portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary united states

political theory selection 2004

Bush or Kerry or Nader?

Trying to determine who would make the best president and vote with a clean conscience.
Ok, I don't really know where to begin. None of these choices would be my first, second, or even third choice, if I could just fill in the blank.

First there is Kerry. He seems smart, and well respected in the Senate. However he seems to be a bit of a gold-digger. He married his first wife of 180 million or so, and divorced her after two children and wanted the catholic church to annul the marriage.

His second wife is worth over 1 billion dollars (current estimates) in inherited Ketchup money from when she was married to a republican senator after he got killed.

Even if the democrats take back the Senate and House, Kerry won't move too far off the reservation because the people financing his campaign are for the most part the same people financing Bush's campaign and they won't allow it.

Despite some style changes, and a few social bills like stem cell research, you won't know the difference between him and Bush or him and Clinton. You could walk outside your house, go to work or school, come home and never know who was president unless someone told you.

Next there is Bush. Depending who you talk to he is either a very good president, or a very bad one. The ones who think he is bad, can't decide if he is a complete imbecile in a cowboy hat destroying the planet, or an evil fascist maniacal super criminal plotting the worlds destruction. I don't see how he can be both at the same time. Either he is an idiot or an evil genius, but how can he be both?

Finally there is Nader. Nader maybe the best man for the job. I don't get the impression he is in this for himself, but he really wants to help the country. Now is his brand of help what the country needs? Probably. He has an uphill battle to say the least, and no matter which party gains control of Congress, both parties will shoot at him from the right and the left because they can't afford to allow a third entity in power to be successful.


So, I can vote for Bush and get more of the same, or I can vote for Kerry and get basically more of the same, or I can vote for Nader, with a clear conscience and in the slight hope that he wins, watch 435 congressman and 100 senators destroy the man and his presidency while not leaving any finger prints.

Unless something changes I'm going to vote for Nader. It will change nothing, but at least I won't feel like taking a long shower after voting.
ditto 28.Jun.2004 23:45

bzsoto

You're not alone in your perspective!

Slight chance for Nader 29.Jun.2004 10:12

.

Of course you should vote how you wish, but you have just as good a chance of being president as Nader does and for the same reason. Not enough people will vote for either of you. It's quite simple really - it's not even a conspiracy.

Dream it 29.Jun.2004 17:41

Idealist

I've been working on this campaign for months now, and if I tallied up the people who have said to me "I would vote for Nader but he has no chance of winning," he'd have at least 30% of the vote in Oregon.

If you dream it, it will be.

Nader is the one who is fighting for the people 01.Jul.2004 08:05

WitchGirl

If you realize how much of the population opposes this war, you could see that if anti-war voters voted for an anti-war candidate, Nader would have an excellent chance of winning. While democrats scream at anyone to vote "anybody but Bush", they do little to control the fact that their party, and especially Kerry seems to very often vote FOR Bush so very often (IWR (war), Patriot Act, Homeland Security, No Child Left Behind, Fast Track, Normalized Trade Relations with China, etc.)

I can no longer in good conscience support the corrupt Democratic Party who have so little to offer in terms of substance or platform, that their campaign is based entirely on the fact that Kerry is NOT Bush. The Democratic Party is no party for the people. It's time for everyone to wake up to that.

As a Nader supporter, I care very little whether Kerry or Bush get in office. If Bush is in, he is a damaged president who ought to be impeached. If Kerry gets in, I have come to believe he will basically do a clean up job for Bush, and get away with the same kind of damage due to the fact that he is not Bush, and therefore trusted. Both will be fascists. Both will further ruin this country by neglecting human concerns, while selling out our government to business interests. Neither major party candidate is acceptable, and both have anti-American tendencies. The two-party system is a means to constrain voters into a terrible either/or choice. In this way, corporatists use the party system as a tool to force their agendas and to take the control of the government away from we the people. Too many people fall for the good cop/bad cop routine that these parties play in order to drive this country down the same road of fascist corporatism.

Nader can win. The support he does have is very strong and active - unlike the weak support Kerry or Bush has. It's quality support, so to speak. Also, I believe that people aren't stupid, just misinformed and scared. Nader supporters need to make every effort to get information to others, because the corporate media will not do it. With effort from all Nader supporters, Nader can fight back these corrupt aristocratic corporatists (Kerry and Bush) who have no compassion for the people, and no sense of justice for the country.