lifelong Dem asks: is a Bush win preferable to a Kerry squeaker?

[Bill McBlueState]

This friend of mine who I keep in touch with via e-mail is pretty much the ultimate cynic, but here's what he says:

Here's a question for you. Are we better served by a 271-269 Kerry win
followed by 4 years of a GOP full court press and gridlock, or by a Bush
victory followed by the inevitable disasters that that would bring, leading
to ultimate discredit and demise of everything this lying, criminal,
barbaric hoard stands for?

I'm not sure. I don't know If 'm being analytical or emotional. I do know
that Bush loosing by a few votes (popular or electoral) is not enough for
me. I want to see him discredited, shamed, and humiliated. (Actually, I'd
like to see him tried for war crimes, but that's not going to happen).

So... what do you all think? My thinking is we need to stop the bleeding before it gets worse. A Kerry presidency, even if he just barely wins, means the worst of Bush's executive orders will be overturned, and possibly some supreme court justices will retire. So even if there's legislative gridlock, things won't get worse.

And hey, taking back the House isn't too far-fetched.

[Melodybe]

1. God no! Just think of the Supreme Court justices and you know that is not

true.

[fob]

2. Exactly. You're friend needs a reminder that 4 years of shrub* equals

40 years times # of SC Justices appointed of shrub*type policy. It wouldn't end in 2008.

[lovedems]

5. My thoughts exactly! It is more important to preserve our civil liberties

for the next generation. I would rather Bush lose and fade into history rather then have him win and get caught for all of his lies!

[NWHarkness]

3. Defeating Bush must be our top priority

But your friend is right, we need to all understand that defeating him is only the first step towards restoring our democracy.

[Bill McBlueState]

11. yes

I think that's a good way to make sense out of this line of thinking.

Putting Kerry in office is just the first step, but it's a f'n important step!

[Trajan]

4. This kind of thinking is cynical to the extreme ...

It explains the Nader candidacy ... It is horrid to think that we must FIRST be dragged through the deep shit before we can be clean ...

[GreenPartyVoter]

6. * with no fear of re-election is going to be Hitler reborn

only, not as well-spoken of course.

[spanone]

7. Out of your freakin' mind????? You are kidding, right?

Nothing could be worse than this hack son of a politician winning a second term. Nothing.

[Walt Starr]

8. Anything short of a Kerry win means losgng freedom forever

Nothing other than a Kerry win is acceptable.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

9. This is more of the "it needs to get worse to get better" thinking

and while your friend is not wrong for wanting a more decisive victory, the implications of a Bush win are FAR too dangerous to entertain that eventuality.

Places to look are as follows:

Bush wants to privatize social security, but how will the government function with an entire ONE THIRD of its revenues no longer available to it?

Is the GAP between rich and poor worth risking?
The USSC?

Nuclear proliferation?

Arming rogue nations?

[bhunt70]

10. Applying a tourniquette may result in loss of limb, but save a life.

stop the bleeding now, deal with the consequences when they come up.

[BayouBengal07]

12. If he does win a second term

We at least get to see him unravel (hopefully not taking America with him).

[JerseygirlCT]

13. In four years, it may very well be too late.

The Supreme Court alone ought to be enough on that count.

[blm]

14. If we tried REALLY hard we could make Dennis Kucinich Speaker of the House

Now wouldn't that be the best thing we could do for President Kerry?

[lutherj]

15. Kerry's margin doesn't matter anyway. Clinton won hands down

in '96 and the republicans still went after him.

[sandnsea]

16. What an idiot

Vindictiveness against Bush is more important than the people in this country and around the world? It's the same with those who put ideology above people. There's nothing more important than getting Bush out of office and I don't know how anybody can call themselves a thinking, caring person if they don't understand that.

[greekspeak]

17. Squeaker of election better than screams from internment camps

You know those aren't far behind, for those that get in the way of the PNAC juggernaut if they are allowed as much power as or more power than they have now. Violate a "free speech" zone, internment camp. Defy "family values," internment camp. Speak out against the NeoCon agenda, internment camp. FAUX, CNNservative, MSGOP and all the other tools will paint a rosy picture of such facilities that Lord and Savior Bush* built.

This is not to mention more years of power-grab wars, the reinstatement of the draft, more money for the rich and less for the poor, further eroding of the public education system, more tearing down of the wall separating church and state, etc.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

18. Don't ASSUME a GOP-controlled Congress

I hope all the local Dems are out there emphasizing the importance of electing Democrats for the House and Senate, too. It's doable. After all, we need only a couple more Senators to take back the Senate, right? And we've won the last three House bye elections.

[iconoclastic cat]

19. This "the worse, the better" crap needs to be squashed.

Tell that guy to try and analyze exactly what a Shrubby re-select would do to this country, the environment, etc. Sheesh!

[Kazak]

20. Yes, preferable, but I've got news for 'em...

Ain't gonna be no squeaker.

[emulatorloo]

21. I was ***CERTAIN**** Reagan would be impeached in his second term

There was no doubt in my mind.

And now they are talking about putting him on Mount Rushmore, the dime, and the five dollar bill.