Well, let's face it. We vote on charm - not issues. People wanted to have a reason to vote for Bush, because he is darn good at seeming to be sincere. I think if we found out that Gore spent the vice presidency, as Bush did his governorship, in the gym and playing video games, his opponents would have been screaming bloody murder.

Bush looks like a nice guy to go out and have a beer with, so the average American feels he or she can trust them. Most don't do a whole lot of investigation into the real political history of a candidate. Actually, that would be difficult with Bush, because he doesn't have much of one..

There is also something really unattractive about Gore's desperation though.

That said, you would have to be pretty ambitious to run for that office, and I attribute some of that desperation to a really strong desire to try to achieve certain things - that won't happen with someone else in office.

Nonetheless, I think agreeing with Gore's policies and then voting for Bush is ensuring that the policies you support will not come about. I am not thrilled with either one of them, but Bush particularly seems empty to me. He is what you fill him up with, no strong conviction or values. I think therefore will be even more vulnerable to the folks that bankrolled him.

I have to go with Connie though. Often people outside the US are far better informed than the average American voter... We just typically aren't interested in that stuff.

The reason most Americans are not that pre-occupied with politics is that the U.S. political systems is so stable. For example, Congress and Senate will always be there no matter who will be the president. We do not wake up to find out Congress has been abolished. Unlike other countries, you wake up to read Parliament has been dissovled. The three branches of the government: legislative, executive and judiciary watch each other for possible abuses. Just look at the process of selecting the president for the president. There is a check and balance going on. Again, most American are not worried whether Gore or Bush becomes president for the reason it is basically the cabinet member who make the decisions. Why do think Reagan accomplished more things than Carter? Reagan left everyhting for the cabinet to make decisions; while Carter controlled everything because he is a genius!

I have to say that the stereotyping of Republicans as the wealthy in this country is ludicrous. Last time I checked, I still can't find my BMW in the garage. Maybe it's hiding behind my wife's huge Saturn. If you've seen my luxury car and house in the hills, please let me know.

I'm sure there's not a democrat in the country that wouldn't love for that misconception to continue to be perpetuated. The fact of the matter is, there are the "elite" (read: rich) on both sides of the fence. The Green Party has them too. It would seem that the rich on the GOP side of the fence are just a little more wary about giving handouts to others. Philanthropy is a good thing, but wasteful dish-outs to groups who may not value being industrious is dangerous. I'm not interested in creating a society of couch potatoes who only get off the couch when the pizza man shows up with free pizza.

Connie-have you done the real math on Bush's tax plan, or did you take Gore's (read: cyborg relations) word for it. If everyone gets a strict percentage tax-cut, say 5%, of course those making $500,000 per year would get a "bigger" tax cut than he who makes $50,000. If you're paying taxes of $185,000, your tax return of $25,000 would equal the return of 10 people making $50,000 each year. Overall, the return to those more wealthy will be, dollars and cents-wise, more than those less wealthy.

Nevertheless, unlike Gore's plan, Bush's seems to be an unbiased, fair plan based solely on one factor: percentage. I don't want Gore telling me that since I make a certain amount of money, I should have to forego the pleasure of seeing some of that back in my pocket. Do I drive the freeways more? Do my kids go to MORE public school? Do I go to more NEA-supported art exhibitions (of dung-defaced religious figures )? What am I doing that justifies Gore deciding I need to pay more taxes (or at least not get pack the same percentage as everyone else)? Did I not work as hard for my salary than the guy who's making $8.00/hour at the car wash? Is that Al Gore's call?

Geez, I don't want to sound like an elitist, but I believe that those who have worked hard to get where they're at should be allowed to do what they will with the fruits of their labors. The only exceptions are those who have worked hard to circumvent the law to get where they are. They should have their assets seized and then they can live off my tax money in the big house...without TV and workout privileges, though!

P.S. As mentioned, the fact that Gore is even in this tight of a contest proves his ineffectiveness and inability to inspire confidence in the American people...in the face of our most prosperous eight-year period in history . What a dolt!

woah. This got really partisan rather quickly. I was kind of avoiding this thread (since I feel a little guilty about the other two that I seemed to help get out of hand).

Shouldn't we somehow get back to the topic of espana?

(Actually poor whites make up a huge chunk of Republican voters)


Oh whatever. we are really an opinionated bunch, aren't we?!

[This message has been edited by Nicole (edited 12-05-2000).]

[This message has been edited by Nicole (edited 12-05-2000).]

I think Nicole painted a perfect picture of Bush with her words "He is what you fill him up with, no strong conviction or values. I think therefore will be even more vulnerable to the folks that bankrolled him." That said, because I am of the firm belief the US is not unto itself in the world and no longer can/should we act as if we were the 'great power' - a huge priority change is in order. Europe has a far more concerned and humane attitude than we as a country seem to exhibit. Whether ist free trade or NAFTA - noone can go along saying me-me-me. There's too many holes in the ozone layer kids, and too many hungry and sick people in the world to have the freedom to cry "not our responsiblity" - and, in my mind - that typifies George W.

Sorry for spouting off - have stayed away from this thread for a reason ....

CaliBasco, no reason to get upset. I was not contending that all Republicans are wealthy and Democrats are less wealthy. I just wanted to point to the differences between the American and European mentality.
In Western Europe, we think that social redistribution is an important function of government and we consider fiscal progression good and just because we think the financial capability is the decisive factor in determining the contribution everyone owes to the community. It is not the thought of how much you make use of the state services but the sense of a solidarity community. Even if my kids do not go to more public schools, I am ready to pay more taxes to ensure that also persons in poor neighborhoods get a good education. And I have my problems in understanding why a budget surplus has to lead to tax returns while a substantial amount of people has no health ensurance, and there are a lot of other useful things how the money could be invested. But it is the choice of the citizens of this country, I just observe that the campaign would have been quite different in Europe.
I do not want to say that people in this country do not care about the poor, there is a lot of private charity work which is very impressive, but people do not want the government to be involved too much, and we Europeans DO want the government to be involved in that sector.
Here in the US, the focus lies on the responsibility of the individual in the first place, and personal freedom. The domestic policies pursued by the Republican party are obviously supported by a majority of voters.

Not to be a cynic, but I was much more concerned about the results of my state's election than the Presidential election.

I don't believe the president is worthless, but whoever said it above (I forget, sorry) was right, the power does flow from the states to the federal gov.

This election is a joke. The fact that Bush couldn't clearly swing his brother's state is a joke. That Gore is throwing every legal angle he can is a joke. I just hope that because of this fiasco the President will have to rise above it and be truly dynamic and effective.

Yeah, the whole situation is pretty hopeless. I only hope that it may produce some changes towards a more efficient voting system.

I had a heck of a time getting registered in CA, and the voting place was surprisingly informal and a bit disorganized...

Hello Nicole--
A while back you commented that 'agreeing with Gore's policies and then voting for Bush will ensure that those policies will not come to pass." That's true. While I agreed with some (not all) of Gore's positions, I did not feel that he was the "far better" man for the job, as an earlier poster said, and listed my reasons for thinking that. Now, the fact is that No candiadtes campaign promises come to pass. they are always subjected to compromise when the horse-trading begins on Capitol Hill. The GOP has a razor-thin majority in the House, and the senate is 50-50. This should be interesting.

As Always....Peace to all.

did any of you all see the infamous ballot in question from ?broward? county in florida?? i am refering to the absentee ballot that 'so many americans' had trouble filling out...

it was not difficult to read at all... on NPR (nat'l public radio) they chuckled about a study that a kindergarten teacher did with her class... she gave them all the ballot and had them fill it out.. not ONE child got it wrong. they all voted for whom they wanted and got it right.

on the same NPR broadcast a lady called in from florida who is a PhD in psycology and she said,'i'm a doctor of psycology and i'm no dummy and i couldn't figure out that ballot!' she was pretty angry... he he he... i think that is so funny.. why does it seem like something is wrong there?

hey gore, it was 'the will of the people' that elected those judges that don't favour you. funny how YOU are not 'the people' unless you favour the democratic party. hmmmmm... and i've been left in the past... maybe i'll go further right.