WHY I CAN’T VOTE FOR BUSH — Conscientious Objector, by Robert A. George. This article explains it best, at least according to my thoughts.

Am I jumping ship? Damn right I am. Jumping from a ship that has been hijacked by neocons and evangelicals.

The issue with Rehnquist also tipped my decision. I’d rather have Kerry appointing our next Supreme Court judges. If Rehnquist dies, that could leave Bush appointing the next Chief Justice and I would not like seeing someone like Scalia in that position.

I think a Kerry victory will better position the Republicans for a victory in 2008. Notice the bounce after the Republican convention, versus the no bounce from the Democratic convention. Republicans did a better job of appealing to the middle. If this hijacked ship crashes with Bush at the helm, it will be easier to rebuild a better ship, a better party.

I don’t believe Kerry will be a great president. Far from it. I think the president he will be most similar to is Jimmy Carter.

Plus, with all that’s going on, Kerry is trapped by these circumstances. I don’t think he’ll be able to keep all these promises, especially when he said he wouldn’t raise taxes. How’s everything going to get paid for when the baby boomers start getting their social security?

Kerry’s plan for Iraq isn’t all too different from Bush’s plan. I mean, France and Germany already said they wouldn’t send any troops. Kerry’s not going to be able to build a giant coalition. But the echo plan is a reason to vote for Kerry! It provides reassurance for me, at least, that we won’t simply abandon Iraq. You can get the Bush plan without the Bush. However, he will be bogged down by the situation in Iraq. In a way, I feel sorry for him and this mess he could inherit. Kerry won’t bring anything grand to the table, but at least it’ll be a fresh start, and maybe there’ll finally be some accountability.

Speaking of accountability:

How come after 9/11, no one got fired?

How come after Abu Ghraib, no one got fired?

How come after the intelligence failure in Iraq, no one got fired?

President Bush, I thank you for what you’ve done (after all, I respect the office of the presidency), but… “You’re fired.”

I don’t have time to write now, but tomorrow I’ll officially decide who I would vote for if I wasn’t too young to vote.

People have been saying that in the third debate, Kerry’s mentioning that Dick Cheney’s daughter is gay was an underhanded and dirty political trick to manipulate the Republican base.

Well, so what if it’s dirty… because it worked. I’m telling everyone I can to vote for John Kerry now. How can a president protect us from the evils of homosexuality and secularism (a threat greater than Islamofascism), if his own vice president has a gay daughter? I just don’t feel safe with a president who allows his vice president to have a gay daughter. Don’t vote for Bush.

DISCLAIMER: If you don’t know me too well, you might not know that this is a joke. So, I’m telling you that it is a joke, and I don’t care if it offends you.

Is it November 2nd yet?

No?

*goes back to hiding in hole*

I’m going to have fun and list reasons why I don’t like Kerry tomorrow, and then reasons why I don’t like Bush the day after. I’m taking a rest today.

I listened to a little bit of it on radio and realized that it was all garbage because neither of them is going to cut the deficit in half in four to five years, those liars.

I taped it, but I’m 99% sure I won’t be watching that tape.

Bush made a crucial error in last Friday’s debate in referencing the Dred Scott case. With the election so close, no candidate can afford to alienate any constituency, and President Bush has done just that.

By saying he won’t put anyone on the Supreme Court who supports Dred Scott, he has alienated the White Supremacist/Slave-owning vote. With every group so important in this polarized nation, this move could cost him Florida and other crucial swing states.

When queried about this, Bush said, “Sometimes, as president, you have to make decisions that aren’t popular.”

Unpopular, indeed. One white supremacist commented, “I want a president who won’t appoint any nigger-lovers to the Supreme Court, goddamnit. White power!”

Will it cost him the election? Only time, and the ballot box, will tell.

The second debate was the same as the first one, only the candidates were meaner… oops, I mean, more lively and stronger in their convictions.

The debate definitely goes to Bush if you consider The Lie Factor. When I came away from the second debate, I was completely convinced that Kerry had said the world was not safer without Saddam Hussein. Only, at the first debate, Bush said, “[Kerry] also said in December of 2003 that anyone who doubts that the world is safer without Saddam Hussein does not have the judgment to be president.” The final flip flop?

Kerry’s money quote: “The world is more dangerous today. The world is more dangerous today because the president didn’t make the right judgments.”

But I was so convinced that Kerry said the world was safer without Saddam that I was searching the second debate transcript for a direct quote for something to that effect. Not a roundabout allusion, but a direct quote.

Was it the association effect? The same thing the administration did with 9/11 and Saddam, not directly stating they were connected, but associating the two? Or was it just me?

Miscellaneous election comment

I still hate the “we have a plan” line. Why? Because I tried reading their “Our Plan for America” and couldn’t get through it. I think there was a plan in there somewhere, but I got sick of reading we have a plan over and over again. I wanted the meat right away. It’s just that I think if Kerry wins, when the next elections roll around, Kerry’ll still be saying, “we have a plan…”

The problem with judging debates is that since the nation is so polarized, we have developed a rather acute case of selective hearing.

However, that’s not the biggest problem with judging debates: it’s the multiple levels of judging. You gotta look good. You gotta speak good. You gotta attack on just the right level, not to harsh, not too soft. If you win, but don’t win enough, you lose according to some people. If you do better, but appeal to the wrong demographic, you lose. You gotta be consistent. You gotta say not the same thing over and over. You gotta convince the pundits after the debate is over.

TOO MUCH INFORMATION! IT’S TOO MUCH TO BE USEFUL! There’s so many subjective levels that you can’t get an objective reading.

Luckily, I’m here to simplify it for you.

I present to you, my simple test, which I like to call “The Lie Factor.”

It is as such: Whoever told the most convincing lies is the winner.

Note: I use the word “most” both in the sense of quality and quantity.

The brilliance of the lie factor is that you can do further analysis, and judge on the spot at the same time. You see who convinced you the most, and then it can be confirmed by the lie count. The common people, and the pundits can be happy.

Presidents are human and therefore fallible. However, we cannot let a leader be so. It is American nature to deify our heroes. Thus, whoever can convince us that he is invincible is the most invincible! Whoever can best mislead you is the most qualified to lead this country! You will feel safer, more placated, and happier. America is never wrong!

I took notes of some things that caught my ear as I was going along… [note, these are definitely edited from their original form, but the gists are the same]

• Cheney sounded good when I first walked in, but I missed the question
• Edwards can pronounce “Colin Powell” correctly
• Cheney said Edwards said Afghanistan was falling about earlier, but they’re about to hold elections now… what’s the real state of Afghanistan?
• Cheney mentions women in Afghanistan, good
• “the reality is” — Edwards keeps saying that over and over
• Hm… I’d rather have these guys running for president than vice president
• “more of the same” Edwards says it as an aside when mentioning the plan for Iraq, not as effective since it was an aside
• Edwards taking security forces out of Iraq to train them, good specifics
• Cheney says Edwards is not counting Iraqi sacrifices… even though Edwards was making a valid point about one thing, I thought Cheney’s line hit hard
• Edwards mentions Halliburton and Enron, slick association
• Cheney says FactCheck.com… it’s FactCheck.org… I should know, it’s a link on the side. Too bad the average person listening doesn’t know Cheney has cut Halliburton ties since becoming vice president (Yes, I do know that Edwards was also mentioning stuff when Cheney was CEO)
• Cheney’s “First time I met you” line… OUCH! (Too bad it turned out to be a lie)
• Cheney says removing the tax cuts would hurt small businesses, appealing line (too bad he had inflated figures)
• Cheney did not do well at all answering the Marriage Amendment question… does he disagree with Bush?
• I was most impressed with Edwards when mentioning the lawsuit reform, etc, because he said “we have a plan” and then actually went into specifics!!! I like the 3 strikes thing!
• Edwards says the best defense is a good offense — totally yoinked Bush’s war on terror line
• Edwards was prepared as hell for that flip flop question. He was waiting for something like that.
• Good closing statements, lost me with “we have a plan” then back on track with “you get to decide”
• I really really really hate the “we have a plan” line. Don’t say, “we have a plan,” tell us, “we will”
• Cheney’s closing statements emphasized the homeland security/war on terror angle, very good
• Cheney didn’t thank Edwards. What the hell? I think it was intentional.

About Saletan’s article on how Edwards destroyed Cheney:

“Cheney seemed to think most viewers were tuning in to judge the vice presidential nominees. Edwards seemed to think they were tuning in to hear about the presidential nominees. [new paragraph] If Cheney guessed right on that question, he probably won.”

We are not in 100% disagreement. I watched the debates to judge the vice presidential nominees, and I thought Cheney won. I agree with Cheney that the most important thing about a vice president is that he could take the reigns in a moment’s notice. So what? Am I watching the debates wrong now? I think the debate about the debate is getting out of hand. Tune in tomorrow for the discussion (discussion, what the hell am I talking about, I mean: post) on that exciting topic!

[5:40] I put “watching” within quotation marks because I do more listening than actual watching. Maybe that’s why I scored the debate the same for the presidential candidates… I didn’t notice Bush supposedly looking irritated and the like. (Note: Supposedly, the networks weren’t supposed to show the reactions of the candidates, but I guess they went against their agreement.)

[7:50] Watched the debates, took notes. Will add more later. Maybe not even until tomorrow. I think I might score this debate as slightly favoring Cheney, but I wasn’t able to think completely objectively, so I can’t say.

When they first brought up the warning lights thing, with the yellow and red lights, I almost laughed aloud. I imagined a gameshow type environment. After the lights went red, the room went black. “I’m sorry Mr. [Bush or Kerry], you have been eliminated.”

Also thinking about Kerry’s position on Iraq, and I think he’s still sending “mixed messages.” He says Saddam was a threat. But then, he also says the war’s a diversion and the wrong war at the wrong time. So is Saddam really a threat, or not? Kerry’s answer is yes. He’s such a threat that we should’ve slapped another resolution on him.

[1:30PM] EDIT: John Kerry plugged his website, JohnKerry.com, during the debate. Milestone. Remember way back when, when companies didn’t even have websites? Now, every company has one. The influence of the web is growing. Is this the first time a website has been mentioned during a presidential debate? I have no idea if any were mentioned, or not, during the 2000 debate.