much in favor of the Faith-Based Initiative, and Kerry isn’t. Seems perfectly consistent with the Democratic ideal of government empowering people. One more strike.

i also agree on the israel / outbushing bush points. it does seem like posturing to try to take away bush’s early advantage on making people feel safe, protrected against the terrorists, etc. my feeling is that kerry has tried to be indistinguishable from bush on a number of issues, counting on the fact that people who are so fed up with bush will vote for kerry anyway, so he can play to the middle / right on some issues.

also, the faith-based initiative seems like a good idea to me, too—i haven’t heard kerry speak of it and he hasn’t answered my email.

i guess i was wrong (about the blowout).

it’s happened before…

laryn

I must say, I managed to hold my tongue the last several weeks, but darn it! I KNEW it wouldn’t be a Kerry blow-out. I wouldn’t have been surprised had Kerry won, but it definitely would not have been a blow-out victory.