Skip to main content

I am sick of hearing how people are upset with the POTUS.  Crazy ideas like people pushing him as worse than W.  Things like, "since my life isn't peaches and sunshine, he must not be a good President."  These things pushed me as being a sociopath who doesn't care about people when I responded to a question that should be as innocuous as, "are you better off than you were 4 years ago?" with "Yes."  It doesn't mean I don't care about people who aren't.  What this means is that I am better off, and the question you should be asking yourself is, "Would I be better off with the other guy?"  That is likely a No with Mitt.

I vote Democratic because I believe in Demand side economics.  To vote for Republicans is just offering up money to the rich at the expense of the middle class.  It would mean that our economy would die from eating itself (all of the money would be with the people who own the businesses, demand would plummet and there would be no incentive to hire anyone at livable wages).

I want to keep government spending that helps people.  The Republicans only want to pay for the military, and that is so that they can continue to invade places on a whim (usually resources or religion).

I want to make sure racists don't take control of this nation.  The Republican party is predominantly ruled by one race.  These people, for the most part, are one religion.  These people have dominionism at their hearts.  These people want to limit opportunity for minorities at every chance so that they can consolidate their power and make this land theirs alone.

I vote Democratic because I believe that women should be able to decide their fates and anyone who tries to victimize them should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.  The GOP is trying to rip women's rights from them at every turn.  They often go so far as to make it harder for victims of rape and violent crimes to report their attackers to authorities and get justice.

I vote Democratic because I am not too short sighted to want to give in and deny people healthcare because of a pre-existing condition.  I don't see any life worth losing just because someone had a condition or financial problem.  I believe that Obamacare is not tyranny of big government, but a triumph of humanity.  It offers care to those that need it, even when they never thought they would need it.

By voting Democratic, does that guarantee me that I will have all of these things at all times?  Will I get everything I want?  Will it stop recessions from happening?  Will it stop corruption completely?  No to all of these.  The thing about our system is that even a candidate that isn't perfect is the best candidate.  It isn't just the lesser of evils, it is that there is no perfection in politics.  There may not be perfection, but that doesn't mean that there aren't good candidates.  I vote for Democrats because to vote GOP would be to give up on everything I believe.

With this in mind, I ask that we stop insulting our candidates because our lives aren't perfect.  There will always be work to do.  These are candidates, not deities.  The truth is that we will always have a system that is not perfect, but the side I agree with will always be clear.

To those that feel disgusted with the President, what would you like to do?  Do we invent a candidate that doesn't exist?  Do we see that Obama has done so much good that he has earned our support or give in to the other guys and say that since life isn't perfect, we should vote for the opposition and lose all of our principles?  I can't do it because I care too much to bite my nose off to spite my face.  No matter how frustrated I am, I am not foolish enough to lose sight of the big picture.

If you feel differently, let us all know what your grand vision is below.  Maybe you really believe in Mitt...

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Democratic. You vote DemocratIC. (0+ / 0-)

    "I'm going to rub your faces in things you try to avoid." - Muad'Dib

    by Troubadour on Sat Jun 16, 2012 at 10:12:20 PM PDT

  •  Oh brother. It is called the (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Democratic Party. You vote Democratic; you vote for Democrats.

  •  I'm still going at 2 AM. Sorry. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tardis10, ParkRanger

    It is fixed.

  •  Markos expressed it best (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    praenomen, chipmo

    This is what Markos said when interviewed at NN.

    I asked Daily Kos founder Markos Moulitsas if he was worried about the level of despair at the conference. He replied, “The administration should be worried about the level of despair here.” Like many attendees, he brought up the failed recall election in Wisconsin. The Republicans, he pointed out, sent all sorts of surrogates to the state to campaign for Gov. Scott Walker. “Obama stayed away,” he says. “Why? Because he would be embarrassed if he lost. I’ll tell you what. If he shows that he’s going to fight for the things that I care about, I will fight twice as hard for him.” And if he doesn’t? “Then I’ll vote for him,” says Moulitsas.
    (Emphasis mine)

    Very few people say they aren't going to vote for Democrats. However, I think the enthusiasm which was there in 2008 isn't there. The other guy is worse isn't good enough to generate enthusiasm.

    Anyway, this year has been better than the last 3 years. I think we will get what we want only if every year is an election year.

    •  I think this polling data kind of goes along (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      annecros, chipmo

      with that:

      "Our focus groups show that voters see a lot of glamour and glitz from the Obama administration; they're wondering where the vision, where the valor is going to be... [Obama] is missing the mark on the middle class. He needs to get down there. It is not just rallies; he needs to be out there feeling what they are feeling, a lot of pain, a lot of hurt, a lot of uncertainty."

      More: "The public need a sense of a vision, they need a sense of hope, they need to be able to see that it's not just the old Obama giving them the charisma and the cool. They need to see substance over style."

  •  Look, I'm not going to come in here and argue with (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tardis10, annecros, jeopardydd, Agathena

    you.  Because I don't want a fight.

    If you feel differently, let us all know what your grand vision is below.  Maybe you really believe in Mitt...
    I and people like me have not reached the same conclusions that you have, and they are based on different premises and comprise different answers than the strawmen you have erected here.  And the fundamental questions we ask ourselves are different from yours.  These questions are not "Is Obama a U.S. citizen?"  Of course he is.  That campaign was clear propaganda meant to stoke pockets of lingering bigotry and divert the energy and attention of the constituents of both parties.  No, these questions are "Is the President abusing his authority?", "Does voting for someone who is responsible for hundreds of innocent deaths also confer MY passive consent for those deaths?" "How much control over the policy approved by the Democratic side of DC do the wealthy psychopaths of this country actually control?"

    I have what I consider very solid reasons for asking these questions, and they all center around the fact that our foreign policy toward the rest of the world has NOT CHANGED ENOUGH in over 60 years.  The amount of propaganda that has been drilled into my head for my entire life is finally being exposed for what it is.

    I have no interest in forcing you to change your mind, and I will not come in here and subject you to the information that leads me to my conclusions.  You have a mission and a strategy.  That is fine.  I am not so arrogant as to believe that my analysis is perfect, and I say more power to you in pursuit of what you believe is right.  Hopefully your answers to those questions are correct.  I am merely on the other side of the hill of certainty.

    I will not come in here and insult you for your position.  I know there will be many comments that will insult me for mine, and I accept that.  I stepped in here.  Sticks and stones may break my bones, but only dialogue can change me.

    But if you are unwilling to truly accept the possibility that  conclusions like mine are even possible and you are not willing to evaluate each new piece of disappointing evidence that comes forth and reexamine that possibility, then you are engaged in a monologue, not a dialogue.  Don't demand that I change my mind when you've given up on trying to dialogue with me and are merely attempting to bully dissenting voices into submission with beliefs that don't acknowledge my questions.

    You do not have access to the whole truth JUST AS people like me do not have access to the whole truth.

    I never step into diaries on this side of the fence about Obama because I never have the expectation that anybody here is interested in what I have to say.  If they were, they'd come into the diaries where people discuss things while entertaining perspectives like mine  Yet I am constantly forced to endure comments that express the same lack of interest in dialogue and same if not more contempt as contained in this diary for people who are just as imperfect of knowledge as you, the diary's author, but have merely reached a different conclusion.


    No.  None of us believe in Mitt.  What kind of moron would be antiwar but pro-Mitt?

    The hilarious thing is that on conservative Facebook pages, I've seen comment section postings where disaffected Republicans who are considering voting third party or abstaining are told that their "wasted" vote will just count for Obama.  Which when you start with some of the axioms I start with just goes to reinforce the point.

    Anyway, I'm just in here to let you know that you're creating a strawman of the position that people like me hold.  It's more accurately described as the "anti war weighted issue" voters than the "radical left" crowd as it draws people from all along the false left-right spectrum, but that's just more of the  media approved, divisive framing and perpetuation of the phony-ass spectrum.  And just in case you think you are really making a point to those in the extremely anti-war group, you are not expressing interest in a dialogue but merely a rally with the chorus or a pie fight.

    I don't want to fight.  I want to be left either in peace in the critical diaries that come out about current events OR engaged in dialogue that is AT LEAST as MODERATED and RESPECTFUL IF MISTRUSTFUL as my response to this obnoxious insinuation that anyone who doesn't feel like you do is interested in voting for Mitt.

    I do not participate in pure "bash Obama" diaries.  I barely see any on here, in fact I think they're HR'd right the hell off.  That's good.  I agree completely there are other places for that unnecessary divisiveness.  I disapprove of the pie fighting you're doing here as well, but clearly this is a section of the site that doesn't consider people like me part of the community.

    I've been here a hell of a lot longer than I've had these opinions.  I was reading here years before I signed up.  It is a sad commentary if the importance that I place on the issue of war is what leads me to be a pariah of the Daily Kos.

    “America is just the country that shows how all the written guarantees in the world for freedom are no protection against tyranny and oppression of the worst kind.” ~Peter Kropotkin

    by chipmo on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 12:11:49 AM PDT

    •  What 3rd party candidate helps you? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Ron Paul (libertarian)?  He wants to kill the minimum wage, kill the fed and pursue high levels of austerity.  Will that make you better off?  He wants to get rid of Obamacare.  This last point would kill innocent people just as surely as drone strikes.

      Who is your third party candidate?

      •  way to (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        chipmo, Agathena

        miss his entire point.

        •  No, they missed the point. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          I wanted their ideas on what to do about it.  I was wanting this question answered.  Complaining is only acceptable if you have a clear and concise plan to fix what you are complaining about.  I don't believe in complaining to complain.  Things aren't always sunshine and rainbows... that isn't cause to spend your life talking about how life is unfair.

          •  youa re demanding (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            that people pull the lever and thus give their tacit approval for some actions that they are morally opposed to.

            This is a bigger issue than you seem to think it is for some people and just dismissing those concerns are not going to get anybody to just drop their morality.

            You need to better appeal to that morality rather than dismissing it if you want to convince people to make that vote.

            Bottom line: when you compare people's moral beliefs about unchecked state-sponsored killings to:

            "sunshine and rainbows..."
            you will find it very difficult to win any converts.
      •  To quote myself. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        "you are engaged in a monologue, not a dialogue.  Don't demand that I change my mind when you've given up on trying to dialogue with me and are merely attempting to bully dissenting voices into submission with beliefs that don't acknowledge my questions."

        “America is just the country that shows how all the written guarantees in the world for freedom are no protection against tyranny and oppression of the worst kind.” ~Peter Kropotkin

        by chipmo on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 10:28:12 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I am wanting to know what you suggest I do. (0+ / 0-)

          It isn't monologue unless you refuse to answer the question I present.  Give me the solution.

          I answered your question.  I am better off because of him being the most forward President for civil rights of my generation.  If others aren't, I still care about you, so I vote for the candidate that I believe will keep programs alive for you and avoid starting new wars.  I stated that the question I ask myself is, "Would I be better off with the opponent?"  I have answered your question, but I would love an answer to mine.  What is your solution?  If I don't get the answer, I understand that you don't have one, but to say that I am in monologue when you ignore my questions and called me selfish to start with, seems like you don't care to solve the problems.

          I get it that you think Obama has abused his power.  I get that you think he has been too nice to Republicans and corporations.  I have read your points and seen the ones you approve of.  I just want to know what I can do, in your mind, to help you fix all of this.

          •  Your stance, repeatedly, (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            is to diminish my stance.

            I cannot answer your questions without examining the fundamental axioms, which get to measuring just how evil the lesser evil.  Do you even recognize the conclusion that the Democratic Party and its stance on warfare is, in fact, advancing an agenda that is evil?  

            If you recognize that possibility, then we can have a dialogue about just how much the lesserness of the evil counts.

            If you don't recognize this as a possibility, there is no dialogue to be had.

            And again, you have never once in this diary or in your responses expressed anything but disdain for the position I represent.  I have certainly not condemned or dismissed your view, despite the certitude that I have in my position.

            “America is just the country that shows how all the written guarantees in the world for freedom are no protection against tyranny and oppression of the worst kind.” ~Peter Kropotkin

            by chipmo on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 12:58:32 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Further, I am not merely stuck at the question (0+ / 0-)

            of "which candidate should I vote for?"

            I am at the question of "Are the two parties actually colleagues more than competitors, jockeying for the favor of the Jamie Dimon's of the world rather than for our vote?  Their job is to see which party is capable of fooling the most people?  Are elections, more than anything, polls that ask us if we as a nation will tolerated being governed by the policies enacted by this particular mix of political policy brands?  If I vote for either, am I voting for war and the deaths of innocents instead of an END TO WAR?"

            Are you there?  What PROOF do you have that these questions are ludicrous?  These are the questions at which I AM STUCK, not because I am some sort of saboteur looking to dissuade voters.  IF YOU WANT TO VOTE, THEN I AM JEALOUS OF YOUR CERTAIN OPTIMISTIC ANSWERS TO MY QUESTIONS!

            All I am is someone who 4 years ago was CERTAIN that who I was voting for was not perfect but rather someone who would have the strength of mind and will to turn this country around, as George Bush was able to turn it around the other way, but through critically thinking about current events and the results of this administration despite all its excuses and how incensed I would be if McCain had been responsible for what happened this term.


            Yes, I am a fucking cynic.  By definition, a cynic is an optimist broken by disappointment.  Being cynical of everything that has to do with the two parties in charge of this country is a pretty goddamn rational place to be in June of 2012 from my point of view, and until you are willing to SEE my point of view and DISCUSS RESPECTFULLY what is it that I see from down here, you will never be able to change my mind.

            “America is just the country that shows how all the written guarantees in the world for freedom are no protection against tyranny and oppression of the worst kind.” ~Peter Kropotkin

            by chipmo on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 01:59:39 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  In short, I refuse to suggest to you (0+ / 0-)

            for whom you should vote.  That is your decision.

            Please do NOT post your conclusions as proof of your answers to my questions unless you are willing for me to go into some serious goddamn detail about why I disagree with them.

            I will not foist upon you the moral quandary that I feel unless you invite it.

            “America is just the country that shows how all the written guarantees in the world for freedom are no protection against tyranny and oppression of the worst kind.” ~Peter Kropotkin

            by chipmo on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 02:51:59 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  In which I reply with minor cliche & major reason (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Rome wasn't built in a day. (ok, enough cliche)

    We were in a hole in 2008. Deep. Effing. Hole.
    Relatively speaking, We've Come A Long Way, Baby.
    No, we aren't there yet. And in this age of instant messaging, meeting places/Venting places such as our Daily Kos, we can all remind ourselves of that repeatedly in a really short span of time. We don't have to wait for tomorrows paper to hit the stands anymore.
    Makes me think of that scene in Men In Black where Tommy Lee Jones tells Will Smith that Earth faces an outrageous number of existential threats each day, but the general public doesn't know about them.
    Well I think those threats have always been there, but now we know. So it can be disheartening from time to time.
    But I try to stay focused on the big picture.
    Yes we can.
    We were right on track until the the TeaBags got the House in '10 - we are still on the right track, we've just run into a slight headwind. We really HAVE come a long way, even though we still have miles to go before we sleep.

    This election is really important. Rmoney is exactly that - (R)Money. Just from getting a glance at the Ryan Budget, and his list of Bush advisors, I know we are doomed if the thugs get power back.
    We can't stop now. We need to re-elect the President and give him a bit more legislative power to boot.
    We can DO this. President Obama can DO this.
    Yes we can.
    I'm going to be out planting seeds, changing minds, and being relentless about it. It's got to be done.
    I have faith that President Obama has a good bit of firepower saved up that hasn't been unleashed yet too. In political terms, it's an eternity between now and the election. And seeing him on a debate stage with Romney IS going to be a real treat, I have the utmost confidence.
    Yes we can.

    And to quote John Blutarski, "Did we give up when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor??!?! Who's with me?!??!"

    Yes we can.

    Everybody got to elevate from the norm....

    by Icicle68 on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 01:17:31 AM PDT

    •  And about staying home on election day.... (0+ / 0-) do that is to vote Republican.
      Do you really want to do that?

      Everybody got to elevate from the norm....

      by Icicle68 on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 01:20:03 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  well no, (0+ / 0-)

        by definition, you are not not voting for a republican (or anyone) if you stay home.

        for the record, even if people Do not feel like they can pull the lever for Obama, I would hope they feel like there's something down-tick that they can vote for and will therefore show up.

        •  Well yes, yes you are. (0+ / 0-)

          By not voting, you are standing aside and letting the ski-masked bandit into your neighbors house.
          Edmund Burke once said "All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
          You know the busloads of crazies will be out, Republican-owned voting machine companies and people like Katherine Harris will be working their magic.

          Vote like your life depends on it.
          Because it does.

          Everybody got to elevate from the norm....

          by Icicle68 on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 10:59:04 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  I think it's a huge mistake to address this to (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    annecros, ParkRanger

    the "critics", imo.

    Although they're very vocal on some websites, for whatever reasons, they're not even close to being as vocal or dominant elsewhere.

    It's far more productive to let us know what positive effects the Obama Administration has had and give us details about that.  No need to bring the "critics" into it, as the core of your message will just get drowned out by those who feel offended and those who love to agitate against the Obama Admin on websites like this one.

    "A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle" - Mohammed Nabbous, R.I.P.

    by Lawrence on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 02:06:49 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site