All About McCain

[scaeagles]

A decision not to vote is just as valid as voting for either candidate. It is not the same as apathy. It is saying that both these choices are so aweful that they are not worthy of my vote.

I am not boneheaded. ISM is not boneheaded.

Should I come on here and say the decision to vote for Obama was boneheaded, even without mentioning anyone specifically, I would be called out, so I am calling 3894 out for calling both ISM and me boneheaded.

[3894]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

I am not boneheaded. ISM is not boneheaded. <snip!>

I am calling 3894 out for calling both ISM and me boneheaded.

Here's what I posted:

Originally Posted by 3894

I think the decision not to vote is boneheaded.

There is a difference between saying a decision is X and saying a person is X. I consciously worded my post like that because, although I believe your decision is boneheaded, I do not believe that you are. You as a person and your political beliefs are not the same thing. My wording was not an attempt to weasel in a personal insult.

I do understand if your feelings are hurt. That was not my intent. I am very interested in why/how anyone could possibly not vote in this presidential election. This one is for the soul of America.

[JWBear]

That was hysterical. (The SNL bit, not Leo's post.)

[scaeagles]

My feelings weren't hurt, 3894, but I certainly appreciate what you are saying and do thank you for your clarification. I just have no doubt that should I say the decision to vote for Obama was boneheaded, the posts in response would be vitriolic.

By not voting for either, what I am saying is that I'm tired of the crap choices we're supposed to support. What would make an INCREDIBLE statement is if the country as a whole had the attitude ISM and I do now (good lord, no wonder I'm depressed..... ) that we are going to vote but not support either candidate. Can you imagine what it would say if voter turnout at the polls was 70% but only 35% of those who voted made a vote for President? THAT would shake things up mightily.

This may very well be an election for the soul of America. I believe each of the candidates takes the soul straight to hell, and so by not voting, I make a(teeny tiny though it may be) statement that I am sick of the crap I'm supposed to vote for. That's more an indictment of the republican candidate from my standpoint than it is the dem.

[3894]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

I just have no doubt that should I say the decision to vote for Obama was boneheaded, the posts in response would be vitriolic.

Which would be okay, IMO. This election inspires passion. Right now, this country is polarized.

The New York Times has an interesting opinion dealio about Palin by Frank Rich. Apparently, there is some talk about flipping the ticket, making Palin the top and McCain the vice-president. Quick quote:

She wants to be president, she thinks she can be president, she thinks she will be president. And perhaps soon. She often sounds like someone who sees herself as half-a-heartbeat away from the presidency. Or who is seen that way by her own camp, the hard-right G.O.P. base that never liked McCain anyway and views him as, at best, a White House place holder.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Originally Posted by 3894

Which would be okay, IMO. This election inspires passion. Right now, this country is polarized.

You condone vitrol? I'm not a fan, myself.

Visible mojo for scaeagles, since I can't mojo you. I'm surprised that tapping Al Gore was the last straw....but I admit my inability to understand your politics. I agree, your decision not to vote is a decision, as is iSm's.

To anyone who is feeling down about the future...I suggest you read the book I'm reading, about the next generation of politics. Hmm, actually, probably not good for scaeagles. But in the perspective of history, maybe it will make you feel better anyway.

[Strangler Lewis]

When both of you guys move to a state that's actually in play, then it will be a principled stand. You each have a possible worse outcome in mind between the two main candidates. Your principles are free riding on the efforts of others who make that outcome in your state unlikely.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Originally Posted by Strangler Lewis

When both of you guys move to a state that's actually in play, then it will be a principled stand. You each have a possible worse outcome in mind between the two main candidates. Your principles are free riding on the efforts of others who make that outcome in your state unlikely.

True, the situation in their own states does affect their decision, and that decision in a state like Florida means something different. They have luxuries the others don't have, and I am glad you mentioned this. It's a good thing for non-voters to keep in mind.

Yet, we don't vote in a vacuum. Their decision makes sense for them in their states, and I can dig that, as I've been an abstainer for many years...though with the situation kinda flipped, as I leaned red but didn't worry about my state going blue.

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by Strangler Lewis

When both of you guys move to a state that's actually in play, then it will be a principled stand. You each have a possible worse outcome in mind between the two main candidates. Your principles are free riding on the efforts of others who make that outcome in your state unlikely.

This was actually rather thought provoking for me (not the usual just skip over want Strangler has to say ). You are indeed correct. I do have a possible worse outcome, but I think the victory of Obama is better in the long run for the conservative movement. I believe McCain will clearly be better in one area than Obama, being national defense, and that is the only reason I am not voting for Obama. I see Obama right out of the Jimmy Carter book of destroying the military, and in these times, that cannot be allowed to take place.

Convince me that Obama won't destroy our military capability, cut vital weapons programs, cut the size of our forces, or capitulate in the name of getting along.....and perhaps I'd vote for him. This is how far McCain has fallen in my view.

By the way, hell is still a very hot place, from what I understand, regardless of my last few posts, this one in particular.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

Convince me that Obama won't destroy our military capability, cut vital weapons programs, cut the size of our forces, or capitulate in the name of getting along.....and perhaps I'd vote for him. This is how far McCain has fallen in my view.

The case has been made, you choose not to believe the case. Biden made the case in the debate. Obama and the people who advise him have demonstrated time and again over the past decade that they understand the concept of consequences. They accurately predicted the result of the war in Iraq (sectarian violence, significant commitment and sacrifice on our part, and a bolstering of Al Quaeda in Afghanistan/Pakistan due to our resources being tied up elsewhere). Wheras McCain and those that advise him said it would be easy, that we could just ignore Afghanistan since we've already clearly won there, and that it would be a war against Al Quaeda.

So who's ideas have done more to weaken our military? The camp that seems to have a pretty good handle on where we should be fighting and what those fights might look like, or the camp that thinks war is a game that's won by running in as fast as you can and blowing sh*t up, who cares if you're actually fighting the right enemy, or if you're adequately prepared, or have any idea of what might be involved in running that war.