[ politics Category ]
October 24, 2004

Seeing red, feeling blue

Okay, someone, anyone, everyone: what is UP with this and this?

I'm truly confused at how Gore won Hawaii by almost 18 points in 2000, yet according to a Ward poll, Bush has a slight (within the margin of error) led over Kerry here. Next someone's going to tell me Mike Gabbard leads Ed Case.

An especially disturbing bit is at the end of The Advertiser poll, where, on issues of national security (thought to be Bush's strongest area), the majority of people here believe:


So sure, let's re-elect the guy who lied about going to war, made us less safe by doing so, is costing hundreds of troops' lives as they are kept there for increasingly long periods of time, and will likely subject all of us (or our children) to a draft. Not to mention the destructive environmental, social, and economic policies that have been instituted in the past four years.

Please examine the candidates' positions on the issues, and then vote. Polls are open now through Saturday for early/absentee voting as well as on November 2. Information is available at the State Office of Elections.

And don't vote electronic.

I'm sure my position is abundantly clear- if you think things can get worse, vote for Bush; if you think things can get better, vote for Kerry. I am completely open to rational discussion/debate on this provided we don't forget the aloha. But mainly I'm trying to understand what's happened to cause such a shift in a relatively short period of time.

Posted by windwardskies at October 24, 2004 11:06 PM

Comments

 
Posted by kane on October 25, 2004 7:37 PM:

Lisa, while the polls are closer than I would like, I'm confident that Kerry will pull out a victory in the islands.

I certainly could be wrong, but I attribute the closeness in the polls to name recognition, where an incumbent always has an edge, and to our infamous desire in the islands to avoid making waves.

I believe when the time comes, Hawai'i will make the right choice and vote for John Kerry.

 
Posted by RON on October 25, 2004 11:12 PM:

Kerry as a replacement for Bush? Simply because you feel that Bush, as the incumbent, does not deserve a second term? And I agree that not too many voters can honestly feel that Bush, evaluated on his track record, deserves a CEO bonus of four more years. Thus Kerry wins the Presidency by forfeit. This is not the best kind of position for voters to have to deal with for such an important office. I have never before voted for a Republican for President. Ever. Although I have voted for Republicans in Hawaii based solely on which candidate was the best person for the particular office despite their political party afiliation. Nationally, though, it's been all Democrats for me. But I still would vote for Bush, a Republican, over Kerry. Up to now, that is. Today, I have absolutely no idea who to actually vote for. However, to me personally, voting for Kerry still remains a choice tantamount to letting a huckster sell you snake oil. Almost equivalent to...I have a friend named Ralph...so I might as well vote for Ralph Nader. I still feel Al Gore would have been elected over Bush, if Gore had run for President in this year's election.

On the other side of the coin, there are some Republican loyalists out there who when cornered with the WMD question, will simply react by shrugging their shoulders and slapping their cabasas and act as if WMD was an irrelevant minutiae in the overall scheme to invade Iraq. As if the authenticity of the reasons for invading another country's sovereignty was not and is not a big thing. The same Republican cult will also leap on the pulpit and justify the invasion of Iraq by chastising critics of the Administration for overlooking that Iraqis are so much better off as we speak with Saddam removed from power. And by extension, because of Bush's decision to intervene there. As Martha Stewart use to put it, albeit, in better days, "it's a good thing." My okolele. Or that Iraqi Freedom gave the American citizens a windfall opportunity to be treated to an exhibition of their country's awesome military firepower, and the invigorating adrenaline rush in lieu of truth, cancels out the odious debt of the false reasons that the Administration used to launch the war in the first place. Well the party's over. It's now the clean-up stage and there's a really big pile of garbage to clean up. Any Republican volunteers out there? Bet not.

Iraq is a country that the British jury-rigged together for political if not economic expediency under the doctrine that we know today as a country's national interests. This took place just after WWI. Relatively recently. Therefore, Iraq is more accurately categorized as an artificial nation. A never-to-be nation, is not too much of a stretch. Before the Brits hastily stitched the Iraqi patchwork together, Kurdistan, the Sunnis and the Shiites lived in different housing projects away from one another. Now the U.S. instead of striving to return the ethnic crabs in the same bucket to their old borders continues to blindly treat the dysfunctional aggregate as if the magic potion of democracy will bring permanent stabilization and homogenize national unity to the point that Iraqis will cease throwing camel dung at each other. Good luck. And fuck Iraq.

On top of not having a conscionable choice of which candidate to vote for President this election, you simply can't tell how your choice for President will work out to your benefit, or to what degree, their future policies will continue to pay tribute to your brand of political philosophy once the next President takes office. The dynamics of the checks-and-balances of a legislative/executive branch system, does not always materialize bills with the most satisfying results. At least, I've been personally disappointed on several occasions. So even when a Bush or Kerry espouses a plank that's consistent with your own views...there's no way of predicting for certain how its ebodiment will turn out when the product comes out through the other end of the Capitol Hill mill. It's equivalent to patting a dog (a voter) and observing which actions cause the dog to wag his tail with vigor. Or even which candidate can make the tail wag the dog. If you lobby or bark or whine or growl enough to get more recognition, you never know, your choice for President might even rub your tummy to keep you happy.

 
Posted by Mr. Wendell on October 25, 2004 11:32 PM:

windwardskies: You know, you could always volunteer to help with the Kerry campaign. I did.

 
Posted by JJ on October 26, 2004 11:40 PM:

I'm willing to look past all the lies, mismanagement and problems that the Bush administration has created over the last 4 years. Hey, all politicians do the same to a degree right? The reason I'm not voting for Bush is because he's stupid. I mean this seriously.

 
Posted by Mitchell on October 27, 2004 3:27 PM:

Two things:

First, here's my annual plea to reconsider voting for the Libertarian candidate, Michael Badnarik. You aren't limited to two candidates everyone seems to agree are flawed. There's a candidate out there who, since he knows he won't win, is free not to compromise or to speak out of both sides of his mouth. Yes, a vote for Badnarik perhaps affects negatively the outcome of the election, but we're talking about ideals here.

Second: I would take heart if I were a Kerry supporter. Undecideds usually vote for the challenger, and that's 10% of the electorate.

 
Posted by RON on October 27, 2004 5:27 PM:

There's so much confusion out there,
No one to support my politics,
Said the voters to the chiefs,
Two riders were approaching,
And the wind begins to howl.

Well...maybe not that ominous. You didn't get any of it? Darn it. However, Asymmetrical Information has some worthwhile highlights of a Badnarik interview on her Oct. 25th post. You might also want to check this out which might however be a Libertarian website.

 
Posted by Charles on October 29, 2004 8:25 PM:

Hawaii went for Reagan in his second term, and Nixon in his, but neither in their first term. It appears that Hawaii voters strongly favor incumbents no matter which party they're in. Why would that be?

 
Posted by JJ on November 2, 2004 1:24 AM:

Did I mention that Bush is stupid?

 
Posted by Mr. Wendell on November 2, 2004 1:52 AM:

I saw the most amazing thing tonight. Check it out in my blog --> http://www.burningroad.com/

 
Posted by Ryan on November 2, 2004 2:12 PM:

You can use HTML in your comments, Wendell, we trust you!

Clinging desperately to the early exit poll numbers, here's my blog post that will undoubtedly jinx things from here on out.

And since I worked so hard on it, here's a forum post I put together reviewing some of the silly superstitions people have when they try to predict how the vote will go. From football to the height of the candidates themselves, it's all fun and games... but it always comes down to the polls.

 
Posted by Lynn on November 5, 2004 1:24 PM:

Ok,it's past the elections and Bush/Cheney has another four years. As a mother of three soldiers, two who were in Iraq the same time and one depolying next week (less than a year from coming home),my choice for the PRESIDENTAL ELECTIONS was BUSH.True,there was no WMDS FOUND AND NO CONNECTION TO THE 9/11 BOMBINGS. However,talking with my children and hearing what they have seen with their own eyes,putting their lives 24/7 in the fight against TERRORISM was enough for me.Yes,I voted for their COMMANDER IN CHIEF,PERIOD.Terrorism is real and it will get worse.Our men and women in the Armed Services volunteer to serve, they know the risks.I stand proud of my own children re-enlisting agian in these troubled times.They are not stupid...and neither is our PRESIDENT!They continue to serve our NATION,so that we can live the AMERICAN WAY.Yes,we have FREEDOM OF SPEECH as well as other rights.I could just imagine what would happen if someone publicly said their PRESIDENT was STUPID!Auwe, better yet...OUCH!Whatever any individual believes or says,I respect them...it is their right as AMERICANS! If perhaps someday, TERRORISM does come to our shores...I bet those who uttered negative comments will be the first to ask for help/protection from the wrath/evil in which TERRORISM brings with vengence!GOD BLESS EVERYONE ACROSS OUR GREAT NATION,GOD BLESS THOSE WHO STILL NEED TO SEE THE TRUTH!

 
Posted by Ryan on November 5, 2004 7:46 PM:

You should be proud of your sons, and I admire, appreciate, and have great respect for our armed forces and our sons and daughters serving overseas. But it is possible to support our troops, and yet disagree strongly with the "leadership" and policies that led them to where they are.

I disagreed with the decision to invade Iraq, but you bet your sweet bippy most of us are now united in wanting to see their mission succeed now that they're there. Giving up on the mess now would mean nothing but an even bigger mess further down the line.

As for the president, I personally think he's not the brightest bulb on the tree. Okay, I think he's wrong for the job, period. But, as it turns out, I'm in the minority. As I can enjoy the (perhaps threatened) freedoms of living in a democracy, I must also be resigned to the fact that I'll sometimes find myself on the losing side of an election. I'm disappointed in "the people," but "the people" have spoken, and for better or worse, this is the world we're stuck with until 2008.

At least Bush will be gone for good then. Unless they do some messing with the constitution before then...

Post a Comment

Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?



« Introducing Our Daughter... | Crazy World »
[ HawaiiAnswers.com - You ask, Hawaii answers. ] [ HawaiiAnswers.com - Hawaii's first online news source. ] [ HawaiiAnswers.com - Let's talk story. ]
Main Page  ::  © 2002-2004 HawaiiStories  ::  E-Mail