Hilary Clinton/John Edwards versus John McCain/Jeb Bush or Condoleeza Rice

Tatyana's last post ( http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/12/330949.shtml) elicited dozens of responses. This person sure knows how to push peoples' buttons! It's only January 2, and we'll no doubt be wasting our time rehashing the same old angry feelings about the democrats and republicans -- over and over and over again -- until 2008. Two recent posts, along with many comments:

Who are "the dems"?
 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/12/331151.shtml

Kerry's Bravado
 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/01/331172.shtml

Personally, I've been totally disgusted with the democrats for many years, and they have become even worse (if that's possible!). Some people keep making excuses for them. Listen up folks: THESE "REPRESENTATIVES" ARE MILLIONAIRES. WITH VERY FEW EXCEPTIONS, THEY ONLY PRETEND TO REPRESENT YOU! THEY REPRESENT CORPORATE AMERICA! WAKE UP!

Yes, my button also got pushed. As far as both majority parties are concerned, does it make any real difference which puppet the DNC and RNC anoints for our vote? The whole damn thing is rigged, even the vote counting.

The question is: will the majority of Americans wake up to the realities of life in 2006, or will they continue to slumber in front of their TVs and play video games, and follow wherever the mainstream media leads them?

Polls are just who people would like to see as 'reported' by corporate media, they have no basis in the reality of the power structures of the corporate parties. Neither Bush nor McCain will be on the Republican ballot unless there is a coup within the party, which is possible following whatever happens to Bush. Still, who cares? Presidential races are a tv-show to make people think they are accomplishing something when they are doing nothing. If you want change, make it happen, and you'll see vast irrelevancy of party politics.

Third Party or Death.

This is such a corporate media bullshit game that I am surprised that Burro even bothers to comment. However, since my recent article provoking reactions about "the Dems" is mentioned by Burro, I'll just say something about this fraudulent waste of time and energy -- the "who do you pick for 2008" corporate fantasy game.

I don't know the source of Tatyana's disinformation, because Tatyana just says "the polls". That is one of the stupidest and most irrelevant remarks that I have ever seen published at PIMC. Tatyana totally plays into the corporate media view of politics as a spectator sport (horse race).

Probably some corporate poll actually has been asking people how they would vote for Hillary/Edwards vs. McCain/Rice. That isn't a poll to "predict" (Tatayana's word) -- that's a poll to influence!

They aren't trying to give anyone a choice. These polls are all about determining your choices by limiting your thinking two years out from 2008!

Recent poll by ABC/WaPo for the November 2008 election LIMITED YOU to McCain, Clinton (Hillary), Rice, and Mark Warner (Virginia Democrat). (No Nader choice offered!)

These polls are nothing more than another form of corporatist propaganda, attempting to program people's thinking.

However, some polls are better than others. For example, ABC/WaPo polls are good in one thing: they tell you exactly what people are asked. For the Democratic nomination (2008), here's the question asked in the most recent poll:

"Next, I'm going to read a list of people who may be running in the Democratic primary for president in the next election. After I read all the names, please tell me which of those candidates you would be most likely to support for the Democratic nomination for president in the year 2008, or if you would support someone else. Indiana Senator Evan Bayh; Delaware Senator Joe Biden; New York Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton; Former North Carolina senator John Edwards; Massachusetts Senator John Kerry; New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson; Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack; Virginia Governor Mark Warner."

NOW NOTE THAT ALL CHOICES EXCEPT HILLARY ARE MALE. Do you think that MIGHT have affected the outcome of the poll? Hillary got 43%. Barbara Boxer and Dennis Kucinich, for example, were not included in other choices.

In the Republican poll, Giuliani was leading McCain by 30% to 22%.(Where did Tatyana get her disinformation? Why not Giuliani/Jeb Bush?)

Here's another choice bit of poll trivia:

Jan. 1 poll by ABC/WaPo asked people if they were optimistic for 2006: (a) personally, and, (b) for the world. Republicans are decidely more optimistic, Democrats the least optimistic, Independents falling in between. About how the world will do in 2006, only 42% of Democrats were optimistic; 56% of Independents; but 78% of Republicans were thinking up. (If this poll shows anything, it's that Democrats are marginally more sane than Independents, while Republicans are delusional in the extreme! Also, why weren't Greens and Libertarians represented?)

To me, Tatyana is nothing but a narcissistic element of the corporatist echo machine. But it isn't Tatyana, it's me that is told to shut up and get the hell out of Indymedia???

BTW: I skimmed the "Kerry's Bravado" article and had nothing to comment.