[merylsilverburg]

Originally Posted by happy_doughnut

Let me say this, though: I did not say I disliked Kerry. There were some policies he had that I agreed with very much. For example, his policies on abortion, stem cell research, and gay marriages - these I agreed with, and because Bush is a con to these policies, I would choose Kerry. What I meant about the "not being a fan" thing was that Kerry did seem unappealing. Like Fortune said, I think it was the way he looked, as incredibly superficial as that may sound. I felt that he needed more zest and charisma to with over the full approval of the people. I liked his policies, I just simply did not like the way he presented them. Hence, that is why I wasn't his "fan" or anything. Like Gore, for example, I was his fan... 100%. I was in full agreement with most of what he said, and I loved his enthusiasm. In politics, I doubt there will ever be one I fully agree with, but if some people refrain from voting because their beliefs don't match absolutely, then they will never vote. I suppose one just has to pick the lesser of two weevils.

I see what you mean through your post now. The part I underlined though: I think Kerry has too much of that already...as I said, he does try to act very charming and very "hip" to win over a lot of the young voters (and he has). I don't know what it is about him, but he just doesn't quite look very honest...but that's just me.

Originally Posted by happy_doughnut

In Ohio, I guess you could say that, well, pretty much everything was up to the - the entire election. What the Democrats needed in order to win was to win over a state that had in the 2000 elections voted Republican. Since most states kinda just "vote the same each time," (like CA, always D. and LA. always R.) they democrats thus needed to win a state that usually voted republican in order to detract from the electoral points of the republicans. Since you said your state is democrat, then even if you would have voted republican, it wouldn't have made much of a difference. In my state, it is pretty much totally liberal, so it always goes democrat, so even if I would have voted republican, is wouldn't have matter much.

However, Ohio was pretty much up for grabs for either party. Thus, every vote in that state was signifficant, whether it be republican or democrat.

The smack thing was a joke, meryl...

What I mean by that is that even though some people in Ohio knew that their state was pretty much the one that would decided the election (and since it could have gone easily either way), they still didn't vote. That to me is just wrong.

Ah, I see now...heh, not too keen on politics (can you tell? ) Well, even though you said the smack thing was a joke, I really don't agree; I'm sure if I were in your position or someone else on here who feels very strong about this situation, I would actually use the same thing.

Originally Posted by Harry

To sum it up – regardless of whom you vote for, voting is ALWAYS important, the vote of a single person DO always make the difference,

Yes, it's true; the vote of a single person does make a difference. But, don't you think it's important and imperative that the person who votes (if you're saying that everyone should vote) know exactly what is going on instead of just some brainless idiot who got influenced into voting by MTV. As some of you may know, I'm not into politics at all. It's a hectic world and I really don't need any more of that. So, if you're saying that everyone should vote (regardless of who they vote for), what is that person makes the wrong decision voting? Sure, they made a difference...in voting for the wrong guy.

To clarify (hopefully -_-;;; )

Let's just say, for example, that I didn't know anything about what's going on in the political world and elections are coming up. I watch my MTV (because, I'm just a stupid teen) and they're all saying "Vote Bush! Vote Bush! Your vote can make a difference!" So, I go out and vote for Bush just because I was influenced into voting. But, I voted for the wrong person because I don't know what the hell is going on.

All I'm saying is, you say that everyone should vote, but I don't think that everyone should vote if they don't know what is going on. Because they can make a difference, but it could be a very wrong one if they voted for the wrong guy because they had no idea what's going on.

Oh man, I hope I made some sense here.

As for your entire post Harry, I was really blown away by what you said because it was very well-written...but I still won't step down from my decision of not voting.