I understand the argument (the "a vote for Nader is a vote for Bush."), and that some wish Bush out at any cost. I just don't agree with this method. The whole point of our system is based around free choice.
My counter argument to the N-K-B argument is that if K (and his party) had actually done more to mollify the N-supporters, N wouldn't feel the need to run. Without N, or any other candidate, there is no impetus for K and his party to change. Buchanan did the same thing to the Republican party some years ago.
Kerry is quoted as saying, in answer to a question by Nader on energy policy, "Wait and see when I become president." That kind of rhetoric (by Kerry) is exactly what scares me about him.
Regarding the silent vote process: My hat goes off to your mom! The reasoning behind not revealing your vote is exactly why the ballots are anonymous. One should never feel pressure to vote because of peer pressure; the act of voting should be of one's own mind-- one of the few times in our lives we have that privilege.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-06-26 01:13 am (UTC)My counter argument to the N-K-B argument is that if K (and his party) had actually done more to mollify the N-supporters, N wouldn't feel the need to run. Without N, or any other candidate, there is no impetus for K and his party to change. Buchanan did the same thing to the Republican party some years ago.
Kerry is quoted as saying, in answer to a question by Nader on energy policy, "Wait and see when I become president." That kind of rhetoric (by Kerry) is exactly what scares me about him.
Regarding the silent vote process: My hat goes off to your mom! The reasoning behind not revealing your vote is exactly why the ballots are anonymous. One should never feel pressure to vote because of peer pressure; the act of voting should be of one's own mind-- one of the few times in our lives we have that privilege.