I’m curious about the political make-up of our community. I know we have a lot of Deaniacs. I’m sure we have some Clarkists. A lot of Kerry supporters, like me, might be a little reluctant to admit it these days. What the hell? Take the poll, and tell us why you supported your guy, or gal, and why you fucking regret it…or don’t.
Update [2005-6-9 19:42:24 by BooMan]: Also, for newbies. It aids reading comprehension if you italicize your sig lines. You can do this by bracketing your sig with {i}place sig here{/i}. Use < instead of {. Thanks.
Clark would have been my second choice, but he was out before Dean.
I came to wholeheartedly support Kerry. I still think he would have been a great president, and I’m irritated at all the Kerry-slamming since the election. I think the fatal flaw was our lack of party structure, not his campaign. We should be organized enough to elect anyone – as the other side is and does.
I really liked his intelligence over the issues. This guy did not go after an issue by reading the newspapers, he actually spent times researching the issue, was open enough to realize the several approaches to an issue and then decide what coarse to take. I admire that in any leader, Kerry included. I also found myself changing my opinion despite the media’s loving guidance, of how I choose a president.
Don’t care how he looks, don’t care if he’s not the “best” speaker(body language,etc,.) and don’t care if he doesn’t like beer!
I thought Kerry was a solid, intelligent choice. I just wish he’d made some more noise about election fraud and verifying results.
As I told someone before the election, “We don’t need a perfect candidate, we need a perfect campaign.”
Fraud caused most of the loss- lets not forget that!
I have said before and I say again, I will support our nominee, whomever he or she may be.
That said, I am hoping for General Clark, perhaps because I believe he could take Texas and remake the red map blue.
I saw Senator Kerry here in Austin recently and felt energized by him. I am looking forward to hearing Governor Dean in two weeks at DemFest.
We have to all fight on the same team if we are ever going to prevail.
Yeah – the only reason I think Clark could win a red state is becuase maybe, just maybe (putting on flame suit) he is a Republican…..
Seriously, he’s a military guy who never did anything political or expoused any beliefs until he was “drafted” to run – and the people who loved him were the most serious ABB types – they were willing to take anyone who wasn’t Bush.
Anyways, I’m sure that I’ll be exiled from the group now, and my mojo will be perminently shot…..but I didn’t mean it personally – I just never got a solid sense from Wesley that he had a solid political philosophy – and I definitely caught a whif of opportunism in his declaring himself a “D” for his run.
Of course, maybe I’m just saying all this because I was a Dean staffer, and felt that Clark’s run could’ve been a serious problem for us…
Seriously, I’m usually much more constructive than this. Please be gentle…
I’d still vote for, and probably even work for, Clark if he had received the nomination.
Hell, I would’ve voted for any living breathing non-Bush entity in the last election if it would’ve made this nightmare end.
I liked Clark, but by the time California’s primary rolled around, he’d dropped out, so of course I voted for Kerry (and I agree with many posters that the guy has gotten a bad rap. Running for president has got to be one of the toughest processes out there, in terms of how it magnifies one’s flaws and distorts one’s strengths).
But I think Clark has a lot of heart and promise. Did anyone see his speech at the convention? He rocked! And I am not someone who goes for the whole flag and country speech, but I’ll tell you, he had me going.
My heart, however, still belongs to Big Al Gore, whose speeches over the last 2 1/2 years have been consistently brilliant and even heroic. I can’t think of a bigger tragedy for this country and for the world at large that he did not take his rightful place in the White House in 2000. Where would we be today if he had?
It breaks my heart, it really does.
I think Gore could have been one of the great presidents, one of those who led us through a time of vast and deep change that goes far beyond party politics. He seemed to understand (or at least be aware of) the larger movements in technology, demographics, environmental outlooks, cultural shifts, and world economic and political realities. There was a real chance, I think, that he could have started us on a REAL third way, fresh paths that leave the old dying highways behind.
That said, I don’t think we can just gloss over what a terrible campaign he ran (even though it was a winning one). Whether it was him, the DNC, DLC, bad advisors or what, he blew every chance he got to show Bush for what he is. I hope some great reporter comes along soon with the truth of what the hell happened. Or maybe Gore is just a victim of a political processs that automatically filters out anyone who can think and have real ideas.
are you very sure he was a republican? What is your evidence to that? I always thought he was an Independent. Just cuz he voted for republicans in the past doesnt make him a republican if he was independent, or at least that is what I think I heard him say.
I went and saw him three times speek in my state and I really liked what he was about. His wife was much more than ppl would even know too.
I want to say this to you tho, if he was a republican in the past and came over to our side, I have no problem with that. I am independent and I saw in him what I see in myself. BTW, if anyone can clean up the mess in Iraq, I think Gen. Clark just might be the one to do this. When one says they support the troops, I actually think he does…not like the ones we have in office today. Ilikes the way Dean came out and from the get go and roused the ppl in taking back America…which of course we must do..
Clark has taught economics as well. So he is just not military, I think he has some common sense…That is an important factor in my book. I have been in the military and I have seen ppl in leadership positions that have no common sense what-so-ever. That alone can be dangerous.
My only regret is that by the time March 2 came around, my vote for Wes was symbolic. That’s what I get for living in the electorally irrelevant state of New York. Screw ethanol.
Actually before Kucinich even announced his candidacy I read a comment he wrote in The Nation and I wrote him an email asking him to run for President. I think these words still speak for themselves.
This evening let us reflect on his challenge to America’s prosecution of a war in Vietnam as we ponder an America poised to once again use its destructive power against a nation of people already broken by war, by US sanctions, by an uncaring leader. America stands ready to accelerate the bombing over major cities in Iraq, to destroy lives, families, houses, buildings, water systems, electric systems, to light fires to force populations to move, to engage in house-to-house combat. All in the name of fighting terrorism. In the name of removing weapons of mass destruction.
…
Peace is a civil right, which makes other human rights possible. Peace is the precondition for our existence. Peace permits our continued existence.
“I speak as a citizen of the world,” Dr. King said, “for the world, as it stands aghast at the path we have taken. I speak as one who loves America, to the leaders of our nation: The great initiative in this war is ours, the initiative to stop it must be ours.”
Today the world is watching, once again, aghast at an America resolutely poised for war.
…
It is up to us to rally our countrymen and countrywomen to the cause of peace, for the sake of peace, and for the sake of the innocents and whatever innocence of our own we may rescue. For the sake of truth too.
No justification whatsoever exists for the United States, the United Nations or any institution whose existence celebrates justice or human unity to wage war against Iraq.
On September 12, 2001, a little more than twenty-four hours after the planes hit the World Trade Center, the Secretary of Defense, in a meeting at the White House, called for immediate strikes against Iraq. “Rumsfeld was raising the possibility that they could take advantage of the opportunity offered by the terrorist attacks to go after Saddam immediately” (source: Bush at War, Robert Woodward, pp. 49, paragraphs one and two).
In sixteen months since America was attacked, no credible evidence has been presented that Iraq perpetrated 9/11 or conspired in 9/11. Iraq was not responsible for the anthrax attack on our country. Nor does Iraq have missile-strike capability against the United States, usable weapons of mass destruction or the intention to use them against us.
It is more than strange that while no credible connection has been made between Iraq and 9/11, the Administration blocked efforts at an early official inquiry into 9/11, while beating the drums to attack Iraq.
…
To be sure, the dictator Saddam Hussein is an easy target, for murder of his own people. He was an easy target, too, years ago when supported by the United States, notwithstanding his cruelty.
When war is already in the hearts of those who lead this nation, because our leaders aspire to dominate oil markets, or expand arms trade or desire world empire, or to distract from failures domestically, what are the American people to do? Do we just sit and watch while the United States moves next to declare war against North Korea, or Iran?
In the spirit of Dr. King, we must reject this White House war mentality and the unfortunate energy policy which spawns it, or we are facing endless war over diminishing resources.
…
In his exploration of the philosophical underpinnings of America, in a work titled To Begin the World Anew, Bernard Bailyn writes of that long ago moment of democratic ferment which produced the world’s grandest experiment with democracy through “the recasting of the world of power, the reformation of the structure of public authority, of the accepted forms of governance, obedience, and resistance, in practice as well as in theory.”
Such was the creativity of our Founders. They used the creative energy of their hearts and spirits to change the world. Why has our creativity turned destructive? We need no longer be destructive with war. It is time to be creative in peace.
…
Any Body But Bush
I started favoring Gephardt but he fell by the wayside early on. Then I was for Dean (but not a Deaniac, per se). Finally stood behind our guy Kerry, but was not personally enthusiastic. I think he tried too hard to counter Bush’s “war on terror” approval ratings on the same turf. Maybe didn’t have much choice then. Too bad the country didn’t know and recognize then what it is beginning to see now.
I was in your boat too…ABB person. But when I finally heard Clark, I took him on as my canidate.
By the time the primary rolled around in West Virginia, it was all over but the shouting and balloons. I voted for Kerry, but I would like to have voted for Clark. He will be an interesting candidate in ’08.
That’s one reason I didn’t vote in the poll. All of us in states that have later primaries have no say in who the nominee will be. I voted for Kerry – enthusiastically, I think he would be a great president – but early on, I was very impressed by Clark.
Maybe we Cal-ee-fornians should generate our own early “straw poll”.
Interesting thought. Do we really have to wait for the party to decide when we get to express our views? Worth looking into. Who the hell cares what the DNC wants.
No regrets, voted for Kerry. Not against Bush. Interesting that his plans for the military, foreign policy, and especially Iraq are now incorporated into the party line. That said, I would hesitate to vote for anyone on that list. the next presidential candidate will need to rise from the ground up, not the top down. And the party itself needs to stay the hell out of it – in front of, and behind the curtain.
I first got engaged at the time of the debates, and I thought that Kerry did so well in them. And of course, by comparison, Bush looked like a complete idiot.
I felt it was more the case that Bush is just a terrible speaker and debater and his speech writers are Orwellian.
Edwards gave the best stump speeches, I thought, because he’s pretty good at it. Though for content I personally liked Kucinich, and for humor and honesty I liked Al Sharpton best. Sharpton was probably the only one who gave me the feeling that he wrote his own material and was really comfortable saying everything he said.
If that were the choice…. I would have voted for my Democratic left shoe if it had a chance. But seriously, I saw a lot to like about Clark, Kerry, Edwards, Dean, and all the others, too. ABB! In the end I was proud to vote FOR the Kerry/Edwards ticket. btw, has anyone else here read Edwards’ book “Four Trials”? I highly recommend it. It will really show you what good trial lawyers can do for all of us. I defy anyone to read it without shedding a tear for the injustices done to these particular folks or shouting out a “hooray” when you read how Edwards won these cases.
I loved that book. I was a Deanie from early days, but after I read Four Trials I knew I could be very happy if Edwards was the nominee. I think the world of both of the Edwards.
Yes, I liked Dean a lot from the beginning, too. I am also loving what he’s doing now. I saw a diary on some other site that was titled “Dean is crazy like a fox” and I had to agree that he is right on time with his “aggravating” remarks. He is not afraid, and that is a GREAT quality. I agree with you that Edwards is worthy of our respect and that I would be very happy with him as our V.P. or even as our President. I was very pleased with the quality of the field of candidates and could have voted FOR any one of them.
of the two of them, I did like Edwards more so..Elizabeth is some wonderful person. Just loved her to death. How is she doing nowadays..Havent heard on her recovery from breast cancer.
I don’t know. Maybe somebody who does know will read this and tell us. Or maybe she lurks here just as she sometimes does (did?) at that other site. Wouldn’t that be nice?
Wesley Clark was my candidate. He knows war well enough to avoid ware if at all possible via diplomacy, because he knows the pain of war. He’s more than able to stand up for himself and us, and he can deliver snark with class. His smackdowns are brilliant.
He has to fight the stereotype of “general,” but I think he’s come a long way. He is a true liberal in his policies, and I just hope people will listen to him.
I believe he really cares about the average joe, but he has the intellect, and I hope the communication skills, to deal with the Orwell-speakers. That seems to scare the party, but at the same time they’re learning from him right now.
Bottom line, I think he can capture enough cross-over voters to win.
a little surprised that Edwards is doing so badly in the poll.
My journey through candidates:
Too young to vote:
Dwight D. Eisenhower -1956
Lyndon Johnson – 1960
John F. Kennedy – 1960
Barry Goldwater – 1964
Old enough to vote, did not:
Eugene McCarthy – 1968
Robert F. Kennedy – 1968
Voted:
Edmund Muskie – 1972
George McGovern – 1972
Did not vote:
Jimmy Carter – 1976
Voted:
Jimmy Carter – 1980
Jesse Jackson – 1984
Al Gore – 1988
Bill Clinton – 1992
Bill Clinton – 1996
Al Gore – 2000
John Kerry – 2004
I’ve actually never voted for the guy who ended up occupying the White House.
First election where I was eligible was 1984. I voted Dem in 1984 and 1988. I voted for Ross Perot in 1992 (crazy protest vote — I plead temporary insanity but I was never a big DLC fan!), and Nader in 1996 and 2000 (mea culpa. Please don’t pile on!)
I’ve also, to the best of my recollection, never voted for the winner of the California Democratic primary. One time I’m sure I voted for Ted Kennedy, for Jesse Jackson, for Jerry Brown, and last time for Dennis Kucinich.
So I think it’s safe to say that the election day where I vote for the guy who ends up in the White House would almost certainly be a pretty big progressive victory.
(I was told I’d get more conservative as I get older. But I’m far too much of a contrarian to take that advice.)
I certainly won’t pile on. I’ve been a big fan of voting third party whenever possible. I was a bit disappointed in 2000 that the Green Party couldn’t get on the ballot in Oklahoma, which precluded a Nader vote. Had to settle for the Libertarian Harry Browne instead. And yeah, if I had to do it over again, I wouldn’t change a thing.
Btw…I’m pretty much convinced that the notion of “getting more conservative with age” is little more than a very bad myth. About the only thing that I’ve noticed that has changed as I’ve grown older (I’m approaching 40) is that my concerns have shifted from the self-centered to a more community-centered focus – and that shift if anything has necessitated if anything going in a more progressive direction.
I’m 67 and if anything, I’m NOT conservative!!!
And, wisdom does not come with age either, you just get older.
That last sentence brought a smile to my face.
If nothing else, as I’ve grown older I have become more of a “wise guy.” 🙂
Pretty much an unreluctant admission: Kerry supporter. Was from the start, was a Kerry watcher since his election to the senate.
I do not regret it. I think I have a fair veiw of all of our guys and gals. I saw eveyone of them as problematic, even Kerry. I could list their
pros and cons.
Kerry’s cons are even more obvious now, mind you.
But our loss can be blamed on Kerry as well as party problems that have plagued us for a couple of decades. We let our side become a dirty word, we have been too apologetic about Democratic goals and policies. Louder and prouder…
strictly because of his message. When I heard of Dean I went to him at the time of the Internet Primary. Stuck with him as a first round delegate after he’d deactivated. Voted Kerry of course.
I’m not a Dean “-iac.” I will say that his speaking out and the early success it caused were absolutely essential to us having any future at all. But that’s not the same as being an ideal candidate.
He’s not an ideal candidate in my mind because he talks in terms of ideas and logic, which is alien to most people, because they think mostly in terms of beliefs and feelings.
I’m a Green in a deep, deep red state. I would have voted for our candidate, David Cobb, in a heartbeat. Unfortunately, thanks largely to the Democrats, Oklahoma has the nation’s most restrictive ballot access laws and doesn’t allow write-ins, so I was unable to vote for the candidate of my choice.
Heh, the blame should be restrictive too, to Oklahoma Democrats…
But few states have really sensible and open ballot access laws. And support for restrictive ballot access laws is truly bipartisan, with spikes and troughs when one party or the other thinks that easing the laws will hurt or help them in particular.
In OK, our current set of laws was put in by the Dems (who’ve controlled the State Senate for every year in the state’s history except for four years in the 1920s, and who controlled the State House for every year until 2005) in a response to the successes of the Wallace campaign in 1968. And, for the moment, because of Nader in 2000, GOPers in state government are more open to ballot access reform than Dems (I imagine things were different in, say, 1993, when Reform seemed a real danger to the GOP).
At any rate, it is the Oklahoma Democratic Party that is particularly responsible here. But the same could be said of many other state Democratic parties around the country. And the national Democratic Party certainly has no more (or less) commitment to open ballot access than does the national GOP.
I should have allowed that there was a concerted effort partywide, nationwide to keep you from voting third party.
I mostly meant lightheartedly, the “ya’ll” is not the “ya’ll” here.
As a fellow Okie, I feel your pain!
The Green versus Democrat dynamics were a big black eye for the Democratic party, if you ask me. But this last time the internal battle for control of the Green party was a big factor, too.
I would support a progressive third party over a Republican-lite party any old day. Hopefully the Greens will return to that place by 2008…
In the primaries, I voted for Al Sharpton. I knew Kerry would get the nomination by the time my state got to have its primary — so it was a symbolic vote. But, honestly, Al Sharpton voiced everything I believe in — from his belief in the rights of gay people to marry to his belief in a woman’s right to choose. There were mostly truths in what Al had to say — and because he probably didn’t have a chance — he could say the truth — unlike the white guys who had a chance.
Mosely Braun was also great. Bless her.
I thought Mosely-Braun was really impressive in the debates. She conducted herself really well and she knew her facts.
I gained a lot of respect for her. I’m far too pragmatic to have supported her. But I enjoyed listening to her.
Sharpton almost got my vote for his slap-the-donkey routine. Then I realized I didn’t want a stand-up comedian to be President 🙂
Damn, I hate that word when applied to politics. You don’t say who you ended up voting for, but whoever it was lost. So what was so pragmatic about that? It was the “pragmatic” Dems who nominated Kerry because he was “electable” who put us on the losing side. The outcome resulting from all other choices is mere speculation. Pragmatic my ass.
Wow, what a firebrand! I love that man for standing up and telling it like it is. His speech at the convention was my favorite. He was our much better version of Zell. The conservatives really hate Rev. Al for that, which makes me love him all the more….
Kucinich or Lieberman – and I would have voted for either over Bush.
No Kucinich – in my intro welcome wagon comment I mentioned that I’m to the right of the average Kossak on foreign policy.
No Lieberman – There’s a difference between being a hawkish democrat and being a shill for the Bush admin. There’s Repubs who have managed to be more critical in spite of party loyalty – whether true blue hawks like McCain or traditional Republican internationalists like Lugar. Plus I’ve always hated his tendency to view religiosity as a prerequisite for being considered a proper American.
My favorites in order were Clark, Dean, Kerry, Edwards.
talked myself into supporting Kerry once he got the nom. I concentrated on BCCI and Iran/Contra so I could argue convincingly. It was hard, because he’s been a hack since Reagan, but I did it, because I decided to be a partisan that election. I voted Nader in ’00 (in NY, a safe blue state).
He sucked. He was a terrible candidate. Now that he’s finally released his medical records, all I can think is that he didn’t really want to win. He didn’t ACHE for it. He didn’t care. When he caved so fast, despite what we all saw of the lines in OH, that “I concede” broke my fucking heart. Somtimes I think he took a fall. I’ll never forgive him for it, no matter how many emails with children’s pictures he sends out.
I will NEVER, no matter how many great speeches he gives, forgive Al Gore for what he did to the CBC, and the voters, the communities, they represent. I stopped supporting him when he named Joe as a running mate, I did vote for Nader, but when the FL fight began, I really hoped he’d step up. No.
What next? Will the party learn to fight. Will the next nominee actually give a fuck and fight? I’m not so sure.
I could almost have written that post. Only exceptions are: I really liked Moseley-Braun, I did not vote for Nader in 2K (never liked him, and tried to get my Green friends to vote for Gore, alas, was unsuccessful), and I’m not registered as a Democrat so couldn’t vote for Dean in the primaries, even though I liked him. I got screwed on that last thing, because the AZ voter website said primaries were open but it turned out that only statewide primaries were open; if I’d known I’d have re-registered. Bah.
I would love, love, LOVE to see Democrats actually fight for what liberals are supposed to believe in. I’d even start carrying the card.
..about Gore’s run.
((shudder))
When he picked Lieberman to run, there were so many groans about it–even from establishment types. The campaign, IMO, wasted so much time alternately hand holding and arm-twisting to get folks to accept it.
(This was supposed to be “out of the box thinking” to pick a VP based on piece in Roll Call–Morton Kondracke, I think, but I’m not sure, will try to find link–that Gore should pick Lieberman b/c he was appropriately aghast at Clinton’s behavior during impeachment. To this day, I cannot believe the campaign actually bought that crock of shit.)
Lieberman is such a grandstanding ho (someone thought that the most dangerous place in DC was the distance b/w Schumer and a camera? OK, maybe that was true when he was a House member but not so w/ Holy Joe.) but is a cowering, babbling idiot in front of repubs. Recall his dismal performance w/ Unca Dick (that would be Uncle Dick, as in Shrub’s puppetmaster)? No wonder he actually thought he had a chance in the ’04 primaries–he believes his own hype.
Sorry–the flashbacks have been brutal–back to the question.
My head supported another candidate, because I used to work for that person. My heart supported Dean. Or maybe my heart supported that other candidate because of loyalty when my head was saying, “Look at all the people he’s attracting! The stances he’s taking! And even the money he’s raising!”
Dean just shocked the hell out of me because he was the total opposite of what I expected…just the total opposite. I thought he was just another DLC governor and didn’t know much about him, other than the NRA liking him. I figured I knew enough. I didn’t even know why he was running, because the DLC had already “blessed” Kerry.
Wow, what a strange ride this has been.
I wish you could vote for two. Like a Prez. and VP.
Clark supporter here; I thought he was the best opportunity to strike back at the fake “warriors” in the BushCo Administration. I hoped that if he’d gotten the nomination, he would pick Dean as his running mate, or if not then Dean would be Secretary of HHS in a Clark Administration.
When Kerry was the official nominee, I supported him. But it was his failure in the November election that taught me to be very wary of anyone putting the mantle of “electability” on anyone; there is no such animal as “electability”, everyone is vulnerable.
I say “Deanocrat” instead of “Deaniac” because it sounds less like being a groupie (no offense, and maybe I am) but mostly because I think it defines me and many others who are only “here” (contributing to and working for the Dem party) because of HD.
I am at the left end of the political spectrum in my fight against the completly corrupt Republican power structure in government.But I am kind of cynical and think that if we throw the rascalls out the Dems who rise to power could be corrupted too.
That’s why I want reform, and power to the grassroots. HD is clearly in it for the right reasons. And, God bless him, he tells it like it is. What a concept!
I put up a fundraising page called “Deanocrats United” today to earmark my (and anyone who wants to join me) donations to the DNC as driven by HD. I want to make it clear that I do not support people like Lieberman, and that they better not take me or my money for granted. It’s HD’s vision I support.
Here it is so kick in if you’ve a mind to.
http://actblue.com/list/deanocrats+united
Good to see you all here!
Kucinich mostly, for his message. I pretty much liked all of them though, and thought they all had a message to put out there. And I knew I was going to vote for whoever the nominee was (I was never under any illusions it would be Kucinich, lol).
As for Edwards… what I’ve heard of his message, I like and he seems like a nice guy and somone I would support, but for all that I just can’t like him. I’ve tried… but if he was the nominee i would vote for him.
By the time we got to vote here in California, Kerry already had the nomination sewed up, so I voted for him so he’d look stronger.
I like Dean and Kucinich, and I thought that Clark might run well against Bush. Kucinich is the only one who is close to as liberal as I am.
I’d like the Democratic party to have some guts and run Barbara Boxer next time. Our junior senator has been a beacon of light in the Senate, and I think she’d do a great job in the White House. I am tired of hearing that a real liberal can’t win a national election, and that this country couldn’t deal with a woman president. Are we so far behind India, Israel, and the UK?
I also really liked Gore (our duly elected president in 2000). I mourn the loss of his presidency more than I mourn the loss of Kerry.
I really liked Gore in 1992, when I read “Earth in the Balance” and my conservative roommate hated it. But I honestly feel pretty betrayed on the environment by Clinton-Gore.
I can still remember when I was in junior high and we had gas lines… and our science teacher told us that we’d be more efficient in the future (because oil was going to run out and because of pollution). But the CAFE standards have been stuck in neutral since 1987, and thanks to SUVs the gas mileage of new vehicles today is worse than it was when I finished junior high. I never would have believed we were going to be so unwise!
is not entirely off-topic, given the level of political involvement in how and what we drive.
You said, “thanks to SUVs the gas mileage of new vehicles today is worse . . .”
Henry Ford’s Model-T averaged 25-30 miles per gallon.
I looked this up a while back, and looking for the info now, found it at an interesting conservation site.
I wasn’t aware of that (about the Model T) and it’s initially difficult to imagine!
BUT top speed is very important to miles per gallon, since at freeway speeds there is a drag force going up quite fast (if you drive 100 mph, the drag force is about 4 times the force at 50mph). How Fast did a Model T typically drive?
I have a Honda Civic Hybrid. The readout typically is at 56 mpg when I drive 65 mph, and it does down to about 51 mpg when I drive 70 mph.
For comparison purposes the speed at Indy 500 is 220+ mph, and the cars get about 2.5 miles per gallon (approximately one gallon per lap)
By the way I’m a member of UCS but have never seen that site. Thanks for the link!!
The hybrid gives you a constant mpg reading? That’s very cool, and something that should be required on all cars (with a tax based on the results).
It has an “instantaneous readout” for mpg that is a little bar, and it has two “mpg meters” (trip A and trip B) that will record the average readout since the last reset. I typically use “trip A” for each tank of gas. The readouts tend to be high compared to actual mileage measured by the gas pump numbers.
My readout this morning says 56 for this tank, but I typically go 635 miles on something like 12+ gallons, so it works out to be more like 51 when measured at the pump.
I rented a Prius a couple of weeks ago and drove 200 miles on 4+ gallons. It also has an instantaneous and cumulative mileage display (on the fancy touch screen thingy)
Top speed of about 45 mph, 20 horsepower.
One might also consider the possibility that Model T fuel economy is sometimes viewed through the rose-colored glasses of nostalgia. Here’s a recent real-world case:
“Our tour from Kinsley, KS (near Dodge City) to Miami, Fl was completed on Wednesday, April 27th. [2005] Total miles 1854 at an average speed of 31.2mph. Gas milage was 19mpg.”
http://www.model-t-ford.com/cgi-bin/webbbs/webbbs_config_512.pl?read=87496
for CLARK, I thought American was ready for a General to help get us out of this mess we were in, but I never had the chance. Once Kerry got the nomination. I was 100% behind him. I made over 400 phone calls from my cell phone, in my own backyard, to Battleground States, I called people in Ohio, Florida, Michigan, Arizona, NV, NM. for the KERRY CAMP. I spoke to the most amazing people. I got them to Knock on doors, I explained why we had to rid America of GW Bush.
I talked about Healthcare, Bush’s War, the Economy, how it was Osama, not Sadam, how there were NO WMDs in Iraq, how Kerry kicked Bush’s Ass in the debates….you name it I talked about it. I told all that would listen why John F. Kerry was the best man for the job. I even made it be that some of the people who didn’t have transportation to get to the polls to vote..got to the polls through the Kerry Camp.
I heard the most amazing stories from people of all ages..from 18 to an 85 year old widow in Florida. I heard about how badly people were hurting in our country because of George W. Bush and his stupidity and horrific policies. I heard from Mothers who had lost children in Bush’s War. I heard so many stories from average Americas who had lost their jobs..people who had lost or had no health care. I still think of them today…A day doesn’t go by where I don’t think of some of those poor souls that I called in the months leading up to Nov. 2. They give me the strength to continue the fight.
The Dean campaign brought me back into active political life. After the Gulf War and the 1992 election, I was convinced that I was an anachronism. For fifteen years, ages 22-37, I had been heavily involved in activism, in community organizing, issue campaigns, electoral races. It seemed that both my views, and my grassroots orientation to politics, were disappearing from the scene. The democratic system was entirely taken over by professionals, there was no room for the citizen any more. And I was burned out. Too many years of defeats, too many years since a real win for social justice. Even among those little local issues that I’d spent so much time fighting.
So I went private. Worked. Danced a lot. Had a band.
Then the stolen election, the white collar rent a riot. The eerily science fiction like day of 9-11. As the drumbeat toward Iraq began, I took my first overtly political act in a decade, renewing my long-lapsed membership in Veterans for Peace. Wrote fruitlessly to my Democratic US Rep. Was less than stunned when my junior Senator John Kerry voted for the war. Since his return to politics in the 80s, it had struck me far too often that he would put his ambition ahead of principles. I wouldn’t be voting for him. Didn’t know who I’d be voting for, until in May of 2003 I started reading about how the Dean campaign was giving groups of local supporters the freedom to run their own operations and build their own organizations. My community organizing soul couldn’t help wanting a peak at this, so I found and went to a local Meetup that summer, and damn if that room didn’t feel just about like Mass. Fair Share, it was like coming home. Three months later I was hosting that Meetup. We did wonderful things, tabling at the Big E (Eastern States Exposition), Balloons for Dean at the Thanksgiving Day parade, many trips to New Hampshire.
By the time I voted on Super Tuesday, it was a bittersweet exercise. It was, Thank You, Howard Dean.
Hi everyone, Part 12 of the Welcome Wagon Diaries is up. Recommmends are appreciated as well as handing out mojo to the new BooTribbers.
Please Unrecommend Parts 10 and 11 to make room for diaries on the Rec. List. Thanks for your help!
(I voted for Dean)
Like others here, I would have voted for a brick before I voted for Bush. I still think it would have been a better vote.
I gave up on politics when Bush was ordained. I completely dropped out. But when he was ordained for a second time, I just couldn’t stand away again. I had to get involved. Hence, my being here. I have called my senator more times this year than I have ever called her in all the years prior combined.
So, that said, it really didn’t matter to me. I did a questionnaire that said Kucinich most represented my ideas, but I knew he had no chance. So I backed Kerry and was luke warm towards him until the debates. I think he really came back in the debates. He was reasonable, honest and someone I could support.
This last election was the first time I donated to any political cause. It won’t be the last.
Feingold, if he runs.
Though I swear, I was still wavering back and forth between him and the Greens all the way through the “Help” pages of the damnable electronic voting machine…I am not convinced my vote was counted, don’t think anyone will ever be able to convince me one way or another.
In the primaries, I would have voted for Kucinich…not that I thought he had a chance in hell, but damn, it would have been nice to cast a vote for someone who so closely represented my interests and passions…never been able to do that (I was born in 1966).
I am very ambivelent right now about the “Democratic Party” and voting for “D” no matter what and who and where and when….yes, I would like these slimeballs out of office, but it ocurrs to me over and over again that Nixon and Regan and Bush I (well, Sr., not so much…) went away, but their administration’s structure never did…(we even have many of the EXACT same people running around doing the same old shit)
Negroponte
Cheney
oh, I could go on, but am tired and laptop running out of battery…
They have been the same fucking people in power my entire life….
I voted for Kerry but im really so far out of mainstream that i can’t find anybody that really suits my fancy. Kucinich comes closest but i wasn’t too thrilled with him for some reason.
Voted Kucinich in the WI primary, tho that was less a vote for Dennis, than an attempt at a message to Kerry, regarding the DrugWar.
Philosophically I fall more at the leftmost edge of the Libertarians. I couldn’t relate to the LP’s Presidential ticket in ’96 and ’00, when I was too steamed at the Clinton record to vote Dem, so Nader was the default. ’92 and ’04 were ABB years, and I actually liked the John Kerry of Contra/Coke (where’s he hiding?) and Theresa from our conversation in Feb. ’04.
I supported and voted Lionel Jospin at the last presidential election… in France!
Alas, Chirac won, and we are paying it dearly: it is an important cause for the rejection of the European constitutional treaty…
Thank you for this comment. Even though I’m American, it kind of bothered me that this question assumed everyone on the site was American, when in fact a big part of the appeal here is that it’s not just a US site.
IMO, us netizens (and maybe Dems in general) spend too much time identifying with pols or candidates rather than the ideas or issues that really matter in politics.
So count me as a vote against cults of personality, whomever the personality may be.
I actually registered to vote in a Democratic primary for the first time since my first election in 1992 – and that was difficult for me, but I liked the policy stands that Kucinich made – first time in awhile I’d seen a Dem act like a true leftist.
I’m well out beyond the left fringe of the Democratic Party – I’ll freely identify as a socialist (red-bait away) – but I’ll usually line up for the Dems in an election.
to vote for him as he was no longer a candidate by the time we had our primary in NY!
Truly, I could have supported any of the Dems (except Lieberman–too accommodationist) fairly happily, but I liked Dean’s fighting spirit, anti-war stance, and “you have the power” message, and thought he could beat BushCo.
The only thing I had against Kerry in the primaries was that he was beating up on Dean in a way I didn’t like–that, and he was rather wooden. I actually think he improved over the course of the campaign.
I’m basically for individual per issue policy positions. There is no candidate or party or platform
that truly represents me.
This is because I am very concerned about the middle class and the economic future of the American people.
So, I am for re-evaluting all trade agreements, giving labor a strong negotiation position in all trade agreements and the end of trade agreements by and for multinational corporations exclusively. I’m for
stopping offshore outsourcing at least in government,
federal and state, progressive tax structure, end
of corporate corruption, equal enforcement of the law and legal recourse for justice not based on one’s deep pockets, balancing the budget, universal health care, child care, workers rights, environmental rights and stopping illegal immigration.
I see these insane trade agreements and the budget deficit being the largest threat to America currently.
I also would like to see the government/DoD sponsor projects that could innovate into the private sector, such as alternative energy, global warming and cyberterrorism.
I think education, including all the way to PHD should be heavily subsidized by the government and of almost
no cost to any American/legal resident who is capable.
I also see congress and government so corrupt from
multinational lobbyists and use of media to spin
wedge issues, misinform, I believe we have lost
democracy. I do not know what it would take to get it back, but wrangling democracy from the hands of multinational corporations is key.
I think the Iraq war is a sham and it’s all about oil
as well as keeping the oil currency in US dollars. I believe in multilateralism in foreign policy.
Champions of these policies range from socialist Bernie
Sanders to very controversial Tom Tancredo. If I went
to a Republican site I would get trolled off for being
a liberal. If I talk about illegal immigration, I get
called a white supremist (and it’s extremely difficult
to get anyone to even think about this in terms of labor economics, which is my focus).
What I find most disconcerting is the lack of
any party, any representative putting forth policy
that truly makes sense for America’s economic future,
sense of a nation-state and for the people as a whole.
What is even more frustrating is the lack of common sense on policy, really from either party. There is a lot of “hot rhetoric” without enough “thinking it through” and what even is a nation-state and what that means as well.
If I could vote for anyone I would raise FDR from the death and plead with him to come and save America and bring his conscience with him, Eleanor.
the immigration part. Given your other views, I assume you are not committed to the hardline vigilante approach to immigration. This is essentially an economic question and can be mitigated by economic means. But Americans would rather make it a battle between nativism and sentimentality.
Like a surprising number of posters in this thread, and despite your middle-class focus, what seems to be missing for you is a Social Democratic party. The Dems are a poor substitute. I don’t see any way to get where you (and I) want to go without destroying the current two-party system.
Unfortunately the “race card” is being played to mask
this is indeed a very real problem.
It’s a problem due to wage repression, dramatic
increase in supply of cheap labor.
Few realize that multinationals are DEMANDING(and there are negotiatons right now in GATS (WTO)) for unlimited
movement of workers, which will cost workers worldwide
in wages, rights.
So, immigration policy is actually a tool to control
the labor supply. Keeping illegal aliens illegal
is completely unacceptable for massive exploitation
of illegal aliens is happening by big and small business. They have no rights in the US to complain
of abuses.
In terms of solutions, I think they should
secure the border, make it extremely difficult to
create false social security numbers, fine and punish
severely the employers and remove illegal aliens
from the social services rolls and other roles.
The reason for this is there are 20M illegal aliens,
a huge cost to the US taxpayer and there is a
huge underground economy undermining the US system.
There are studies showing the US social services
system is supplementing the below minimum wage wages..
so employer benefit through exploitation and legal
residents of the US pick up the rest of the tab.
Also, a legal resident cannot complete with an illegal
alien working the system. A “cash” employment takes
out no taxes, no FICA, nothing and then with a fake
social security number illegals are qualifying for Medicare, social services, even housing. If they
have a US born child, they get all of this legally.
Illegal aliens are even buying houses with fake
social security numbers.
But, our focus is much more on the use of VISAs to
fire Americans and replace them with cheaper foreign
labor. The “high tech shortage” is a myth perpetuated
by industry.
In terms of amnesty I’m not sure. I cannot imagine
deporting 20M people at the same time, saying
a person who breaks US immigration law and border hops
can then gain US permanent resident status is a recipe
for disaster.
I feel a better way to deal with stopping the border
hopping craze is to demand repeal of NAFTA and
push for worker rights and reforms in Mexico.
The people are leaving in droves because Mexico
is corrupt, a few families have all of the wealth,
the entire government is not set up to take care
of it’s people.
If Mexico (S. America) was raised up to a fairer economic system for the Mexican (S. America) people, the situation would be more like Canada and of course Canadians aren’t rushing to the US for they have a quality of life.
But, fundamentally “open borders” can create a situation much, much worse than the reunification of Germany. Putting together two vastly differing economies (which is what open border does) pulls
down the strong economy to the level of the 3rd world one. It’s amazingly that Germany recovered as it did, but it took 10 years.
As far as “vigilante” goes, they made a very good
point in that they did secure the border much better.
I don’t see a problem with what they did. I do have
serious problems with some of the people behind that
group and other things they have said and done.
That said there are racists involved with illegal immigration this is true, and it’s important to
never let racism take over this issue.
I wish people would
examine this issue practically instead of believing
that anyone who wants something done is a racist.
I lived abroad and actually was a “foreigner” and other
nations just do not allow this sort of illegal status
or “open border” sort of situation
and it has nothing to do with race, it has everything
to do with a nation-state and responsibility to it’s citizens.
i kind of gave up after 2000 election, but dean got me
to rethink in 2004. Clark was my prefered candidate, but he had already dropped out of the primaries by the time
i had a chance to vote. I did vote for kerry. anybody
but bush.
I was looking for the strongest candidate and could have been happy with Kerry, Edwards, Dean, or Clark. I was kind of leaning toward Edwards, for likability and a great stump speech, but I don’t think now that he would have done better than Kerry. I was closer to Kucinch on issues but knew he wasn’t electable (for personality reasons as much as anything).
Partly I’m posting this as a test to see if I successfully italicized my tag line. And as a newbie I wonder if I could ask two other technical questions:
Is there a way to delete old comments from my comments list?
If someone responds to a comment, is there any way to look at the response without scrolling through the whole long thread?
Thanks for any help anyone can give me!
Hi Maureeen… if it’s your comment they are responding to, you can look in the right hand menu for “your comments” and click on that. It’ll indicate if you have a response to something you said.
Otherwise, you can go to the top of the page and click “recent comments” and maybe find it that way. You can read just the comment without opening the entire thread.
Thanks for the help. Yes, that did work. I also see now that I can set it so I only see 10 or 20 of my comments.
‘Till he caved to reality. What can you do? They’re politicians. I despised Dean because it seemed that everything he said had been said two weeks before by Dennis, along with stealing Wellstone’s ‘democratic wing’ line. But I love him now, and Kerry as well. They’re all fine to me and SO superior to Alfred E. Bush and Darth Cheney
I was pretty entusiastic about John Edwards. I loved his two Americas meme. Between his limited experience and the fact that he looks twelve years old, I figured he was unelectable, but I still liked him. His story appeals to some of the working class voters who have defected to the Republican Party against their own best interests. This election was the first in which I gave money to a national campaign. Which led me to give money later to the Kerry campaign. Which led me to help GOTV in neighboring New Mexico. So even if you didn’t like Edwards, at least he led one person to take a more activist role in Democratic politics.
Voted for Dean in the VA primary, even though he had already dropped out. I wasn’t a “Deaniac” but I liked his style and thought the way he was treated after the “Yeaarrrgggghhhh” incident was dispicable. Mine was a protest vote.
After Kerry got the nomination, I grew to really appreciate his intelligence and thoughtfulness (although I hated the damn pink tie he always wore).
I’m something of a single-issue voter. War is my issue, and I supported Dean initially, because he was one of the first Dem candidates to speak out strongly against it. I know Kucinich also did — and probably was better and more consistent in his anti-war message than Dean — but I never believed Kucinich was “electable” (some would probably debate if Dean was electable, too), and I was living in Vermont at the time.
I would have expected that Kerry would be my natural candidate — we both were in VVAW after all way back when — but, in my opinion, he sacrificed principle for political expediency in his vote to give Bush the power to go to war (it was clear, at that time, to anyone with half a brain that Bush was gonna use that power if they gave it to him, something the DSM has since confirmed), and that lost him my support.
I voted for him against Bush (ABB), and clearly think he would have made a better president than Bush, but, from my perspective, it is truly ironic that Kerry made the political calculation to support giving Bush the power to initiate the Iraq War, and it was that decision — and his inability to repudiate the decision, or articulate a clear alternative vision to Bush’s concerning Iraq — that contributed (though did not exclusively cause) his ultimate defeat.
Kucinich was the only candidate in the primary who reflected my politics. Dean also was anti-war, but too conservative overall. I voted for Kucinich in California where it didn’t matter anyway, knowing he was as unelectable as it gets.
Lots of electrons have been spent on the de/merits of Sen. Kerry and I won’t go into them, except to say that John Kerry won my deep admiration and respect, and I supported him wholeheartedly. Still do, though it’s too soon to say what the next presidential election will bring.
quite late as I felt I needed alot of time with that group. I didn’t dislike anyone immediately, it was a compentent set of folks but no one jumped out at me like the day I saw Clinton throw his hat in the ring on C-Span , never having seen him before and instantly knew he was the guy.
I ended up Edwards in the primary and Kerry/Edwards on election day. For what it’s worth, still think it was the best combo available and i still like the other folks in the race. America (50.1% anyway) was just not ready to change horses in the middle of the war, justified or not. Sad, but true.
During the run-up to the election, I was fond of saying that I would vote for Howdy Doody if it would get George Bush out of the White House.
I can’t remember who I voted for in the primary. Crazy, I know! I was very impressed with Carol Moseley Braun and wanted to vote for her. Did she even make it to the California primary??
I wasn’t an early supporter of Kerry, but after he won the primary I did honestly believe that he would make a good President. It appeared to me that he spent way too much time listening to handlers and I thought he would have done better during the campaign if they had just let him be himself. He is a very smart man and has an impressive track record. I couldn’t understand why they wouldn’t let him talk about all the good things he had done as a Senator. People said it was because his handlers didn’t want him to appear too liberal. That pissed me off and I wondered why he put up with that.
Anyway, you can count me in the ABB camp.
just checking my sig line…pay no attention.
which is “anybody but Bush.” I’m sorry to say I wasn’t really for anybody; I would have voted for a small, cute dog if it would have gotten George Bush out of office.
My daughter really liked Dean.
Kerry was the establishment’s sacrificial lamb, borne to lose. Clark is a shill for DARPA contractors. Dean may have been legit, but his own chickenshit base let him down. Lieberman is a fool and the others ‘unelectable.’ So this means we should vote for the establishment guy, right? Kerry, right? WRONG WRONG WRONG.
How many of you think that voting for Kucinich would have made a difference in the final outcome of the election? Dems lost, folks. You won’t get ground from the establishment (both parties collude, you know) unless you frighten them.
If you look at policy, actual policy. Kucinic was the only one who actually represents the liberal ideals so often expoused here and elsewhere. Everyone else was either a compromise or a total bullshitter. Dean put on a good show, but he had no balls where it counted : Disconnecting the Military-Industrial Complex’s power supply. Point to his policies if you don’t believe me.
But all you jackasses who forget what voting IS went for the middle of the road guy who was only pretending (remember Gore) and would reveal his true liberal self later. We gotta go with the guy who can win, right? wrong-o, as proven by the result. This will never win elections, yet it’s happened twice in a row now.
Kucinic voters are the few Dems who feel we deserved to lose this time around, simply for selling out to party establishment BS yet again.
Next time, vote your heart or Go suck a Chem Trail. Sometimes it is HOW you lose that counts.
I rated your comment a four because I generally agree with you, but I also think you’d make a better impression if you were a bit more polite.
It is ironic that so many people “supported Dean (or Kucinich) but voted for Kerry.” If people would just vote for the candidate or party that they actually AGREE with, then we would have a multi-party system immediately.
Everybody has so completely bought into the two party theory–even though countries like Canada and the UK have three parties under a voting system similar to ours–that we end up with two virtually identical parties fighting over a couple of percent right in the middle of the electorate.
Why would anybody vote for Al “snail darter” “SUV” Gore based on his environmental record? Argh.