what is kerry's platform exactly [Archive]

mattmeck

07-27-04, 02:30 AM

The only thing he really says it "i'm not bush, he sucks."

This IS his platform, that and "I did a couple years in the navy im ub@r!!"

I wont vote for him due to the fact all he dose is trash Bush's ideas then when asked how he would do it diferently he shrugs and says he will have to look at it later. He has no clue what he is going to do he is just pointing fingers and saying he will do better without sayd HOW he will do better.

Being part of the Military family ( I just got out and my wife is in Iraq right now ) Bush is the way to go, looking at all his faults he has taking care of the military isnt one of them. He is listening to the right people when deciding what to give / do with the military. ( yea yea we shouldnt be in Iraq they hate us and its all Bush's right? Tell that to my wife who has been asked on countless ocasions to bring kids back with her, or the gifts they try to give out troops for rescueing them )

I wish there was a "good" canidate tho, as it is its about picking the lesser evil :O

Vindicor

07-27-04, 03:27 AM

http://prism.troyst.edu/~phoenix/ftp/cthuluhu_bumper.gif

TeanninBramblefeet

07-27-04, 04:01 AM

I actually saw someone with a near identical bumper sticker...

Peebs

07-27-04, 05:28 AM

He has three purple hearts!

Meddik

07-27-04, 05:55 AM

He's on Both sides of every issue, depending on how polling is that issue.

Which is why he voted for war with Iraq, and then voted against funding the war with Iraq. And He thinks abortion killds a human life, but he wants to keep it legal... etc. etc. etc.

Anyway, If you want to look at his voting record, Here's a good source. It shows how Various interest groups rated his voting record.

http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=S0421103

Rather than look through Each individual vote, you can look for groups that fit your views and see how they judged his record. For example, If I'm pro-life, anti-tax, and in favor of gun rights, I might look for favorable ratings from the American Taxpayers Union, Right to Life, and the NRA.

Be sure to read the descriptions of the groups involved carefully.

Edit: If you want to look at an overall conservative/Liberal composite score, National Journal does a pretty good job. Kerry got a 97 on the liberal rankings, higher such liberal bigwigs as Hillary Clinton or Ted Kennedy. In fact, the msot liberal ranking of any senator.

Nocte

07-27-04, 06:00 AM

Bitchin' bumper sticker!

Kerry has not taken a firm stance on one thing. He is running on the "not Bush" platform. That works on some levels, but his advisors and election committees should be keelhauled. Bush is at an all time low in popularity, though trends are showing an upswing. Kerry should be pummeling him for all he's worth... hell, take a stance and drive it down his throat.

Nope, I'll stay quiet and keep saying... "I'm not Bush." Tactically, that's political suicide. Clinton beat the hell out of Bush Sr. by being Clinton and arguing issues. Watching him on the DNC last night, I remember why he was president. He just oozes confidence and charisma even after his less than graceful exit. Stand Kerry next to that... and a Texas cowboy with one term under his belt. 3 purple hearts nearly 40 years ago don't mean diddly to MTV nation. Kerry needs to kick it into second gear if he wants the White House.

Bush is just one WMD/key terrorist/economic windfall from surging in popularity. Kerry cannot take that for granted. November is still a long way off.

Vilkata Tasavalt

07-27-04, 06:13 AM

No no no Vindicor!

Vote Cthulu so we don't get a GREATER evil in the white house.

Vilk

Gnmish Gearbinder

07-27-04, 06:13 AM

Very interesting site Meddik. Thanks.

Dazzler Twodirks

07-27-04, 06:26 AM

A retarted chimpanzee is better than Bush at this moment.
Bush only takes care of his PALS.
Taking care of the military so his PALS make billions rebuilding the stuff the military destroyed is what's he's really doing.

Wonder how many bricks would be in polititions pants if there was a Moore/Carlin in 2004 ticket.

Meddik

07-27-04, 06:35 AM

As was said before, Kerry has nothing to run on other than the fact that he isn't Bush. Thanks for illustrating the point Dazzler.

Emrys

07-27-04, 06:43 AM

JohnKerry.com (http://www.johnkerry.com) would be a decent place to start.

Also, Google "John Kerry Platform. Don't buy into the Conservative spin on Kerry before you educate yourself. It's easy for Meddik to say, "he voted for the war, then against it!" It's like a freakin mantra. When you hear someone say that, first consider the information that the Pres gave the UN for justification for invading Iraq. Now, that we've found no WMDs, Iraq posed no immediate threat to the US, etc, Kerry voted against it.

It's called changing your mind based on new information. It's called using your head and thinking issues through.

Now if you really want to learn what Kerry's platform is, it doesn't take long to get tons of info on Google. You'll learn much more than asking for input on a messageboard.

Oh, and incidentally, you'll learn a lot from the Democratic Natl Convention this week, so if you don't watch it, check out the synopsis on the news or online.

Darkefang

07-27-04, 06:52 AM

Kerry doesn't have any platform at all. That's why he is behind, and probably will continue to be. His campaign has been really indecisive regarding which issues to focus on.

Being part of the Military family ( I just got out and my wife is in Iraq right now ) Bush is the way to go, looking at all his faults he has taking care of the military isnt one of them.
I would argue that Rumsfeld has been a serious detriment to the military. His policies have tended to discourage people from joining the military. And the erosion of veteran's benefits that began under Clinton have continued unimpeded.

If you want to look at an overall conservative/Liberal composite score, National Journal does a pretty good job. Kerry got a 97 on the liberal rankings, higher such liberal bigwigs as Hillary Clinton or Ted Kennedy. In fact, the msot liberal ranking of any senator.
Rankings like this are completely arbitrary. They are a way for people to avoid the responsibility of actually learning about the issues and the candidates. Kerry is certainly a liberal, but to suggest that he is more liberal than Hillary or Kennedy is patently ridiculous.

Clinton only appears to be less liberal of late, because she is gearing up for a run for President in 2008. Kennedy probably appears less liberal because he was too inebriated to attend voting sessions.

I will be voting for Kerry, not because of his stance on the issues, or because of anything he represents. I'll be, in essence, voting against Bush. Bush has betrayed many of the most important values of the Republican Party and conservatism. Bush has been more liberal than Clinton ever dreamed of. He started off in the right direction, with tax cuts, and then veered sharply off course.

Since then, his administration has fought free trade, seized power from the states, invaded American citizen's privacy, expanded government spending, and has generally been a poor representative of the US.

My hope would be that Kerry wins and gets his four years. He won't be able to do much damage, because the Democrats will not control Congress the first two years, and the Republicans will have a huge mid-term election. Then, we vote a real conservative into office in 2008.

With four more years of Bush, I'm very concerned about party fragmentation, and the possibility of having an extended run of Democratic control of Congress and the presidency. I would much rather see a Democratic president, and a Republican-controlled Congress. The legislature is where the real power is.

Nyssa

07-27-04, 06:55 AM

I seriously can't figure it out. The only thing he really says it "i'm not bush, he sucks."

That's what has me terrified about this upcoming election. It seems all people are after is to remove Bush, but they have no clue what else they want and how to better the situation. Well, removing the "problem" isn't enough. Finding a solution to the problem is what's necessary. If all Kerry has to go on are purple hearts and "I'm not Bush" then electing him is far more dangerous than having a "war monger" in control.

Gnmish Gearbinder

07-27-04, 06:59 AM

Don't buy into the Conservative spin on Kerry before you educate yourself.

JohnKerry.com would be a decent place to start.

you'll learn a lot from the Democratic Natl Convention this weel

Whaaaa? This is a horrible idea. You preach not buying into a spin and then send them right to the candidate's site?

Go to independant information sites. Any given candidate's site is about the most useless place you can go for information. Party Conventions are pretty useless too.

Sheesh.

Emrys

07-27-04, 07:00 AM

While I don't profess to want a "real" conservative in the White House as Hodur does, I also am hoping to see 4 years of Kerry, and then I'll decide whether I like what he's done in office. However, the 2008 elections are shaping up to be much more interesting than the 2004, so I'm thinking perhaps that what I'd really like to see is Kerry in '04, and then a McCain/Powell ticket in 2008.

I agree that 4 years of Kerry will not hurt much as long as the Congress remains in Republican control. My hope is that he'll help restore the US's international relationships, reign in the rediculous amount of spending under Bush, and focus more money on domestic issues. I'd really like to avoid another war in the middle east, and get back to focusing on our crumbling school systems and health care. Our own infrastructure needs serious attention, and wars like Iraq are draining money away from important domestic problems.

I don't really care if he only gets 4 years, because if McCain/Powell run in '08, they've got my vote.

Nocte

07-27-04, 07:03 AM

first consider the information that the Pres gave the UN for justification for invading Iraq.

Well, that right their is a spin statement. Bush relayed the information he had. He's been exhonerated on that as was Clinton. The CIA F'ed up. Can we get over that please?

Oh, and incidentally, you'll learn a lot from the Democratic Natl Convention this week, so if you don't watch it, check out the synopsis on the news or online.

Are you ****ing kidding me? C'mon, you aren't that naive are you?

Nyssa

07-27-04, 07:03 AM

you'll learn a lot from the Democratic Natl Convention this weel

Whaaaa? This is a horrible idea. You preach not buying into a spin and then send them right to the candidate's site?

Go to independant information sites. Any given candidate's site is about the most useless place you can go for information. Party Conventions are pretty useless too.

Sheesh.

Besides, aren't party conventions little more than pretentious ego stroking, wang waving parties anyways? What more do they accomplish other than saying "my weener's bigger than yours?" and having former presidents/famous people within their party come in and say, "yes, I've seen it! Indeed his weener is bigger than that of his opponents!"

Emrys

07-27-04, 07:04 AM

If all Kerry has to go on are purple hearts and "I'm not Bush" then electing him is far more dangerous than having a "war monger" in control.

I strongly disagree.

Seeing as how I've disagreed with most all of Bush's policy, "I'm not Bush" means I won't do what he did (on certain issues and decisions). That's good IMO. Now, we don't have a clear idea of exactly what he would DO instead. That is what the next few months are about: Learning more about him and his specific plans.

At the LEAST in Kerry we have a candidate who has placed himself in mortal danger in war, lead men through war, and come back with the balls to criticize the mess that was Vietnam.

You can make fun of his purple hearts all you want, and I won't disagree that his wounds weren't really bad. I also won't disagree that he's using the "Purple Hearts" tag way too much.

However, the fact that he has purple hearts at all says a lot about him and what he's been through and seen. Bush has none of this experience of war. His history and experience prior to 2000 is laughable in comparison.

I'd much rather have a veteran in the White House who will go the extra mile for diplomacy and international support. Oh, and I also agree with Hodur about Rummy. The only person I respect in Bush's cabinet is Powell, and, surprise, he's been marginalized for months now. A great side effect of Bush being out of office would be that his cabinet would be gone too.

I really don't think 4 years of Kerry is as dangerous to the US or the world than 4 more of Bush.

Emrys

07-27-04, 07:05 AM

Don't buy into the Conservative spin on Kerry before you educate yourself.

JohnKerry.com would be a decent place to start.

you'll learn a lot from the Democratic Natl Convention this weel

Whaaaa? This is a horrible idea. You preach not buying into a spin and then send them right to the candidate's site?

Did you miss the part about "decent place to start"?

Relax. Why not start with the horse's mouth (pun intended), and then Google for some independent views.

Nyssa

07-27-04, 07:09 AM

If all Kerry has to go on are purple hearts and "I'm not Bush" then electing him is far more dangerous than having a "war monger" in control.

I strongly disagree.

Oh, but I've heard so little about what Kerry plans to do about improving the economy, healthcare, schooling, urban poverty, homelessness...you know, all the important stuff, but I've heard a great deal in regards of the "I'm not Bush" gimmick. Sadly in this election, it's the least I've ever heard about the important issues that affects me as an American, but oh, I've heard plenty about how he was a Vietnam vet and John Edwards saying "he'd never leave any American behind!" Does he plan on taking me somewhere? ;)

At least with Bush, I know where he stands. With Kerry, it's nothing but empty promises I know that he won't deliver....like many politicians before him.

Gnmish Gearbinder

07-27-04, 07:10 AM

What more do they accomplish other than saying "my weener's bigger than yours?" and having former presidents/famous people within their party come in and say, "yes, I've seen it! Indeed his weener is bigger than that of his opponents!"

ROFL! :lol
That's almost signature or page-top quote worthy!

I strongly disagree.
Tell me that was a Kerry-esque pun.

Did you miss the part about "decent place to start"?
Nope, sure didn't. That is, as I said, a horrible place to start.

EDIT: Stupid phpBB buttons breaking my hand-typed coding...

SnibbsQ

07-27-04, 07:13 AM

Nothing to add aside from what's already been said. But, holy crap that bumper sticker is awesome, must find one. :D

Emrys

07-27-04, 07:24 AM

Oh, but I've heard so little about what Kerry plans to do about improving the economy, healthcare, schooling, urban poverty, homelessness...you know, all the important stuff, but I've heard a great deal in regards of the "I'm not Bush" gimmick....

At least with Bush, I know where he stands. With Kerry, it's nothing but empty promises I know that he won't deliver....like many politicians before him.

Ok first, the DNC is just now getting going. You've had 4 years to get to know Bush. Pay attention and you'll learn plenty about Kerry in the next few months.

Secondly, it's a known fact that election year rhetoric is full of ********. Bush did it, Kerry will do it, etc. I've seen what Bush did in his first 4 years. IMO he needs to be held accountable. There's no way he's getting my vote. Unless Kerry self-distructs (which is entirely possible, as he's proven capable of saying stupid things), he'll probably get my vote. I'm really hoping that I won't be driven to vote Nader.

Nyssa

07-27-04, 07:26 AM

Emrys

07-27-04, 07:26 AM

Did you miss the part about "decent place to start"?
Nope, sure didn't. That is, as I said, a horrible place to start.

Wait. You're saying that a horrible place to start when you want to hear what a candidate's platform is, is from the candidate themselves...

Give me a hit of what you got...

Emrys

07-27-04, 07:27 AM

I head over to FoxNews (http://www.foxnews.com) and this is what I see: a pic of Clinton at the Dem National Convention tooting Kerry's horn. It looks an awfully Hitler-esque to me. Pretty scary if you ask me. ;)

I'm astonished, astonished! Fox News posting a pic of Clinton in a Hitler-esque pose of the DNC! Who would have thunk it!?

That was quite the money shot, I'll give the photographer that.

Nocte

07-27-04, 07:33 AM

As I said in another thread. I was actually pleasantly impressed with Clinton last night. Considering how he left office, his charisma and confidence radiated off of him as he spoke last night. His speech was pure puffery bull **** of course, but well delivered nonetheless.

I was less than impressed with Hillary though, who I usually enjoy.

Gnmish Gearbinder

07-27-04, 07:35 AM

Peebs

07-27-04, 07:40 AM

It's easy for Meddik to say, "he voted for the war, then against it!" It's like a freakin mantra. When you hear someone say that, first consider the information that the Pres gave the UN for justification for invading Iraq. Now, that we've found no WMDs, Iraq posed no immediate threat to the US, etc, Kerry voted against it.

I don't see your point. If Kerry voted for the war at the beginning of it, then he voted for the war. I can't see why you would give Kerry credit for changing his mind after the fact. His job as a president would be to make decisions based on the information we had at hand.

shehab aldean

07-27-04, 08:06 AM

Ok first, the DNC is just now getting going. You've had 4 years to get to know Bush. Pay attention and you'll learn plenty about Kerry in the next few months.

and how to start rebuilding relation with the world ? by showing
he doesn't like arabs (http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/9FD55FF1-CD66-40BC-8453-C65D9CE709BE.htm) :crazy

Meddik

07-27-04, 08:10 AM

I'm saying it is completely irresponsible to vote against FUNDING the troops who are in the field, after they are out there in a war you voted for.

Soulstealer

07-27-04, 08:15 AM

I'm saying it is completely irresponsible to vote against FUNDING the troops who are in the field, after they are out there in a war you voted for.

he was trying buisness tacticks, cut the funding and watch it fall apart. then he can use the falling apart war in his throw to get in office.

Meddik

07-27-04, 08:17 AM

Oh, and is that pic really as bad as this one?

http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20040726/i/r4086761383.jpg

He looks like a space-bound oompa loompa.

http://www.p45blogs.net/stuffin/archives/images/hitoompa.jpg

Policies aside, his campaign amnagers and stuff should be making sure he doesn't get into positions to be photographed looking silly like that.

Darkefang

07-27-04, 08:26 AM

According to the Bush commercials, he missed the votes regarding troop funding, didn't vote against them. In Congressional races, both parties are accusing each other of voting for and against crazy things.

As with all bills in Congress, its hard to say who voted against them for what reasons. After all, Congress is where a bill funding road construction can have a rider attached to legalize marijuana. It looks like they ended up voting against the "Road Construction 2004" bill, when in reality they voted against legalizing pot.

Emrys

07-27-04, 08:33 AM

Wait. You're saying that a horrible place to start when you want to hear what a candidate's platform is, is from the candidate themselves...

You're finally starting to understand what I'm saying I think. Yes, the candidate's site is a poor place to learn about their platform. It's all spin. Useless...for either party. Did Dazzler somehow steal your login?

I don't get the Dazzler reference.

Are you differentiating between the candidate and his site here? Do you think that learning a platform from the candidates actual mouth contains less spin than his website? That argument at least has legs, as he isn't necessarily in direct control of what goes on the site.

But saying that learning a candidates platform from the candidate themself is not a good place to start is silly. Should you first hear what a candidate plans to do in office from some analyst or opposition party critic? No.

You start at the source, then take in other perspectives, then form your own opinion. I just don't see the problem there.

And as for Kerry voting against the funding. He didn't vote at all as a gesture of disapproval after we learned that the basis for invasion was fallacious. There wasn't any chance in hell it wasn't going to pass. He, like many Americans, and other countries, felt betrayed.

Now I don't condone such "symbolic" voting necessarily, but I don't find fault with the principle of voting one way, learning that your vote was based on false information, being upset, and then changing your mind. It could be argued that such a symbolic vote is irresponsible, but only if that No (or missed in this case) vote actually meant anything to the outcome. If there was any danger of a No or missed vote actually harming US troops in Iraq, there's simply no way he would done that. It'd be political suicide no matter what your perspective.

It's purely subjective whether you believe that such symbolic votes, or lack-thereof are worthwhile or wise. They've been cast for ages by members of both parties. It's easy for the opposition to spin any given vote in a negative light. "Kerry missed the vote! He hates our troops!" "Kerry voted no against the Lacy Peterson law! He hates pregnant women and babies!", etc.

This goes on on both sides of the tracks all the time. Personally, while I do respect the value of symbolic votes, I don't think it was necessary for Kerry to miss the vote on that one. He should have just voted Yes and remained outspoken in his criticism. The vote was an unnecessary gesture that has only backfired and given his opposition plenty of ammunition. Like I said before, he's proven a number of times now that he's capable of making mistakes and saying the wrong things in his persuit of the White House. Bush has already laid the groundwork for Kerry's victory. It's up to Kerry to take advantage of it and not self-destruct.

[edited to reflect my mistake of forgetting that Kerry didn't vote at all, as opposed to voted No.]

Marbh

07-27-04, 08:40 AM

I'm saying it is completely irresponsible to vote against FUNDING the troops who are in the field, after they are out there in a war you voted for.

Unless their BS packed into the bill and they are trying to ram it down people's throats by scapegoating them as traitors if they vote against it.

It's not like Kerry was saying "No more bullets or food, screw em!". What happens if a bill with BS in it doesn't pass? They rewrite it and it comes back in a format that will pass. Schoolhouse rock and "How a bill becomes a law" will tell you that. Now as far as the "Three Purple Hearts" bs that has been going around, I would ask this, how many times has he specifically mentioned those medals as opposed to mentioning his service in Vietnam? Let's also remember that each minor wound is a chance for a major wound. If Charley wings me in the should as I'm in motion, that means he had just as good a chance of nailing me through the heart as well. I sure as hell respect someone who served in the Mekong Delta more than someone who was patrolling Piggly Wiggly.

When I voted for Bush in 2000, it was because I was sick of bad morals, sick of lies, sick of bad decisions, sick of Arkansas sidekick croneyism, and sick of politicians who would sacrifice their citizens for their own gain. GWB Sr had gotten us stuck in Somalia, but Clinton (and even more so his poll taking advisors), had made it a total mess, The Balkans were a warning flag of places to not ever try and go into (always have hated each other, most likely always will), and a bunch of other ticky tack bad decisions.

Since 2000 I have seen spots where I respected Bush (they did react quite quickly to 9/11), but either he or his advisors are like the gang who can't shoot straight. Too many times they have shot themselves in the foot diplomatically, they are not patient at all in dealing with foreign affairs, and have way too many people in the administration who see but do not understand. Will Kerry be better? Maybe, maybe not, but I'm willing to give him a chance for 4 years to find out. If he turns out to be a bum I'll vote to boot his arse out. Unless something suprising happens, he isn't going to put the country on a total 180 with a Republican Congress.

Now as far as the original topic of what Kerry's platform is, until a convention is over, there is not official platform. Backroom politics and infighting at the convention is what decides the planks that make the platform. Until very recently, the convention was very importent, because the party steered the candidate instead of vice versa. Kerry has Plans, policies, ect, but to call it a platform is premature. What we do know, is that he has said that we will not be pulling out of Iraq, but instead we must achieve stabilization.

He does not support gay marriage, but is for recognizing civil unions. He supports personal choice on abortion, immigration reform, reinforcing disability legislation enforcement, his economic package says cut middle class taxes, but no real specifics (but what politician in mid election ever commits to stone on money issues), he proposes universal medical care (but I would like to see how the process would be achieved), he is for energy indepence (but science and market feasibility will have the say on this one), and he's pro environment.

Like I said, I'll vote to give him 4 years, then boot him if he messes up.

Gnmish Gearbinder

07-27-04, 08:40 AM

Emrys, I think you know what I'm saying and you're just being difficult so I'm not going to beat the horse anymore.

I think everyone else here knows what I mean as well.

Next?

EDIT: Directed my comment a Marbh replied while I was typing.

Meddik

07-27-04, 08:49 AM

The vote was an unnecessary gesture that has only backfired and given his opposition plenty of ammunition.

No, THe vote was a neccesary measure to shore up support in the primaries, where he was very afraid of losing to Howard Dean or some other challenger.

Once again, he was basing his voting on how the political winds are blowing that moment, rather than on any sort of core principal. He's trying to have it both ways, and be all things to all people.

Marbh

07-27-04, 08:51 AM

Oh, and is that pic really as bad as this one?

http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20040726/i/r4086761383.jpg

He looks like a space-bound oompa loompa.

Policies aside, his campaign amnagers and stuff should be making sure he doesn't get into positions to be photographed looking silly like that.

Hell with that color suit you could bluescreen anyone elses face in there and it would look bad. NASA duds and coolness are on two different ends of the planet (nay, solar system!)

Meddik

07-27-04, 08:53 AM

Yeah, its not that Kerry looks silly in the picture, anyone would. But shouldn't his advisors keep him away from photo ops like that?

Its not quite Dukakis in the tank silly looking, but its bad.

Marbh

07-27-04, 08:55 AM

Yeah they should, but it's also harder to keep photo folks away as well. The POTUS always has it easier with the extra security. Otherwise we would have photos of W face down in a tumbleweed patch this weekend. Same with Clinton when he was in office, lots of possible bad shots that the circle O' guards prevented.

Jhani Vandolay

07-27-04, 09:38 AM

The important link everyone's been asking for: http://www.chaosium.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=519

Krimzan

07-27-04, 10:16 AM

I also am hoping to see 4 years of Kerry

I'm with Emrys on this one...and I'm only hoping to see FOUR YEARS of Kerry, not eight.
Phase 1: Get Bush out.
Phase 2:
Phase 3: Democracy.

Emrys

07-27-04, 10:16 AM

The Elder Party is the only political organization offering permanent solutions to the world's problems. Proclaim your eternal loyalties to one and all with this high-quality bumper sticker. Measuring 3x11", this sticker is printed with fade-resistant inks for many aeons of deathless enjoyment.

Priceless!

Yalum

07-27-04, 10:18 AM

If you don't think politicians can be trusted, that they must be judged by past actions and not future goals, then their platforms are irrelevant to you. For everybody else, you can find Kerry's stances here (http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/) (supposedly his universal health care plan is the most intriguing part, according to the folks with the intestinal fortitude to actually read such things), although as Marbh said the convention will set the real platform. You haven't heard much about Bush's plan yet either, for the same reason.

Gnmish Gearbinder

07-27-04, 10:27 AM

Yalum, that's all well and good but the problem is, as with most political commercials they all tell the what but not the how. They never bother to tell you how they're going to accomplish it. For some people, that's good enough to buy their vote, but all it is is empty promises.

Give me damned facts. This is why Perot was successful. Crackpot or not, he at least tried to explain the How.

Emrys

07-27-04, 10:37 AM

If you don't think politicians can be trusted, that they must be judged by past actions and not future goals, then their platforms are irrelevant to you.

Not sure if that's directed at me for my words about election year ********, but for the record, their platform is all we have to go by. There are a lot of reasons politions don't and can't accomplish those goals once they get in office, both internal and external.

I realize that you have to take what a politician says in an election with a grain of salt, their goals are all we have to go by. All you can do is hope they achieve or try to achieve as much of what they promise as possible.

Meddik

07-27-04, 10:52 AM

So you think that they would act one way in politics for several years, and then suddenly act another way when elected to a different office? Please...

The platform is them saying what they need to to get elected. The voting record tells you how they really have acted once they were elected. Actions speak much louder than words.

Greldek

07-27-04, 10:57 AM

I head over to FoxNews (http://www.foxnews.com) and this is the first thing I see: a pic of Clinton at the Dem National Convention tooting Kerry's horn. It looks an awfully Hitler-esque to me. Pretty scary if you ask me. ;)

http://www.foxnews.com/images/132896/4_2_072704_clinton2.jpg

Bush also has a few hitler-esque pictures running around. They are really not that hard to get.. just wait for a politicial to raise his hand to wave and most likely you'll be able to snap a hitler salute if you're fast enough.

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/Gntik/heilbush.jpg

But my favorite picture of bush is this one :p
http://mywebpage.netscape.com/Gntik/beavisandbush.jpg

But that's not to say I'm a Kerry supporter. I honestly think both are jackasses who shouldn't be in the white house. And no I don't know who would be better, but none of the **** sticks that were running this year.

:|

Marbh

07-27-04, 11:05 AM

The platform is them saying what they need to to get elected....... Actions speak much louder than words.

You better believe it bub. (http://www.failureisimpossible.com/needtoknow/campaignslogans.htm)

Gnmish Gearbinder

07-27-04, 11:24 AM

Touche' (http://www.socialistworker.org/2003-2/460/460_08_Clinton.shtml)

Meddik

07-27-04, 11:36 AM

Wow. You found a lot of editorials trashing bush.

Big friggin deal. Most of the topics listed on that page are pure semantics anyway. So he called himself a compassionate conservative. Then someone writes an op-ed piece saying "Hey, He did something that I personally think wasn't compassionate!" Well, thats jsut a stupid comparison.

Don't know much about Yucca mountain, Didn't even know it was an issue that came up in the 2000 election, it was well below my radar. Besides, did he say No, it will never go in Yucca mountain? No. He said a decision would not be made until research had been done. Was it done? Yes. Does every environmentalist agree with it? No. But then, YOU try to find any site on the planet that all environmentalists would agree on. Do the NIMBY crowd agree with it? Of course not. You try and find any community on earth that would say "Sure, put it here!" But it had to be put somewhere.

As for Free Trade, I'd agree that his steel tarrifs were a mistake, and I said so here at the time. On most other trade related issues, he's done a fair job.

Reforming the military? I'd say he's done a spectacular job of that, given the conditions under which he had to work with. We have done more, mroe effeciently, with less risk of life than anyon on this board would ahve dreamed possible 4 years ago.

Most of the rest of the items are similar to the compassionate conservative example above. Taking broad phrases that were never even intended to be campaign promises out of context, and findind a handful of editorials that blast bush on some vaguely related issue.

And as for

Xynn

07-27-04, 11:39 AM

Would someone please tell me what exactly his platform is.

I was lucky enough to be granted a press pass to the Democratic National Convention, and ive snuck a look at the platform.

Platform Consists of:
Wood
Paint
Nails(Metal)
Staples(Also Metal, industrial quality)
Paper
Duct Tape
Plastic
Rubber
Astro-turf

What a weird request :crazy

Marbh

07-27-04, 11:39 AM

Wow. You found a lot of editorials trashing bush.

Big friggin deal.

Wasn't a trashing of Bush as much as showing that Kerry isn't the only one to change his mind after thinking more on it. I'm the one who doesn't trust any politician remember? Relax.

notwen

07-27-04, 11:46 AM

A few months back I gave the opinion that this election was going to come down to Bush vs. Not-Bush. I was criticized for that. Then I see this thread, and this very morning there's an article on the front page of the local paper all about Kerry's platform of being not Bush.

I chuckle. :)

Vindicor

07-27-04, 11:50 AM

Platform Consists of:
Wood
Did someone say "wood?"

http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v298/mgolden510/gladepics/kerrybeard.jpg

Yes, I was bored. :p

Meddik

07-27-04, 11:56 AM

That's great! its a shame that all the political junkies and the LOTR junkies I knoiw don't overlap.

Nocte

07-27-04, 12:25 PM

the front page of the local paper all about Kerry's platform of being not Bush.

I hereby dub Kerry forevermore as the Brazilian!

Emrys

07-27-04, 12:44 PM

The voting record tells you how they really have acted once they were elected. Actions speak much louder than words.

Well, seeing as how Bush doesn't have a voting record, I can't exactly examine his. However, I can look at his decisions over the last 4 years, and, that's all I need to know not to vote for him.

Besides, Bush has flip flopped on many, many issues himself.

There are probably a lot of duplicates there, and yeah, the sites are biased, but flip-flops are flip-flops. You can't argue with Bush's own words.

http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=42263
http://www.democrats.org/specialreports/top10_flipflops/

Thing is, you look at Kerry's voting record and see thing you don't like. I look at it and see things I do like. You say Kerry flip flops. I say Bush flip flops. At some point everyone here is going to have to realize that both candidates' poop stinks.