Subject:
|
Re: Couple of interesting screeds from a site I just found
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 8 Mar 2004 21:02:36 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
226 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
|
| |
| |
At the very least, those true
Conservatives might simply withhold their votes for Dubya, even if they
don’t vote against him.
|
This sounds reasonable, though, in my mind, not advisable. Change is best
inacted from within, not by pouting on the out.
|
Surely, but it’s human nature to pout (in some fashion, or to some degree) when
one really doesn’t get one’s way. For example, it’s been suggested that blacks
in Florida might be less eager to vote in 2004 after they were (or perceived
themselves to have been) denied of fair voting access in 2000. Similarly, if
Conservatives feel they’ve been betrayed by the man they voted for in preference
to Gore, those same Conservatives might not vote for Dubya again.
Granted, in the immediate term this can amount to autodenasalation, but if one
takes the long view, it can be seen as a way to goad one’s party toward a
certain course. In this regard, I must admit, Conservatives have been generally
better at working toward longterm goals than Liberals have been. 8^(
| |
Again, I would say that conservatives should be careful what they wish for;
Kerry happens to be the most liberal senator in our senate.
|
Is that true? I would have thought Kucinich to be more Liberal than Kerry, or
even Ted Kennedy, though I haven’t reviewed their voting records. Anyway, you
know I don’t have a problem with putting a Liberal into office!
Dave!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
6 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
