It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Kerry supporters: your anger is misplaced!

page: 1

log in


posted on Nov, 3 2004 @ 03:02 AM
To all of my fellow ATSers who are bitter and think that we now deserve anything bad that happens now I give you this to ponder:

If you are looking for someone to blame, it is the Democratic Party who has failed you. Over the last several years we have watched it become more divided amongst itself and seen it's gradual implosion from within.

You need to ask yourselves how in the world John Kerry got the Democratic nomination in the first place. There were several other choices that would have been better, and that may have made the difference.

What would the outcome have been if someone like Joe Lieberman or Dick Gephardt had gotten the nomination instead of Kerry?

In my opinion, you would be seeing very different results if that had been the case. I believe that the Democratic Party as a whole didn't put much thought into who their nominee would be and were too swept up in "Anyone but Bush."

Maybe next time they will choose more wisely. Don't blame the country, our choices sucked. Blame your party. They are the ones who have failed you.


I voted for Badnarik, so don't blame me

posted on Nov, 3 2004 @ 03:36 AM
As a fellow voter for the Liberitarian party; I want to thank you for your effort. Pleasantries aside...

You're right. I *might* have leaned towards democrats if they gave me a better option. When the primaries decided in favor of Kerry, I really got angry because I could never understand how a guy who was viewed as a zero in the eyes of his own people (in terms of votes) rose from null popularity to #1.

In some ways, this looks like some kind of a set up. Especially since Bush and Kerry both went to that same god forsaken secret society at Yale, Skull and Bones. That might mean nothing to some, but that means a lot to me.

The DNC endorsed this guy, despite his credibility issues, his shady past (like the investigation he lead on the BCCI scandal), and his Gore-like charisma. There were much better options, like Kucinich, and yes, Gephardt.

They sort of did the same thing with Bush back in 2000, when the obvious winner was going to be McCain... until he withdrew. But it had the opposite effect.

The faults of this shoddy election lie in many different directions, but one finger is definitely pointed at the DNC's decision to appoint Kerry as their man to run against Bush.

[edit on 11/3/2004 by AlnilamOmega]

posted on Nov, 3 2004 @ 05:12 AM
I managed to convert dear hubby to the LP, too
He operated under the misconception that Libertarians were fruitcakes who wanted free license to do anything and everything they want. I straightened him out on that one. Seeing that Badnarik actually received more votes than Nader did in several states gives me hope in that the message is (slowly) getting out to people. I knew there was no chance of an LP candidate being taken seriously, but am hoping that it will eventually become a viable choice by the time my 7 year old is of voting age. I'll do my part to make that happen by volunteering my time to the local effort here.

If Lieberman had run I woulda voted for him and would certainly sleep much better at night than I have since the nominations were announced. This past year has been H&@@ on me
What's done is done, but Ambien is your friend



log in