Bulldrek v3.0

You are all granted the right to vote for the next (or present) president of the United States.

The names with their respective running mates on the ticket are: (more added as more official party nominations become brought to my attention, all official nominations are assumed to have made it onto the ballot)

Republican: George W. Bush / Dick Cheney

Democratic: John Kerry / John Edwards

Reform: Ralph Nader / Peter Camejo

Libertarian: Michael Badnarik / Richard Campagna

Constitution: Michael Peroutka / Chuck Baldwin

Green: David Cobb / Pat LaMarche

American: Diane Templin / Al Moore

Concerns of People: Gene Amondson / Leroy Pletten

Peace & Freedom: Leonard Peltier / Janice Jordan

Personal Choice: Charles Jay / Marilyn Taylor

Prohibition: Earl F. Dodge / Howard Lydick

Socialist USA: Walt Brown / Mary Herbert

Socialist Equality: Bill Auken / Jim Lawrence

Socialist Workers: Róger Calero / Arrin Hawkins

Workers World: John Parker / Teresa Gutierrez


Poll numbers so far:
Bush: 8
Kerry: 14
Nader: 5
Badnarik: 1
Peroutka: 0
Cobb: 0
Templin: 0
Amondson: 0
Peltier: 0
Jay: 0
Dodge: 0
Brown: 0
Auken: 0
Calero: 0
Parker: 0

Bulldrekker votes counted so far:
Buzzed - Bush Sep 10, 6:06 pm
Reika - Kerry Sep 10, 6:14 pm
Ares - Nader Sep 10, 6:19 pm
Cazmonster - Kerry Sep 10, 6:47 pm
Salvation122 - Bush Sep 10, 7:00 pm
MissTeja - Kerry Sep 10, 7:08 pm
Instant Cash - Nader Sep 10, 7:19 pm
Daki - Bush Sep 10, 7:33 pm
Silent Sniper - Kerry Sep 10, 7:36 pm
TheScamp - Kerry Sep 10, 7:37 pm
laughing Monkey - Kerry Sep 10, 8:13 pm
Toryu - Kerry Sep 10, 8:45 pm
MooCow - Bush Sep 10, 9:12 pm
Raygun - Bush Sep 10, 9:29 pm
Cash - Kerry Sep 10, 11:07 pm
Szechuan - Kerry Sep 10, 11:47 pm
Serious Paul - Bush Sep 11, 12:25 am
Cain - Kerry Sep 11, 12:53 am
Johnny the Bull - Badnarik Sep 11, 1:15 am
mrmooky - Nader Sep 11, 1:41 am
Kitt - Nader Sep 11, 3:07 am
Anguirel - Kerry Sep 11, 3:49 pm
Angel - Kerry Sep 11, 5:55 pm
Liniah - Nader Sep 12, 12:42 pm
Lightning - Bush Sep 12, 1:37 pm
ak404 - Bush Sep 12, 9:37 pm
lorg - Kerry Sep 13, 8:37 am
JongWK - Kerry Sep 14, 3:12 am


Cast your votes. Remember, EVERY vote counts. Your vote will decide who the next president of the United States will be! *Only one vote per bulldrekker.*

The September Poll will close on the last day of September at midnight! (according to my browser). Any post dates and edit dates after September (except for mine, which for the record I vote Bush) will not be counted! *you may change your vote with an edit before the deadline, there will be a final recount after the poll closes*

Goes without saying that my vote is for the Kerry/Edwards ticket.

Nader

Cthulhu/Mickey Mouse

You think I'm kidding? That's going in the Write In section!!!

Nader's not Green Party.

John "Bushwhacker" Kerry and John Edwards for me!

Bush.

At this moment in time? John Kerry. Though, I've flip-flopped like a beached fish for months now. Won't postively know until I cast the vote.

This would be so much easier if John McCain was running. :cry

Nader

And if he isn't there, Kerry

Bush.

Kerry.

Kerry

Kerry

Kerry. But then again, I'm no yank.

The delegate from Redneck Land casts his vote for Bush.

MooCow wrote:The delegate from Redneck Land casts his vote for Bush.

When the fuck did Chicago become Redneck Land?

Cazmonster goes to get an Atlas to squish Moo into beef pate.

Bush.

Breaking Ballot News:
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/ ... ional-wire

Marius wrote:Nader's not Green Party.

Sorry. Populist Party. Edited. I didnt count your comment as a vote.

MissTeja wrote:At this moment in time? John Kerry. Though, I've flip-flopped like a beached fish for months now.

So you do have something in common with Kerry!

Myself? Kerry.

Kerry.

I'd vote for George Bush.

Kerry. Anyone *but* Bush, really.

I'm voting Michael Badnarik.

Nader. In an actual election (if I were eligible to vote) I'd be forced to vote Kerry, but since this poll is inconsequential, I may as well vote for my preferred candidate.

I'm interested to know how many of the people who voted Kerry would have actually voted Nader if they thought he had a chance of winning. Similarly, I'd like to know how many Bush supporters would have voted Badnarik.

For me, I couldn't vote Nader because I don't think he'd work effectively with the rest of the Government.

Nader.
Not that I could vote out there in the real world, but if I'm gonna be partially responsible for putting some asshole into office, I want to vote for the one that won't win. That way, I can honestly tell my Bush-supporting allies that I voted against Kerry, and my Kerry-supporting allies that I voted against Bush. They wont need to know anything more. They don't realize how much of a sneaky bastard I am.

Cazmonster wrote:For me, I couldn't vote Nader because I don't think he'd work effectively with the rest of the Government.

Ditto. Kerry's not my ideal candidate, but he's better than Nader.

The reason I won't vote for Nader isn't so much that he doesn't have a chance to win, it's the fact that in the last few years he seems to have gone over the deep end. I don't want another extremist basket case in office.

Reformed Voltron. I mean Kerry.

mrmooky wrote:I'm interested to know how many of the people who voted Kerry would have actually voted Nader if they thought he had a chance of winning. Similarly, I'd like to know how many Bush supporters would have voted Badnarik.

I would vote for Badnarik if it didn't mean essentially putting a vote in Kerry's pocket.

Kerry.

Though I wish there was a "no one is worthy of my vote" box on the ballot.

For right now I'm saying Nader, but I may change this before the poll closes.

I'd rather be voting for McCain/Powell, but since they're nowhere on the ballot, I'm going to have to say Bush. I'd rather have him than someone who switches sides when a monarch butterfly in South America beats its wings. Bush sticks to his guns, even if he's not completely right.

So an inability to adapt is a good thing?

Inability to adapt? More like a choice not to waver whenever someone complains.

Lightning wrote:I'd rather be voting for McCain/Powell, but since they're nowhere on the ballot, I'm going to have to say Bush. I'd rather have him than someone who switches sides when a monarch butterfly in South America beats its wings. Bush sticks to his guns, even if he's not completely right.

How about you look at a couple of links and then see if the Bush you mentioned is anything like the actual GW Bush.

DNC Top 10 Bush Flip Flops

KOS list of Bush Flip Flops

PAC (APAF) list - extensive.

Cazmonster wrote:How about you look at a couple of links and then see if the Bush you mentioned is anything like the actual GW Bush.

DNC Top 10 Bush Flip Flops

KOS list of Bush Flip Flops

PAC (APAF) list - extensive.

That would be an example of Bush's ability to adapt.

adapting while protecting those tax cuts for rich people, I see.

Reika wrote:The reason I won't vote for Nader isn't so much that he doesn't have a chance to win, it's the fact that in the last few years he seems to have gone over the deep end. I don't want another extremist basket case in office.

I can't think of any extremist basket cases in the Presidency. LBJ, maybe.

Bush.

America needs a couple more years of polarizing cultural issues, xenophobic policy, foreign wars, economic splits, unemployment and redneck Bible beat-offs before they wake up and scream, "OMFG WTF have we done?" For times like this, sensible men who prefer to look at both sides of the issue are not part of the solution. For times like this, the only way to save a burning building is to add gasoline so that when we finally root through the smoldering ruins, we can ask ourselves, "OMFG WTF have we done?" It's like the lesson Germany learned after the 1950s: pay more attention to the man you have entitled the Big Head.

Vote Bush. Because Americans ultimately get the leaders they deserve - and they get them good and hard. (paraphrased from HL Mencken)

Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard.

Actually, ak your idea is brilliant, you've convinced me to change my vote to Bush.

oops

Now that is an interesting idea...

Which doesn't answer the question by the way. Marius didn't answer either, among others.

Buzzed wrote:That would be an example of Bush's ability to adapt.

I guess you admire Kerry's adaptability too, then?

Salvation122 wrote:I can't think of any extremist basket cases in the Presidency. LBJ, maybe.

Most of your founding fathers would be considered extremist basket cases by today's standards. Many politicians will pay lip service to the idea of small, unintrusive government, but neither major party actually adheres to the idea in practice.

ak404 wrote:Bush.

America needs a couple more years of polarizing cultural issues, xenophobic policy, foreign wars, economic splits, unemployment and redneck Bible beat-offs before they wake up and scream, "OMFG WTF have we done?" For times like this, sensible men who prefer to look at both sides of the issue are not part of the solution. For times like this, the only way to save a burning building is to add gasoline so that when we finally root through the smoldering ruins, we can ask ourselves, "OMFG WTF have we done?" It's like the lesson Germany learned after the 1950s: pay more attention to the man you have entitled the Big Head.

Vote Bush. Because Americans ultimately get the leaders they deserve - and they get them good and hard. (paraphrased from HL Mencken)

Le sigh. Because Bush is teh ebil.

mrmooky wrote:Most of your founding fathers would be considered extremist basket cases by today's standards.

But are those the appropriate standards to judge them by? Whatever modern standards are?

Isn't it more appropriate to compare them to each other in this case?

Serious Paul wrote:

mrmooky wrote:Most of your founding fathers would be considered extremist basket cases by today's standards.

But are those the appropriate standards to judge them by? Whatever modern standards are?

Isn't it more appropriate to compare them to each other in this case?

Okay, they were puritan basket cases by that era's standards.

Johnny the Bull wrote:

Serious Paul wrote:

mrmooky wrote:Most of your founding fathers would be considered extremist basket cases by today's standards.

But are those the appropriate standards to judge them by? Whatever modern standards are?

Isn't it more appropriate to compare them to each other in this case?

Okay, they were puritan basket cases by that era's standards. :D

No they weren't. They were by and large scholars, tradesmen, merchants, and wealthy landowners. They were modern philosophers of an enlightened age, radical thinkers with new ideas. Most were far from puritan, their number included many deists or even outright atheists. They were considered extremists by certain contemporaries, especially their political superiors in the British Empire, but then again so are all revolutionaries.

edit: And no, I'm not voting. I can't have a say in real life, so I don't see why I should force myself into false dilemmas.