I'm a little shy about posting on a US board

[uriel1972]

As I am from Australia and I don't know all the players, nuances and rules in US politics. However, what happens in the US effects the rest of the world to a large degree.
To the point:
Vote for whomever you like in the primaries, but when it comes to the presidential election in the name of those who will be killed, maimed or otherwise traumatized by another four years of Republican brutality please, please, please vote for the Democratic nominee.

Yes they're a corporate hack, yes they threw the GLBT community under a bus and yes they're a new age woo, but they are all preferable to another Bush or worse.

For the poor, minorities, the mentally ill, physically disabled and all the other vulnerable people it's not a popularity contest it's survival

So please, please and please again vote for the Democratic nominee

[GCP]

1. Welcome to DU - and yes, I'll vote for WHOEVER the Dem candidate is

I've never voted republican in my life and I'm not about to start now. :hi:

[bullimiami]

8. me too.

kang or kodos




i believe our political system is broken.

[harlinchi]

23. I agree with what he said!

Welcome, and I'll vote for the Democratic candidate, although I'm sure I've at least voted for a republican candidate in an 'at-large' councilman's race in Philly, but that's it!

Shy? An Australian? While my experience is limited (OK, very limited!), the Philly Iggles have a punter who is an Aussie. He's a big guy (6'5", 265 lbs.) who took a vicious (and maybe cheap) shot from a linebacker (Antwan Barnes) early on, got up and remarked, "Is that all you got?" He didn't seem to be a shrinking violet!

Shy, outgoing or however, thanks for posting this sentiment! I hope more non-Americans post it here as well, to show how the world has placed its hopes on us.

[anakie]

86. That'll be Sav Rocca

He played Australian Rules football for over 10 years. If you have ever seen footage of our game you will understand why. Darren Bennett x Chargers led the way and the Jets punter is also an Aussie. Playing in body padding should be a doddle for these guys.


Peace

[Dulcinea]

158. Same here.

I'm not particularly enthused about any of the candidates at this point, but you can rest assured I'll vote Dem in '08.

Welcome aboard! I hope to visit Australia one day! I've met Aussies on my travels abroad, & they're some of the friendliest people I've ever met. :hi:

[NoPasaran]

2. If you only have a vague idea of how US politics works

You'll fit in with at least half the posters here!

Just remember, keep your opinions strident and self-righteous!

Welcome to DU!

:hi:

[OKNancy]

5. I usually don't do this, but

LMAO... :rofl:

[liberal N proud]

3. Welcome to DU - and don't be shy

Most of us here at DU realize that what happens in America effects the rest of the world. Don't know how much longer that will last with this regime in place.

Not to worry, I would guess that once the primaries are done and we have a Democratic nominee that 99% of the people on DU and a majority of the true Democrats in this country will vote for that candidate, whoever it is.

[bdamomma]

40. yes, we all better realize what happens in the America

affects everyone.

[Midlodemocrat]

4. Welcome to DU. Like Godlesscommieprevert said, I have never

voted Republican and don't intend to start now. Old dog, new tricks and all that.

[uriel1972]

6. thanks for the welcome

It's just that I keep seeing "I'll never vote for X" and I despair

[Maraya1969]

19. I just said that about Obama but you can be sure that if he is our nominee

I'll vote for him. Right now it is just a bunch of fights over the people we would actually vote for, (even if someone says they never would vote for X person).

[harlinchi]

26. Dadgum, that's got to be the most encouraging thing I've read in a while!

Thank YOU, Maraya1969! I've said mean things about a candidate or two but your words sum up my feelings.

[riona]

7. Will do

:kick:

[CoffeeCat]

9. Don't be shy....

...come on in...the water's fine! :)

I've often wondered if people outside of the US understand that there
is a large contingent of US citizens who are adamantly opposed to this
administration.

I am happy to see that you have found DU. More people in the world need
to understand that our entire country isn't in lockstep with the crimes
of the Bush Administration. In fact, we are sad and disgusted with them.

I hope more people outside of the US, find DU. The world needs to understand
that not all of us are complete idiots.

Welcome and enjoy your stay!

:hi:

[uriel1972]

10. Nearly all we see of the US

is it's television and it's pretty safe to say most of it doesn't reflect the true nature of US society the good or the bad. It can be hard to believe in 'good' americans if you don't go out of your way to find them.

[YOY]

22. More than 1/2 of us are technically "good" Americans

Bush and the necons maintain a strong hold in under the 30% of Americans who are either somehow benefitting from this Administration, holding uber-Nationalistic biases, or are utterly incompetant/idiotic/ignorant.

It's hard to comprehend how "patriotism" and "nationalism" can be used to isolate and villify dissent here as well as the ultra-consumer undertow telling us to keep our heads down and ignore the "man behind the curtain" unless you've actually lived here. It happens and it's rather scary to think about...you'd understand why some would prefer to be ignorant of it.

You're welcome here as welcome can be. You may be surprised that you are treated as an equal despite the inability to vote in our election process. Of course, we can't vote in yours either, now can we? ;)

[DemReadingDU]

32. Welcome!

Appreciate your views, hope you post more!

:hi:

[DutchLiberal]

27. Trust me: all the Dutch people I know, know the majority of Americans want Bush gone,

Newspapers are often running stories about Americans' call for change, too. :)

[spooky3]

119. thanks for posting that

there have always been some Ugly Americans, but Bush has made us all look ugly. We apologize to all the world for him. It is good to know that our European friends know most of us are appalled by him and wish we could stop him.

[DutchLiberal]

148. His 28% approval rating is well-known in The Netherlands.

So don't you worry. :hi:

[sarge43]

11. Welcome uriel.

To quote an old timer Democrat, "I'd vote for a yellow dog before I'd vote for a Republican." This is the reason for our yellow dog icon.

[uriel1972]

12. That's the way I feel

About our labor and Liberal party here. Our conservatives are called Liberals for some strange historical reason and our Democrats are a minor party.

[sarge43]

45. After you settle in and feel comfortable with us maniacs, you'll have to give us

the quick and easy briefing on who's who and what's what on the Oz political scene.

[HowHasItComeToThis]

13. yes, that's the word REPUBLICAN BRUTALITY

THAT IS IT IN A NUTSHELL

[MethuenProgressive]

14. Welcome!

Thanks for joining, and you can count on me for voting Democratic in '08!

[rox63]

15. I plan on voting for the Dem nominee, whoever it is

There are some I'd prefer more than others. But every one of the Dems is much better than any of the Repubs.

[raccoon]

16. Ah, don't be shy, matey!

I was just wondering the other day if Australia had any resources the neocons might want. I can't think of any. :silly:

[uriel1972]

17. uranium gold copper oil gas uh... kangaroos

There's plenty to rip out of the ground here if you don't care it's in a national park. So I guess it's all perfectly safe from the neocons:eyes:

[YOY]

18. Rather like preaching to the converted isn't that?

Of course we're going to do that. Some may go Green but in a non-parlimentary democracy that's somewhat an exercise in futility.

[uriel1972]

20. I was beginning to worry

I kept seeing "I'll never vote for X" I hope that it's just blowing off steam.

[YOY]

25. There is an X or two I rather dislike

But I'll vote for them over any Repub.

I draw the line when it comes to dislike of criticism of those Xes. I'll criticise anyone I please but there are people who demand lockstep party loyalty and silence over commentary...that's the other guys.

[Jim Lane]

65. Thanks for your perspective!

I think most of the "I'll never vote for X" is indeed just blowing off steam. Consider that Nader received almost three million votes in 2000 but fewer than half a million the next time around. The 2004 election showed that most of the Nader voters came to understand the point you're making, about the difference between Democrats and Republicans. They realized the absurdity of Nader's position that there was no meaningful difference. They saw, from Bush's first term, the terrible effects of refusing to vote for a candidate who wasn't absolutely perfect.

In 2008, there will still be a few head-in-the-sand progressives who waste their votes, but not many.

[SaveOurDemocracy]

21. Thank you and Welcome, uriel...

No worries here, mate ... I'd marry a kangaroo before I'd vote for a ReThug. :hi:

[DutchLiberal]

24. I think there's a fault in your reasoning.

You think a Democrat is better than a Republican per sé, but what if a candidate is elected who is similar to Bush/Republicans? What if a Democrat is elected who has no intention of reversing the powers Bush has granted the president, but instead makes full use of them? There are Democratic candidates who have not spoken out the intention to reverse the Patriot Act, or the Military Commissions Act. And some of them are just as much slaves for the corporations as Republicans are. So to say *any* Democrat is better than a Republican, is not right, IMHO.

[uriel1972]

28. It's a worry sure

but as far as I can tell the dem candidates are halfway sane and even if they are what you say they are they aren't going nuke russia in a drunken fit of pique. If nothing else it will give us more time.

[truedelphi]

60. Lol And the worse part of it is that since HE doesn't know where

Russia actually is, it could be Chicago or Milwaukee that gets nuked!!

(Chicago would mean he wipes out my family and Milwaukee - he wipes out my beer!)

[KamaAina]

84. My money would be on Moscow, Idaho

"Look, Mr. Cheney! There's Moscow, right there!" :dunce:

[Tom Rinaldo]

33. I do not see such a Democrat running however.

This is the 2000 Green Party Nader argument updated. Most people making this argument argue that Clinton is a corporate Democrat etc. etc. Does anyone seriously believe that Hillary Clinton would embrace policies significantly closer to Bush Republicans than did her husband Bill when he was in office? He will still be close at hand you know. And who is blind enough not to see that the world and most Americans also were far better off with Clinton in the White House than with George W. Bush? I fuly agree with the OP.

[DutchLiberal]

91. If you don't see one, you need to look closer.

Here are some of my beefs with Mrs. Clinton. I do believe she's a "Republican lite".

Hillary Clinton did vote for the Patriot Act. She has showed no intention at all to reverse it. She has voted for the Iraq war (so did Edwards, Biden and Dodd, by the way), and she has not apologized for it (like Edwards did). She has taken money from the big corporations that screw over the working class, including from Rupert Murdoch, was owns Faux Noise. Clinton has said it's possible the troops stay in Iraq until 2013, and in her plans, whenever she pulls out the troops, the US will keep bases in Iraq, to secure the 'privatization' (= theft) of Iraqi oil.

Clinton, to me, looks like another corporate-owned candidate and no, I don't think she will change anything dramatically in Washington. She represents the status quo, and she represents the interests of corporate America.

There are more like here. E.g. I'm not sure Edwards and Obama are corporate-free, and neither of them have shown the will to reverse some horrible Bush legislation like the Patriot Act and the Military Commissons Act. Biden and Dodd I do not know enough about to judge.

[dickbearton]

100. Dutchliberal, America is a corporate state; and Bill and Hillary are NOT Bush and Chaney.

[DutchLiberal]

101. Tell me something I don't know. Now either say something meaningful or go play.

[cali]

37. none of the dems running are similar to bush/republicans

All of them have spoken out to varying degrees on the Patriot Act and the MCA, and reversing bushco's executive power grab. None of them are as much slaves to the corporations as the repukes, and none of them would appoint fundy assholes to the SC.

[DutchLiberal]

92. Keep in mind that HRC voted FOR the Patriot Act. And none of the 'Big Three' have spoken out..

.. the will to reverse such horrible legislation as PA and MCA. Some of them are funded extremely by corporate America. If you think they represent your best interests, think twice. And none of them appointing fundy assholes to the SC? I'm not sure about that either. Obama is looking mighty fundy these days with his 'cured' ex-gay friend, and Hillary is dwelling with her religion as well.

[dickbearton]

98. A Democratic candidate similar to Bush, so far, purely hypothetical...

If that happens, a Republican and a Democratic candidate,
similar or worst, then the Criminal Bush; we are all in real
trouble. It should not happen; but I suppose anything is
possible. I never thought, we would have a traitor, war
criminal for President. I knew Bush was stupid and certainly
the wrong choice; but now we know the Criminal Bush is a
traitor.

[pnwmom]

143. NONE of the Democrats who are running are anything close to the Rethugs.

Hillary, whom DUers love to smear, has a voting record that consistently places her above 90% on progressive issues. The typical Republican score is less than 20% on those issues. Anyone who says they are the same is either misinformed or deliberately twisting the record.

www.progressivepunch.com

[DutchLiberal]

151. Voting for war with Iraq and voting for the Patriot Act is not very progressive.

Neither is accepting money from Wall Street and Rupert Murdoch, as well as voting for labeling the Iranian Revolutionary Guard as 'terrorist organization'. Hillary goes along in Cheney's phony 'war on terror', that's not progressive.

[progressoid]

29. We don't want a variation of this next year...

[bdamomma]

41. that cover tells all those who are in denial

how the rest of world views us.:-(

[hootinholler]

30. Voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil.

I will probably write in a candidate to officially register my dissent when the "republican light" candidate gain the nomination, but I would only do that if the candidate has my state locked up.

It's really depressing to think that we won't be able to get someone with the potential to be like FDR or JFK recognized. Rupert and GE won't allow it.

-Hoot

[uriel1972]

31. when the only choice is between two evils what will you do?

It's a shitty choice and I'm not arguing that, but if more survive through the lesser of two evils then they get my vote. FDR and JFK were both compromised by their dishonesty as well as being 'Great Men' We are all only human

[Oldenuff]

38. I'm with Hoot 'n Dutch on this one

and although I haven't read the other responses,my "take" on the new mantra "any Dem is better that a Repug" doesn't cut it.As long as we all just follow along with who the media and the party select should be supported?Not this time.Not anymore.If we don't stand up and demand better,we will always get to hold our noses when we vote.

So don't expect me to blindly follow along.I'll write in a worthy candidate if the party and the media makes a selection that I can't support.Any candidate who supports the Patriot Act has already lost my vote.(and that includes ALL the frontrunners).

[uriel1972]

43. Even if

not voting for the lesser evil alows the greater evil victory?
edit spelling

[NotGivingUp]

109. damn straight....evil is evil....eradicate itl. n/t

[Oldenuff]

152. Yep...even "if"

I won't settle this time.It's "line in the sand" time,and I'm not going to compromise my principles by voting for what I believe will end up being a "same old,same old" candidate.It's long past time for a REAL change,and voting for one of the so-called "front runners" is just more of that same ole same old bullsh*t.If one of the so-called frontrunners had the integrity to stand up against the Patriot Act,then that would have shown me that they have at least a little concern for my rights....but they didn't.Not a single one..(of the frontrunners)....For that,they have effectively spat in my face,and in the face of freedom loving Americans.Not enough difference now between the Dem candidates and the Repugs.It's the ultimate "slight of hand".

But go ahead and vote for another "shill" candidate.You still have that right........(for now).

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2171405

[NotGivingUp]

153. i think you meant to reply to uriel1972...one above me....

i feel totally as you do. i will not vote for a shill candidate. why waste my time voting for someone who has, and will continue, to screw me and all americans. the only candidate i am voting for is kucinich.

[Oldenuff]

154. You are right,I replied to the wrong message

My apologies to you.

I'm pleased to see another person who can see thru the fog of American politics.(I know there are others too...but where the heck are they?)

[DutchLiberal]

93. You said it right. They count on you voting for whoever the nominee is. They've always relied on it.

They (the DLC, the corporatists, the front-runners) know it doesn't matter they're "Republican light", because they know eventually all Democrats will hold their nose and vote for them anyway. And if not enough of you stand up and say: "no, not anymore", this process will never be changed. However, if you do so, if you actually stand up for your principals and refuse to vote for somebody who is not representing the people's best interest, you will be bullied and attacked by Democrats who dismiss you as "not a good Democrat".

Isn't it scary how "you're not a good Democrat" has almost become as much a recurring attack on DU as "you're not a good American" has become the standard reply from the right wing for opposing them and their silly war?

(I'm sure many of you now will be angry and say: "Who does the Dutch guy think he is, meddling in our elections?" Guess what? You're right. I have no right to do that, as you certainly will not come to a Dutch board and tell Dutch people, including me, how to vote. So from now on, I will shut up about the primaries and instead only post about general topics.)

[uriel1972]

99. I am a socialist and I don't think any of the candidates

truly represent what I would like to see in charge of the US for many reasons, but for those of us who need relief now any one of them would be a better choice than the Republican candidate. Those of us living on the margins can't afford to sit back and wait for the perfect candidate. Principles don't feed families or pluck medicine out of thin air, compromise is king I'm afraid. By all means work for change, I will try to, but people need help now.

[DutchLiberal]

102. If you're a socialist, why would you not support Kucinich/Gravel?

Also, seeing you're from Australia, I think you can see how, on an international scale if you place all weight on foreign policy, war, and global impact, Republican candidate Ron Paul would be a better choice than some of the Democratic candidates. That's not to say I would vote for Paul, because he would be terrible on gay rights, abortion, stem cell research, privatization, taxes etc. But, looking at foreign policy, he would be better for the rest of the world.

(I guess I'm flame-bait now, eh?)

[uriel1972]

103. I care about the vulnerable inside the US as well as outside

so Paul is a non starter. Kucinich I have issues about some of his beliefs and past-associations. I freely admit to ignorance about the lesser known (externally) candidates and will try to remedy this now. I'm trying to avoid the entanglement of endorsing one or the other here and turning it into a flame-fest.

[iverglas]

104. pick the Canadian choice ;)

Joe Biden -- like Pierre Trudeau, only with some heart to go with the head.

Kucinich might be my first choice on policy, me being a social democrat (as socialist as possible in the circumstances) -- I don't have problems with his past stance on reproductive rights, for example, because I'm a no-questions, no-apologies advocate of total freedom of reproductive choice and I think he got it -- but I think it's unrealistic to expect him to get the nomination, and I also think he just doesn't have the depth and breadth that Biden has. Biden is just far and away the best qualified and also the most trustworthy and honourable of the bunch.

Besides, Biden immediately picked Canada when asked in an interview where he'd want to live if he couldn't live in the US. You'll be happy to hear that McCain picked Australia. ;)

Clinton and Canada ... there's a can of worms ...

[uriel1972]

105. Last thing we need is the ever-huggable John McCain in Oz

but then again he would probably do less damage confined to an australian nursing home than in your senate

[iverglas]

106. Hey!

Not my Senate! You gotta be a Canadian citizen to sit in my Senate. ;)

(Before 1929, you had to be a man, but my grx5 grandparents' great-grandson fixed that, when he was a member of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council and held that women were "persons" under the constitution. Phew.)

I think McCain's cute. We Canadians like people who laugh at themselves.

[uriel1972]

107. my most sincere apologies

I remember when I was 7 asking some visitors if they were Americans, they politely told me they were Canadian and ever since I have tried not to make the same mistake.

[iverglas]

113. when I was in England ...

We gave up. When they asked us what part of "America" we were from, we just said the Canadian part.

I gather that New Zealanders (what does one call those people?) react with even more hostility to being taken for Australians. Someone in England told us they'd just adopted the policy of treating all potential Australians or New Zealanders as if they were from New Zealand. ;)

[anakie]

115. New Zealanders are referred to as Kiwis

and the NZ'ers I know are happy to refer to themselves thus.


Peace

[FREEWILL56]

124. Actually your answer of the Canadian part is quite accurate.

America is not a country, but is in reference to 2 different continents, one being South America and the other being North America. There is no country called America even though it is used sometimes as a nickname for the United States of America. The United States is also a nickname and is not the full title to the country. The USA is the proper initials too and not the shortened version of US.
The point is that Canadians do live in America, but more specifically North America. You are an American as is everyone that lives on the 2 American continents. I guess you didn't realize this or had not done well on the subject in school and I'm not trying to put you down or belittle you as many people don't realize this. I guess the only reason it was applied as a nickname to the United States of American is because that is too long and difficult for many in other countries to say. Oh who am I kidding, as it's too long and difficult for many here in the United States of America to say let alone remember?:eyes:

[Norrin Radd]

130. Um, no. I'm an American. Not an United Statesian, nor an United States of American. ;-)

[FREEWILL56]

131. I never said you weren't an American.

I'm just saying that everybody in North and South America is also an American.

[iverglas]

142. indeed

That's why I put "America" in quotation marks in my post -- as in so-called America. And why our answer was one of those dry little Canadian jokes. ;)

My answer whenever I was travelling in Cuba was similar to the answer for when in England.

Are you norteamericana? a Cuban would ask. Because Cubans know quite well that they are American.

Yes, I'm Canadian, I would say. And the Cuban would look confused. No, I don't delight in tormenting foreigners; just a little consciousness raising.

As for proper names, now: the proper name is "the States", as every Canadian knows!


Oh dear. I started replying in jolly fashion before I actually read through your post:

I guess you didn't realize this or had not done well on the subject in school and I'm not trying to put you down or belittle you as many people don't realize this.

Oh well. I guess you don't have a clue what you're talking about, or whom you're saying it to.

Got a gold star? Do a search for "USAmerican". You can also google for étatsuniens, for instance. Of course, yes, there are those United States of Mexico ...

[blondie58]

137. I remember, while doing the eurail/youth hostel thing in Europe

back in the 80's, all of the Canadians had their flag sewn on their backpacks, as even then, they didn't want to be thought of as an American. Can't say that I blame them now.

[DutchLiberal]

149. What are your issues with Kucinich?

Just asking. :)

Yes, I care for my American friends, too, and that's why I would not vote for Ron Paul. But I do like him better on foreign policy and war than some Democrats.

[NotGivingUp]

155. It's very scary. All the little Nazis came out of the woodwork. n/t

[NotGivingUp]

156. Great post, BTW. It would help if you could get this message out there every day. n/t

[DutchLiberal]

159. Thank you. But I think the message will be better received coming from an American, like you.

I didn't think of the similarities between "you're not a good/real Democrat" and "you're not a good/real Republican" until I made that post. But it struck me as a scary tactic.

Unfortunately, I must admit many Kucinich-supporters use that phrase too when addressing anyone who doesn't support DK. I oppose that. :(

[cuke]

58. So vote for the greater evil, then

See how that works out for you

[Ricki]

80. That won't work out so well

It's the LESSER evil people. We are not in a position to support a 3rd party, it doesn't work well within our electoral college, so PLEASE vote the lesser of the two evils.

[pnwmom]

145. Oh yes, and Gore and Bush were "Tweedledee and Tweedledum."

Gore was the lesser of two evils, just like Nader said. Why bother voting for him, when you can have PERFECTION?

:sarcasm:

[HamdenRice]

34. I will vote for any Democrat -- except Hillary

I simply cannot and will not bring myself to vote for the United States of America becoming a banana republic in which the presidency is passed from father to son, and husband to wife, between two families, like some remote, impoverished province of Brazil.

Sorry, but a vote for Hillary is a vote to put the last nail in the coffin of American democracy. Of course George Bush put the Constitution in the coffin, but a Hillary presidency will nail the lid shut.

[cali]

35. OK, ralphie. Whatever you say. n/t

[uriel1972]

36. I hope US democracy is strong enough to survive that

I don't know if it is strong enough for another republican.

[lyonn]

78. Excellent answer. nt

[FREEWILL56]

125. Does your comment include any that hold republicon values?

Be carefull in how you tread.

[TZ]

57. John Adams...

to John Quincy Adams? Theodore Roosevelt and FDR? William Henry Harrison and Benjamin Harrison?
Would you vote for a Kennedy? I think you would.
I don't like Hillary myself but I think you have a very flawed "excuse" there for not voting for her.

[HamdenRice]

140. Not comparable in the least

We're talking about a first lady succeeding her husband immediately after a son has succeeded his father.

John Quincy Adams was the son, not spouse, of John Adams, had had a successful career of government service and was elected almost a quarter century after his father's administration ended and almost two decades after his father's death.

Benjamin Harrison was the grandson, not spouse, of William Henry Harrison, and the latter died in office after about a month. Benjamin Harrison became president nearly a half century after the death of W.H. Harrison.

Teddy Roosevelt and Franklin Roosevelt were cousins, not spouses, and of different parties. Again, their presidencies were separated by decades.

In all the historical cases, the former president's political machine was long gone when the younger relative became president, and each younger president had created a political career on his own.

More importantly, however, when you reach back to the nineteenth century you are referring to a country that had a much smaller elite among whom the high offices of the country revolved. As a result of the New Deal and the post war education boom, we are supposed to be a much more meritocratic society with literally millions of qualified citizens capable of serving in office -- a boom in upward mobility, equality and education that Bill and Hillary benefited from but apparently no longer believe in.

Bill and Hillary are the Clarence Thomases of the upwardly mobile white professional class. The hope to close the door after they have gone through it.

[LeftishBrit]

160. 'the son and not the spouse..'

I don't see the difference; in both cases, family connections are involved. Obviously, 19th century presidents could not have been replaced by their spouses. Possibly a pity in some cases - from what I know of Abigail Adams, she might have made quite a good president.

[DutchLiberal]

94. Funny thing is, it doesn't happen in third world countries, but it does happen in Europe!

Yes, in Greece, I recently learned, the political power is held for over 45 years by two families, who 'switch' almost every election.

By the way, this sunday, Argentina voted overwhelmingly for Christina Kirchner to become president. She is the wife of current president Nestor Kirchner.

[pnwmom]

146. In other words, anyone but the frontrunner. Good move

if you're trying to help the Rethugs.

Nader had exactly the same idea about Gore in 2000 and we've all seen how well that worked out.

[HamdenRice]

147. Utterly illogical Hillary mafia reasoning

Hillary is the frontrunner in the primary. By this astoundlingly preposterous illogic, once anyone has even a temporary lead in the primary, we're all supposed to fall into line. Sorry, but there is no other word for this but idiotic.

As I've stated elsewhere, Hillary stands for nothing, so she and her supporters seem to only be able to use authoritarian appeals: she's the front runner, fall into line peons, or else.

[Contrary1]

39. I would like to apologize...

for what the Buffoon in Chief has done to the value of your dollar.

[OnionPatch]

42. I hear ya!

You couldn't keep me from the polls with a pack of hungry wolves! I look at it this way: If I'm drowning in the ocean and an old patched-up life raft drifts by, am I going to turn it down and wait for the yacht? I don't think so. Likewise, I will vote straight-ticket Democratic even if they haven't been perfect. This is not a perfect world. That's not to say I won't keep working to further our true democratic (small d) values and sway public opinion to our side. I think politicians are a reflection of the general thinking of the masses....the thinking must be changed first before the right kind of politician can be elected. We already have the right kind of politician running (think Dennis Kucinich) but until public opinion is changed, he is unelectable. We have lots of work to do.

[desi]

44. Welcome uriel1972 and thank you for your wise words.

With this post you have changed my mind and I will indeed vote for whomever OUR candidate might be. After reading thread after thread, some quite vile still yet, bashing our former First Lady I decided that she was my candidate and stated that I would vote for nobody BUT her. So I too am now on board thanks to you. As you can plainly see here there are still some, and there are many many more, who want to and will "replay" 2000. They, and of course the USSC, are responsible for the situation we, and you, find ourselves in today. One would imagine that a lesson taught would be a lesson learned.

OT: My son was fortunate to have visited Australia as a contestant on The Amazing Race and has nothing but good things to say about your country and the people he met in the short time he was there. In fact he seriously would like to relocate. Cheers uriel1972.

[nickgutierrez]

46. That's the common-sense position, isn't it?

I know I say this all the time - but listen to the Republicans. A fascist (Giuliani), a senile fool who doesn't know what he believes anymore (McCain), Multiple Choice Mitt, an empty suit (Thompson) who sounds a bit too much like Bush, or another fundamentalist (Huckabee). I think the fundamentalist is going to be the one that gets the nomination, in a shocker.

With a crowd like that, you've got to vote for the Democrat - no matter who it is. You've just got to.

[lyonn]

79. If Thompson got the nod could he make Cheney VP?

The Cheneys' love the guy, right? What a bazaaro world would that be?

[FREEWILL56]

126. Yes he could be vp again as there aren't any limits on that.

[populistdriven]

47. I will vote for any Democrat

[jmp]

48. Sorry but ...

I will not support a candidate that I perceive to be a danger or detriment to the American people. Once you start voting for the lesser of two evils, evil is all you will ever get.

[uriel1972]

53. That's your right, I don't agree that's my right

vulnerable people need relief now and you can use the time to gather your forces if you want to battle evil. Just saying that's all

[jmp]

61. If you won't fight evil when it's trailing in the polls ...

You never will.

[uriel1972]

67. what do you intend to fight evil with?

You'll need money, support and time and while you take care of that please put someone halfway sane in the whitehouse for the rest of us

[jmp]

97. Dems have the money and the time ...

The support would be there IF the folks that are backing Hillary just because they think that she is going to win would get behind a more progressive candidate. There is nothing stopping that from happening NOW.

[emilyg]

111. I believe in Hillary.

[FREEWILL56]

127. I have a bridge to sell you.

[FREEWILL56]

129. With this post and post #53 you sound like a plant just to push hillarity.

Firstly, you can dissagree all you'd like to, but it makes 0 difference as this is politics here in the United States of America and unless you really do live in the USA you have no rights here as you indicated by how you talk in this post you might be from here in the USA. My opinion is you are a snowjob for hillarity herself.

[uriel1972]

132. You are right in one aspect my dissagreement

doesn't make much difference in that I don't have a vote, but that doesn't mean I don't have a right to express my opinions here. As I sit here in Adelaide, South Australia I am a little bemused by the Hillary snowjob and plant thing. If I know anything about US politics, the primaries the candidates etc, most of it is gleaned from being here at DU. If anything Al Gore is probably the best choice in terms of restoring international ties and I was beginning to like what I heard about Biden, but I'd settle for Hillary or Dennis or Barack or any of the others.

[FREEWILL56]

133. Sorry, but you don't have a right.

You have a privilege granted to you by the Democratic Underground. With that, if I am reading you wrong about where you're coming from on your post then consider my apology to you.

[jmp]

49. "I'm a little shy about posting on a US board"

Don't worry, we Americans don't bite. We may bomb your country if you piss us off, but we don't bite.

10 years ago I would've found that line funny.

[Love Bug]

50. There's an old saying that goes something like this:

"The primaries are the time to fall in love and the election is the time to fall in line."

As much as it may pain me, I will hold my nose if necessary and vote for the Dem nominee, no matter who it is. The worst Democrat is going to be better than the best Republican, especially from the field we have to pick from next year.

BTW: Welcome to DU, mate! Your opinion is welcome here! If things go totally to shit in the U.S., you may find yourself with several thousand house guests! :D

[2rth2pwr]

51. A new age woo!!!

I like it. Kucinich in three words.

[uriel1972]

52. I was trying to be fair and use the terms others were throwing around

for the candidates because that is what they will say to themselves when they face the polling booth

[Eurobabe]

54. Hell yeah, I'll be DAMNED if a CON will ge tthe WH in '08

No freaking way will the US elect another stupid ass republiCON.

[DutchLiberal]

96. It's not necessary for the Republicans to be elected to gain the presidency. They just steal it.

I fear that, if the elections are not canceled (my biggest fear is Bush and Cheney calling 12 fake terror alerts and declaring martial law), they will steal it anyway and we welcome president Guilliani/Romney/Thomson in the White House in 2009. :scared:

[barbtries]

112. you read my mind

i was just contemplating posting that it may all be moot if the motherfuckers steal it again, shitcan the election after involving us in yet another immoral war in a another foreign country, declare martial law, find more and more ways to disenfranchise voters....

one of the saddest things i can think of to say is that i am no longer confident that my vote means anything at all.

[DutchLiberal]

150. People think I'm a crazy conspiracy theorist for saying this, but...

...I fear the Republicans will pull something like that. I simply can't believe Cheney would give up all the power he now has. Why would he?

[TZ]

55. Excellent post and very astute points

I have been most fortunate to become acquainted with other international DU'ers (including several Aussie's btw) and its INCREDIBLY interesting and enlightening to hear how our country is viewed and seen internationally.
Pretty much your view sums up what I have heard from my other international friends.....
BTW- I have learned with some envy that you folk from Oz have fundies but they are a lot LESS troublesome than our fundies....

[rucky]

56. I suppose we're probably scaring the hell out of you.

I assure you, we all want to WIN. That's why we're so nasty right now. When we have a nominee, things will be different here.

[Up2Late]

59. No worries here at DU, most here would sooner vote for a Yellow Dog than vote ReThug...

...or at least I fall in that category (the common term is Yellow dog Democrat).

If you want to see the real problem, just spend a few minutes at GOP .org or Free repub lick .com (no spaces), those are the people who are screwing up America and the world.

[CottonBear]

62. Don't be shy and be sure to visit the Australia forum here on DU!

:hi:
Don't worry, we'll vote for the Democratic nominee. :)

Australia forum:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=199

[baldguy]

63. You show more understanding about the process of US politics then most Americans.

[goodgd_yall]

64. Not to worry

Once we choose our nominee, most of us Dems will vote for him or her, holding nose or not.

[immoderate]

66. Hi uriel1972, welcome to DU!

Walk right in! We've got a strong Australian delegation here. The rules and nuances of US politics are constantly unfolding mysteries to many of us here as well. :)

One thing you'll find here is that we like more, rather than fewer voices. I can't speak for all DUers, but that doesn't stop me.

--IMM

[ecstatic]

68. finally... some sanity nt

[roguevalley]

69. post whatever and whenever you want, sweetie. you are welcome here.

[Joanne98]

70. Welcome to DU!

[bigwillq]

71. Welcome to DU!

:hi:

[eShirl]

72. I welcome your perspective uriel1972! Glad you weren't too shy to post.

Welcome to DU! :toast:

[rasputin1952]

73. HI!!! how's the weather down there?

I've always wanted to go to Australia, almost made it one when I was in the Army...maybe soemday!

Thanks for your perspective, it is always a good thing to see what those outside of the States think about us and care enough to drop us a line....helps keep us somewhat sane...:D

:hi:

[uriel1972]

74. It's getting into the swing of spring

Wish it would rain more it's the tenth year of drought in most of Oz:( Come if you can:)

[proud patriot]

75. Welcome Underground uriel1972

I completely agree with you .

[lyonn]

76. Welcome, and yes, most on this site will vote Democratic

No matter whether it is our favorite. You are so right, Any Dem is better than any repub. This is from a recovered, semi-repub. Never again.

I have a friend from NZ that asked me after bush was elected the 2nd time (!?) Why? I had no answers, it's embarassing.

[Grandrose]

77. Welcome and do not be shy!

Democrats fight and come together when the time is right!
Unlike the Repubs, who are robots in lock step!
:hi:

[janx]

81. I was consorting with an Oz native writer friend

(who was living in France at the time) when the last presidential election happened. We were both involved in an international literary conference in Spain. I had voted absentee because of my trip, and she and I discussed the election over food/drinks in Alcala, never dreaming that this pResident would be elected again.

There was a good bit of talk about the U.S. election during the literary conference. The taxi driver who drove me from the Madrid airport to Alcala had the radio on, and there was talk of the election. When I tipped the driver, I took off my denim jacket to reveal my "American tourist apology" T-shirt--the apology being a president I didn't vote for. He liked that.

Other people in Alcala didn't want to talk about Bush at all. They were too pissed off, and I cannot blame them; the recent train bombing in Madrid didn't help matters any.

It wasn't until I was on a plane heading back from Europe to the United States that I heard the bad news. I couldn't believe it.

Just a couple of days after I arrived home, I received and email from my Australian friend.

"I'm so sorry!" it said.

[redqueen]

82. Thank you!

:applause:

[mntleo2]

83. Poverty activist here Dear Aussie

...and I hear loud and clear your plea. I will vote for the Democratic nominated even though I may have to choke on my own vomit to do it as I agree Dems are far better than any Repug, even if they are a corporate whore. I figure with you and the rest of the world we progressives will probably have to whip them in shape as we go along, as we always do.

Welcome to our US boards and know many of we voters are sadly well aware as we always have been that our vote is not just for ourselves, but I have to say these voters are Dems, most Repugs are self centered and could care less about anybody but the rich and themselves. My mama taught me about Republicans a long time ago and it is even more true today ~ she taught me to never EVER trust s Republican.

Cat In Seattle

[stlsaxman]

85. I pray that Gore will run, yet I AM a "Treestump Democrat"

[Martin Eden]

87. Thank you for reminding us of an obvious imperative

Keeping a Republican out of the Oval Office has to be the first priority.

Though I may be disgusted with much of the Democratic Party these days, there will be only two candidates in the general election with a chance of winning.

I will vote for the Democratic nominee.

[ms liberty]

88. Wecome to DU. You're right...

Most of us here at DU will in the end vote for the Democratic nominee, despite many of the "I'll NEVER vote for (any name here)" threads you might see. I think we all know that whomever becomes the Democratic nominee would make a better choice than even the best of the Republicans.

[Maat]

89. For you and the rest of the world, Uriel1972 ..

my vote goes to the Democratic nominee.

Cheers!

:toast:

[datadiva]

90. Welcome to DU

And most of us are already on that page. Don't be shy. Stick around.

[Catherine Vincent]

95. No problemo!

You are most welcome to say whatever is on your mind! Uriel. What a fantastic name. :hi:

[barbtries]

108. you make a good point,

and i always have voted straight democratic. unfortunately the way things are going unless it's gore or kucinich or possibly edwards, i don't see things changing. i am so fed up, so disgusted, and so hurt at what has become of my country. maybe it's time to vote my conscience instead. frankly it's a tough choice at this point

[emilyg]

110. Welcome to DU. Dems have my vote.

[pat_k]

114. "I don't care if John Kerry is a sack of cement. We'll carry him to victory." - Jim Hightower '04

What was true in 2004 will be true in 2008. We'll do our damnedest to carry every "sack of cement" Democratic nominee to victory. If they continue on the immoral and cowardly "off the table" path, they'll make it tough for us, but we'll carry them to the Halls of Congress. We'll carry them to the White House.

That is a task that lies ahead of us.

The task before us -- right now; today -- is turning those "sacks of cement" into true champions of the Constitution and the People's Government. The most critical battle is between the impeachophobic insiders and the champions of impeachment outside. If we want to lighten the load; if we want candidates who inspire and energize disillusioned Americans, we must focus on conquering impeachophobia.

Impeachment is not just the RIGHT thing to do; it is the WINNING thing to do. A candidate who stands up today and demands the immediate impeachment of Bush and Cheney for turning Americans into torturers could be the frontrunner tomorrow. It doesn't matter what they've said before. Any of them can redeem themselves right now by saying "We have been horribly wrong to refuse to impeach. We cannot continue to tolerate the intolerable. No more. It is time to impeach. It is time for the ultimate "up or down" vote on torture and authoritarian rule."

[tavalon]

116. Do not be fooled by the rhetoric around primary time here

We sharpen our teeth on one another (perhaps not the best way to handle things) but when it comes time to do what is best for our country, that is exactly what we do. I am extremely disheartened by most, if not all candidates running on the Democratic side, that said, of course when the dust settles, I will vote for the Democratic candidate. That and I will fight to keep the voting system from being further corrupted.

[tandot]

117. There will be just one person I will vote for...

...and it will be the Democratic nominee...no matter who it will be.

The catastrophic consequences of having another Republican as President will not be on my shoulders.

[mcscajun]

118. Welcome to DU, uriel!

Rest easy, most of us at DU *will* vote for whomever wins the Democratic nomination. We can only hope that the wider electorate does so as well. Most signs seem to point that way, so far.

In the meantime, most here will fight tooth and nail over just whom that nominee will be; after all, we're Democrats! :D

[comradebillyboy]

120. Don't be shy

Americans need to see the opinions of or friends wherever they may be.

[DeepModem Mom]

121. K&R

[JDPriestly]

122. Thanks for giving us a view from Australia.

We appreciate international commentary on this board.

[potone]

123. I'm glad you have joined us.

I am also more than a little jealous of you as an Australian citizen. I'm sure your country has its own problems, but at least you are not in the grip of an illegitimate, war-mongering and fascistic-and I do not use that word lightly-cabal. The real worry here is not that we Democrats will not rally around whoever is our candidate, but that for the third presidential election in a row we will have the election stolen from the rightful winner. That is my greatest worry, and I do not think any of the candidates take this issue seriously enough. They can't seem to get their minds around just how evil, corrupt and totalitarian the Republican party has become. I no longer recognize my country; this is not the country I grew up in.:scared: :cry:

[NoGodsNoMasters]

128. I agree completely.

Politically, I would more appropriately described as Anarchosyndicalist or Libertarian socialist, but I vote democrat. Why? Because third parties don't have a shot in the current paradigm. If we backed the hell out of them,....they MIGHT. But it's not just cultural bias, it's, primarily, funding. This is why I'm a strong proponant of campaign finance reform because I think it would clean up our government and promote transparency in our government, as the saying goes sunlight is the best disinfectant. This would also allow for a wider diversity of opinion in politics which I think can only help. HOWEVER, this is an issue we should persue AFTER the election. Hillary is HARDLY my dream candidate, but do we want 4? 8? more years of this horseshit??? My personal mantra on voting is it's a choice between godawful and mediocre. Well, mediocrity looks pretty good right now. AFTER the election we can push campaign finance reform, environmental protection, more restrictions of private enterprise, but not until AFTERWARDS. I believe in standing on a principle, even dying for one,...but theres' a difference between honorable and stupid, if we don't vote for the dem nominee, we're making a dangerous gamble and too much is at stake. For an Aussie I think this poster has a pretty clear idea of whats what on this issue. I don't think you can make a rational, reasonable argument to the contrary.

[Harmonicaman]

134. I've felt the same way....

Commenting here as an Englishman - although work takes me to the US at least 4 times a year, each trip lasts around a month.

I stay mostly in NY or LA and have a good number of people I regard as friends, still sometimes I'm reticent about posting on a purely US board discussing US politics. Except when I see or hear one of the Neocon media shills and attack dogs come out with something so repugnant the bile forces me to comment.

Internal American politics since 1941 had been tied to global politics, but never more dangerously than now.

In a mere 60 years America and my country Britain have gone from the Champions of Freedom to the snide lying bullies of the world.

From an outsiders perspective, like the original Australian poster we reduce it to Dem V Repug, even though I spend a lot of time in the States I see it as coming down to that wire, even though I see two parties more and more cut from the same cloth. But I at least see the possibility of some repair to the image America in the world under a Dem leadership. Under the Repugs, all I see is the most powerful country in the world becoming even more and more ostracised from civilised society.

To be honest I see no difference between the US under the Bush Junta and Iran / Iraq under Saddam / pick your dictator.

The one difference is the voice of dissent, anger, outrage and decency from a majority of people in the US, loud and strong - and thank God / Allah / Buddha / Fate and Destiny / Chemical Chance for that, because the voices of dissent within the US are the only reason we havent seen mushroom clouds over the past 7 years - and the frigtening thing is that I honestly think the current US administration are insane enough to brainwash themselves into a fervour enough to do it - and invoking Gods name at the time -- and thats why I don't see any difference between the current US Government and the Muslims and assorted "Islamofascists" they claim are out to destroy them, Two sides of the same coin

[T_i_B]

135. No need to be shy about it

Heck if the primaries are anything like last time you may even find meetups for certain US presidential candidates in the big cities!

[avrdream]

136. Mate, I'm up in Cairns and understand what you are saying.

I'm from the States, though, and still vote there so I understand the politics a bit better. You said it best, though: we MUST vote with the Dems no matter who the nominee is.

And, for what it's worth, I still don't understand Australian politics. All I know right now is that it looks like Rudd is going to kick Howard's ass in the upcoming election.

[blondie58]

138. you make some excellent points, uriel1972

and a big welcome to DU! And, like some have pointed out, there is just a lot of "hot air" going around about the individual candidates. Please don't feel shy, it is good to hear viewpoints from around the world. One thing, though- can you take Rupert Murdoch back?

[caseycoon]

139. You are SO RIGHT!

And welcome to DU!
I will certainly vote for the Dem candidate.

[LeftishBrit]

141. As another non-American (British) I couldn't have said it better!

[illinoisprogressive]

144. Welcome. I thank you for your perspective from outside the US.

[concerned citizen23]

157. The primaries matter more then we may think...

Once the primaries are over we are left with the two leading candidates we have essentially been led to vote for through media manipulation and propaganda.

Whether we vote Democratic or Republican the fact remains, given how our election campaigns and legislative processes work and the corporate and lobbyist network that fund them, both parties are essentially serving US corporate global agenda.

John Edwards in a recent speech put it in very simplistic terms:

“…we trade corporate Democrats for corporate Republicans; our cronies for their cronies; one political dynasty for another dynasty…”
Excerpt from John Edwards’s speech
St. Anselm's College, Manchester, N.H
Oct 29, 2007
http://johnedwards.com/news/speeches/20071029-moral-test/