|
|
I wish that people who do not spend time learning about the issues or who do simply do not care about the issues would not vote at all. Voting on the odd numbers, on the names that are the silliest to you, or on the propositions that are even numbers or vowels may look cute to you. But to the people on whom these issues may have a devastating effect, it is not cute at all.
The only thing I hate more than apathy is laziness, especially when it comes at the expense of others. rebecca my sister called me at 7.30, while i was watching the abc coverage on the futuristic space sets. peter jennings was licking his lips, getting ready to christen bill clinton as the winner. i was pretty apathetic. she was giddy. "i helped elect the winner," she said. this was her first election -- she's a freshman at brandeis. "oh, that's nice," i replied. four years ago, i was in her exact position -- eager over the clinton victory, bewildered that my mother had actually voted democrat. (i'm guessing she didn't tell my sister who she voted for in '92 because she wanted to keep my sister's young mind free of left-leaning thoughts.) and as my sister reveled in the democratic process and sam donaldson gave results from a space bridge, i wondered if i was ever going to start caring.
maura johnston {starla@echonyc.com} I voted. I think that the only way to develop and work for real change - to empower ourselves - is to excercise that right. I knew Clinton would get re-elected. Every time Dole opened his mouth he went down in the poles. Clinton knew that too, and he still went the mile and tried to get a few more votes. I respect that. As our first slacker president, he didn't slack on this one. I believe that Bill needs a second term to accomplish anything, really. This is simply the way that our political situation is in this country. Let's not play dumb - we know that. For everyone that complains that Bill didn't accomplish this or that, think about his job for a second. Though many of us my consider ourselves liberal on a number of issues, there are alot of conservatives out there as well (Bob Dole did get some votes). He (Clinton) is often critisized for be a president of compromises. I don't see what's so horrible about that. Hell, I'd love to see more liberal politics. But I don't think we can expect it to start at the top. I voted for Ralph Nader. Why, after all I said about Slick Willie? Because, since I knew he would definately win, I thought it more important to show a vote supporting a third party in hopes that in years to come, more people will feel brave enough to do so as well, and we can begin to work away from the two-party system. A friend asked me, what if your vote caused Bill to lose? Hey, I said, if that were the case, and the voting for 3rd party candidates was that high, how could I complain. Americans would have spoken. I will no longer worry more about who I don't want than who I do want. Yay for us. We voted. We have the right to bitch.
Rich {puffdragon@earthlink.net} It's important for all of us to realize the signifigance of yesterdays decision. Its not about who won or who lost. The problem is with the turnout. Until we realize our vote when combined with all others like us matter, how can we expect to elect or even nominate a person we believe can make the difference. Maybe, the President is not the best suited candidate, but to those I ask, Who's resume qualifies." Those who wonder how he made it from Arkansas need to look at his base of supporters. These voters made a difference. It's time for us to support those we want in office.
c kleinberg {charlesk@msfi.com} I voted for Bob Dole,as he was a better choice. I fear all you folks that voted for Slick Willie are in for a shock.The bridge to the new century is going to be a TOLL BRIDGE!!!!!! Enjoy you earned it.Thanks to all who voted for Congress ! One of the 24 million who voted for Goldwater in 1964, and is proud of it. A Korean Vet the truth of the matter: whoever has risen up the food chain far enough to be a presidential candidate (as declared by the media) is going to have accumulated some scumminess along the way. the same goes for people who have built majillions dollars empires. voted for Bill. too bad any action is going to have to be watered down to make it through congress.
rs {rs@sigma6.com} You bet I voted. Sadly, I voted for Billy. As a gay man WITH a family, I found his support of the Destruction of Marriage Act unacceptable. After all, he unabashed signed legislation AGAINST my family, and told my son that he does not actually have a family.... So, at first thought, I knew that I definitely was not voting for Dole, the Cadaver. After all, he would have died in office, leaving Kemp as the Prez...and just who OWNS Kemp? Do we know? My guess is the Kristian Koalition of ameriKa...but it's just a guess. Then, I considered Ross. As a third, he was great in 92, but he weirded out and stayed that way. But I still thought about it. After all, knowing that Billy-boy would win anyway, I figured it would make a great protest vote. Then I started thinking about the religious extremist nutcases, Ralphie and Patti's poison-apple voting "guides," and the fear that if enough people DO protest vote, Raphie's brainwashed followers just might slip the Koalition's puppets into place! That was just too scary to contemplate, so I voted for Billy. On the other hand, I voted AGAINST everyone else who supported the "DESTRUCTION of Marriage Act." They all voted wrong and deserved to be ousted. I hope it worked, but I don't plan to hold my breath. I voted Green. For the first time I actually felt pretty good about my vote, and that yeah, I was making a difference. There is more out there than just tweedle-dee and tweedle-dum. Of course, the drawback is that you really have to dig to find out how many votes Nader actually got, but that's not really the point. At least I didn't vote for something I don't believe in (Clinton's DOMA turnaround was ridiculous).
Kodiak {kodiak@mailmasher.com} I voted Perot. I wanted a third party candidate to get some national coverage. I agree with Taylor that the two party system stinks. I also very much agree with Steve Silberman that Clinton is a joke on his social issues. Geez, the ones he has hosed are the ones which cost NOTHING to the government to change (ie. same sex marriages). Well, I was equally unhappy with Clinton the first time around since I believed and continue to believe he has no opinions that he stands by. I lived in Italy for a while while he has been president and I was embarrassed for some of his actions, especially regarding Yugoslavia. Overseas it is blindingly obvious when the president is fucking up because foreign papers don't give him the "soft focus lens" of the U.S. media. Bleck! I'm moving off the planet.
man named Pants {pants@hooked.net} I voted yesterday (bowing) thank you very much. I took the easy way out and voted the straignt ticket (Dem, of course). Was not terribly thrilled with the election this time around (whereas Clinton knocked me on my ass in '92). I had even contemplated starting an ABC (Anyone But Clinton) Committee about two years ago just for fun, but realized that no party has ever dumped their incumbent, regardless how unpopular and destined for defeat that incumbent might be (slight nudge to Herbert Hoover). I agree with Taylor and the others who voiced their disdain for our two-party system (or, perhaps more accurately, for our two parties) and wonder what would happen if a third (and/or fourth) party gained seats in Congress. While I love the parlimentary debates I see on C-Span sometimes from Britain and think it would be great if our Prez had to defend his administration's actions DAILY in front of Congress, I hate the weakness and chaos that ensues from "coalition governments" (obvious reference to Italy). I work at a hotel and was a server at the victory party last night held by the state Democratic Party. Beshear, their candidate for Senator, lost to the arrogant Repugn-ican, McConnell. Still, they seemed pretty happy, even though almost the entire congressional delegation from Kentucky is Republican now (except for Senator Ford, and Baessler in the House). That has not happened since Reconstruction, and I, for one, am disappointed that this can occur in a state where Dems outnumber Repubs by a two-to-one margin. Oh well, the next election is only two years away. (
patrick {thomp@pop.uky.edu} I voted for clinton even though I knew he didn't stand a chance in my home state o' utah. I'm really pissed that helms won again here in north caroline. I've gone from one state of embaressment to another. I feel sorry for buddy bob though. He was a good senate majority leader. Just imagine what gingrinch and his contract on american would have done if someone more ammenable had been in the senate. Next time I'm voting green.
AB {am2739@student.law.duke.edu} Yeah I voted. For Bill. Or against Dole. Or whatever. So pathetic that it comes down to this... But I honestly do not know if America can handle six parties on the ballot. I would have preferred to vote for the Socialist Workers Party, or the Greens. Winner take all, as Monopoly-board capitalist as it is, is not a true democracy. It is NOT actual representation. Yeah, we would have the Buchanans and Christian wackos, but also maybe even the Wobblies would come on back. Besides, if it didn't work out, hell, we might just have a revolution. Isn't that what democracy is all about?
sameet {skumar@umiami.ir.miami.edu} Election?
Michael {mikew@planetmac.com} Since I'm Canaidian, I couldn't vote in the election. What makes me sad and a little bit mad is that I already know more about the American candidates than I know about my own politics. I guess it can't be helped, but sometimes I get a little concerned about the Americanization of the media these days. Announcing your Olympic winners during another atheletes race? C'mon, how do you think it makes them feel? Sometimes I wish that Canada was situated just a little bit further away from the spotlight of all the attention. Oh well, at least we don't have OJ.
Kris {Mckinnon@gulfislands.com} I voted for Harry Browne, libertarian, because I believe that he is right. We need to take control of our own destinies, and whether one believes it or not we are empowered from within to be whatever it is we can or want to be. We should help each other out, not by government mandate, but by the essence of who we, as a people, could be. There are issues in which the gov. can be useful, but these issues are often abandoned for "hot-button" issues that appeal to the masses (abortion, for one). We, as Americans should have the right to choose our pursuits in life so long as we don't infringe upon another's rights. We have the best foundation for gov. as it should be, but we have been squandering it and lying to ourselves for GENERATIONS. We cannot blame the politicians, for we, the people, put them there. If you really want to make a difference, then educate yourself first, and then our friends. We, the common people must form a bond so strong it will last for generations. It can be done, but requires sacrifice (not government imposed). Peace Be With You
Just James I want a President that I can trust and believe at least 50% of the time. I want a President that can set an example of decency, honesty and morality for our citizens and our youth. I want a President that when I hear him this morning take a stand on an issue I know he'll be at the same spot this evening. I want a President that values his country and his closest associates at least as much as he does himself. I want a President that can make the really tough decisions without doing a 180 the next day and in the process admiting he wasn't really that comfortable with his flawed decision of 24 hours earlier. I didn't get what I wanted yesterday. I voted for Bob Dole. Bill Clinton isn't a lame duck President--he's a sitting duck.
Cyberia I voted for Clinton and I'm bummmed at how narrowly focused so many people are. I think 3rd party candidates will be the death of our system. The man needed a mandate. Sure Ralph Nader is a good guy, with lots of neat ideas. But face it: he is not a leader of a nation. He is a persident. Same with Perot. A futile vote is a wasted vote. Period. Clinton needed a mandate and he didn't get it. How selfish of so many people on this list to rebel and force thier own agenda. There is a bigger picture out there. Now Clinton's hands are tied. He will have a weak second term. All because people think our two-party system is dead. It isn't. People simply don't understand politics.
Charles VanDeventer {cvandeventer@mail.farago.com} I read the preceding experiences, and I couldn't help but chuckle at all the people who said basically "I was so enthusiastic when I voted for him in '92; I believed in him and I thought he could make a difference..." Ha. All I can say to them is "He fooled you." The only thing Bill Clinton believes in is Bill Clinton. It started with dodging the draft and goes all the way through Whitewater to the Indonesian campaign contributions. Presidents are hired and fired solely on the basis of the economy. Who, in March of 1991, thought that George Bush wasn't going to be re-elected? Well, along comes a dip in the economy, and faster than you can say 'read my lips,' we got Boy Clinton. Who, in January of 1995, thought that Clinton was going to be re-elected? Well, he swerves into a weak recovery (Alan Greenspan, your check is in the mail) and now here we are facing four more years of Slick Willie. What happens next? Hint: get used to saying 'President Gore'--before the 2000 election. My cynical side is ecstatic that the Republicans maintained control of Congress. This guarantees gridlock, which means that nothing of consequence will get done. So much the better. Me? I split about 50-50 between Republicans and Libertarians, with a couple of local Dems on the side. Oh, ye 49.9% . . . ye suckers.
Chris {cwc@pseserv2.fw.hac.com} I voted absentee ballot and when I sat down to fill my ballot out (very much at the last minute), I apathetically opened it up. To my amazement I found that there were MORE than three candidates! I refuse to vote for someone that want's to force their religious and social values on everyone else, let alone take away rights that have been hard won because it wasn't "specifically" written in the constitution (ie. sufferage and abortion). There went Dole's eligibility (even though a registered republican). I refuse to support or waste my vote on someone who might have a temper tantrum in the middle confrontations or negotiations with a nuclear capable nation. There went Perot's eligibility (even though his platform is right on he's still used to being in total control, having absolute authority, and puting all the income in his own bank account). My reluctance to sit down and put my decisions into final form came from not having any other choice but to vote for Clinton, someone I see as a "pretty boy" that has been ingrained with the premise that if he says what you want to hear - smiles at you coyly - plays at being "hip" to all of societies most progressive or traditional values, he can go right ahead and achieve whatever is in his own best interest as soon as he walks away or closes the door. He's already disappointed us for four years and now I have to vote for him to disappoint us for another four! Suddenly, on the ballot I saw the secret campaign of Ralph Nadar. That's almost all it took to cast my ballot. I did do a little research to make sure he didn't oppose any of my near and dear issues, didn't find any glaring detractors, and made my statement for political reforms. I was pleasantly supprised this morning to see that Dole lost by such a wide margin but I still can't believe that no election briefs even mention anyone but the "big three"! Oh, well why should I be suprised. It's only our "big three" television stations doing the reporting! I did not vote. I feel terribly guilty. I go through this every four years. I never paid my bills on time either until wells fargo came online with "bill pay". Maybe next election, I can vote online.
David Hyman {davidh@addict.com} |
|
