well, i just spent the last hour typing a reply but lost the whole thing!!!

:'(

you got me confused buddy.

i'm voting for Kerry. i really hope he wins! if bush wins then its going to be a disaster .....................

:)

(anyone interested in my little game?)

The electoral system is a tricky one. I agree we need some sort of an overhaul, but I'm not necessarily sure if a "straight vote" is really going to be the solution. After all, Bush not only won the electoral votes, but he also cleaned up in the popular vote. I think we'd all find that system just as corrupt with ballot box stuffing and all kinds of shenanigans. Regardless, something has got to give at some point. You can't live in a country where you have a choice of 700 cable channels and only two viable candidates for the most important position in government. That's just mind blowing and embarassing.

You're right, and from what I've been reading and hearing the Democrats (in a bid to become the 'people's party', again) are willing to become more conservative. We definitely need some new blood in this party. Actually, we need an electoral system that will allow more voices to be heard.

Totally hear you and that's why I think so many in this country should be furious with Kerry and the Democratic party for allowing the Republicans to dictate what the "issues" of this election wound up being. The alleged war on terror, our occupation of Iraq, the failing economy, the corporate stranglehold on our government, our unbelievably poor environmental policies and education are just some of the issues that should have been constantly put front and center by the Democrats. Instead we were given Kerry who agreed with the war in the first place. Just being devil's advocate here, but tell me why a voter in a red state would vote for Kerry who is for abortion, civil unions for gays and had no clear position on the war? I voted for the guy, but I challenge anyone else who voted for him to tell me they voted for him because he was the best the Democrats could offer vs. just voting for him to get Bush out.

I don't think it is far fetched at all. Bush and the Republicans won by appealing to evangelical Christians who consider *** marraige and abortion (among other things) wrong. I lived in Arkansas, Texas, Georgia, DC, Pennsylvania, and Ohio, and I gotten a healthy dose of how many in our country think. Though probably not realistic, it would be wonderful if politicians did not relegate any mention of the notion of a culture war to regressive thinking. It is hard to 'move on' from something that stares so many of us in the face everyday.

Even cable is pretty much foolish programming. Although I live in L.A., I've been to places in the mid-west and south and have even driven cross the country. It's so interesting witnessing the different lifestyles. Many older people are stuck in their ways of thinking, and right wing media only confirms their belief. And considering the consolidation of media in general by pro-conservatives, it's a wonder that any form of objective info is being spread around. But I would just guess the more progressives are the college kids in these places.

O.K., now that's a little far fetched if you ask me. I have no doubt that there is still widespread racism throughout the South, but it certainly isn't exclusive to those States. As a recent transplant to Baltimore from Brooklyn, my eyes have been opened wide to the reality of racism outside of NYC.
I have to say that it's ironic to me that we all ask the sitting President to look outside this country to really see if his views reflect the rest of the world's, but we're all arrogant enough in the blue states to think that we reflect the views of this country as a whole. It's this whining and the wonderful IQ comparison to who voted Bush/Kerry that turns off the middle of this country. Let's face it, the Republicans ran a better campaign and knew how to get their base out to the polls. For all of P. Diddy's efforts, the same exact percentage of young voters went to the polls this year as they did inn 2000. Instead of going with a weak candidate that pandered to Bush's base the Democrats should have went for the kill with the only candidate who had the balls to stand up to Bush, Howard Dean. While we were all laughing at that clip of him rambling off states and yelling on "The Daily Show" the Bush team was wiping their brow and breathing a sigh of relief that the Democratic party turned their back on him. Start doing your homework now folks. Jeb Bush or Rudy Guiliani, take your pick. One of those two fools will be the next GOP nominee. The election of 2004 is over...let's start to rethink whether or not we're going to sit on our ***** and allow this reactionary doctrine to dictate what we do for 12 years instead of just 8.

Maybe it's much simpler than that. Try this on for size...

www.selekta.com