Political 'Switchers' - New Errol Morris Ads for MoveOn.org

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by mactastic, Aug 18, 2004.

  1. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #1
    Link Interesting. Errol Morris (who produced Apple's Switch ads) has taken the 'switchers' concept into politics. MoveOn.org has commissioned him to produce ads showing people who voted for Bush and are now voting for Kerry. Check 'em out...

    Just ignore the donations part of the page.
     
  2. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #2
    it's interesting to see who decided to speak out. thanks
     
  3. kuyu macrumors 6502a

    kuyu

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Location:
    Louisville
    #3
    I voted for Gore, but I'm going to vote for Bush. Should I contact moveon.org?

    ;)
     
  4. Bobcat37 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2004
    Location:
    Colorado
    #4
    LOL

    Please do... and let us know what they say ;)
     
  5. kuyu macrumors 6502a

    kuyu

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Location:
    Louisville
    #5
    I've been scouring the web, and no one seems to believe that people like me exist. No news stories acknowledge my kind of switching. What's more, I know at least ten people who are doing the same thing as me. That is, about half of my pro-Gore friends (that could vote last time) have decided to vote for Bush this time. Weird...

    Anyway, the reasons most given are...
    1) Kerry seems like a nice guy, but I agree with Bush on more issues than Kerry.
    2) Kerry shouldn't have won the primaries. I'd have voted for another candidate over Bush (usually they say they liked Wes Clark a lot, me included).
    3) I don't know where Kerry stands except for against Bush. What's he going to do as President?

    Thoughts???
     
  6. mischief macrumors 68030

    mischief

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Ca
    #6
    In response to Kuyu I add the following observation:

    Elections of late are made more on the "three H's" than on anything else it seems:

    * Hair

    * Height

    * Holiness

    If you have good hair, are over 6 foot and can sound preferred by the Almighty... you're in.
     
  7. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #7
    Well, it boggles the mind for one...

    seriously, might I ask the issues you agree on with GW?...with Kerry? Please bear in mind one thing...although you may agree with a particular candidates priorities or intentions , should you not ultimately judge them on what they have actually accomplished during their tenures? (or not accomplished.) Truthfully, how does GW fare in under such criteria? How does Kerry? ...do bear in mind their respective positions of power and influence also...

    I was not particularily overjoyed by Kerry winning the Democratic Primaries either, but he is the most likely candidate to appeal to the largest segment of voters, and thus the most likely to beat Bush...it is just calculated pragmatism, however unexciting...I mean in 2000, I loved Bradley in the Dem. Primaries and McCan in the Rep. Primaries, but they were outgunned by the political establishment...

    As for not knowing what Kerry stands for...do some research. While Kerry deserves some blame for not getting his platform more exposure, GW and Co. deserve some blame for distorting the contest and not arguing on relevant issues...the media also tend to gravitate coverage towards the scandalous and polemic vs the informative stuff also...I would also ask you to ask yourself what Bush stands for...this judged not by his words , but by his actions .

    Do get back to me...I have always respected your opinion...
     
  8. LeeTom macrumors 68000

    LeeTom

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    #8
    I agree that if you don't know what a candidate stands for, you should look it up before you make your decision.

    I for one, know of almost no one that is voting for Bush. The older people in my family are almost all Republicans, and for the first time my Grandfather, great-uncle, and father are voting Democrat. Mainly because they are in banking & finance, and they feel the record tax cuts with record spending is leading to a record deficit that will hurt us in the long term.

    I watched every one of these 'switcher' ads, and I think they're great. I only hope the country is moving in that direction.

    Lee Tom
     
  9. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #9
    This thread has taken a slightly scary turn. It's never been easier to find out how a candidate stands on the issues. And yet, it seems some are still relying entirely upon media, and even more frighteningly, on the opposing candidate's campaigns, to understand their positions.
     
  10. kuyu macrumors 6502a

    kuyu

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Location:
    Louisville
    #10
    Blackfox and IJ. My list reflected the views expressed to me in several political conversations, not necessarily my views in particular.

    I, for one, have visited www.johnkerry.com several times. I know what his plan is, and I'm sure we'll all be just fine if he wins the election. However a lot of people haven't done their research and rely on speeches on TV for ALL of their info. In these appearances Kerry usually focuses more on what Bush is doing wrong than what he will do.

    On the issues:
    Economy: Kerry promises job growth, Bush promises ownership. I think Bush has a better long-run strategy for growth. Namely, encourage businesses to invest in new PP&E and jobs will follow.

    Health Care: Kerry promises cheap drugs and nationalized health care, Bush has delivered HSA's and promised to lessen frivilous lawsuits against doctors. From speaking with people in health care who have said exactly what Bush is proposing, I've got to go with Bush here. I fear a government that owns my health.

    Taxes: After 5 more years of college and poverty (8-9 years total) I'll likely be "the rich". I don't want to be penalized for pressing on when my peers quit. Plus, I like that Bush has expressed interest in www.fairtax.org .

    Stem cells: Kerry is pro, Bush is con. I agree with Kerry here. Stem cells are the way to go.

    Gay marraige: I disagree with Bush, but agree with Cheney's recent comments about individual states deciding.

    Energy: Both candidates are the same here in my opinion. Both have called for new fuels and technologies. Kudos to both.

    National Security: I am in the process of reading the 911 Commission report. Bush better listen to them. It's a great book by the way!!!

    Actions: Bush hasn't accomplished a ton domestically, but neither has Kerry. I think Bush's actions overseas are good for America in the long run.

    Summation: Kerry is a good short run choice IMO, but I feel that Bush offers more in the way of long-run strategies (not fact, mind you, just my opinion).
     
  11. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #11
    Kerry hasn't promised anything like "nationalized health care," but never mind that for the moment. You won't necessarily hear or read about the policy speeches made by the candidates in the mass media. Whenever possible, the media will nab the sound-bite and play up controversy. The policy stuff either doesn't run or falls to the back pages. That's one reason why ersatz issues like the SBVT are ginned up -- they suck the air out of the room, leaving nothing left over for talking about less sexy but ultimately more important issues. That's why so many people believe that Kerry is promoting "nationalized health care" and will raise their taxes.
     
  12. Chip NoVaMac macrumors G3

    Chip NoVaMac

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    #12
    Bush has been promising jobs all the long, but hasn't yet delivered. His Labor Department recently made changes in the overtime requirements, that may end up hurting - more than helping.

    But Bush has not help get costs lower. More are even finding harder to afford insurance, even if their company offers it, and having to choose between housing, food, gas, and other basics.

    This is a tougher one. Lower taxes for me IMO would mean more than for someone earning two to three times that I am. Yet I can understand the way you feel. Though if I went into work tomorrow and was given an increase of 3x what I am earning, now - I would not be concerned about the extra taxes. But that is my value system.

    While fairtax.org has a great sounding idea; I am afraid that the poor and middle class would still see a bigger hurt. Don't get me wrong, as being middle class by some measures, I am not looking for a handout, but being able to afford just a little more than the basics of life would be nice.[/quote]

    IMO Bush has not lived up to his campaign promises of 2000. Kerry as a Senator is one of 100 voices. So IMO he has less "force" on policy.

    On international issues, you and I are opposites. I believe that we are worse off internationally, in particular of the world view, now than before.

    A question that I ask myself now is: Am I better of now than I was four years ago? Four years of Bush have made my general situation worse. My best years were under Clinton, at least for me.
     
  13. kuyu macrumors 6502a

    kuyu

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Location:
    Louisville
    #13
    That's fair. My situation was null and void under Clinton (being a minor and all). My life has been very stable under Bush, aside from the attacks on 9/11. Again, I think we'll all be just fine with either man as President. After all, both have the support of the countries finest minds at their disposal.

    Take note: If John Kerry wins the Presidency, I will give him my support. I may not agree with everything he would do, but he would be my President and that deserves my respect and loyalty. Same goes for Bush. I don't fully agree with either man, but I respect them both equally.
     
  14. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #14
    That's nice of you, but be careful. I don't fully agree with either man either, but the respect issue is different for me.

    I respect the Office of President, but I also implicitly expect the individual occupying that position (temporarily) to respect (a) the reputation of the Office and what it represents, (b) the people who put him (for now) there, and (c) himself (ie self-respect/be able to look in the mirror in the morning)...

    So by those Criteria, I DO NOT respect GW Bush at all, although I still respect the Office of President...in fact, it is that latter respect that has pissed me off so much w/ regards to the current occupant.

    As for Kerry, I am not commited one way or the other...if elected in NOV., he, like GW in 2000 will get the benefit of the doubt in the respect dept.

    Respect, however, must be earned in my book...GW had his chances and failed miserably. Kerry may have his...we will see how he will fare.

    Not trying to single you out Kuyu, BTW...but GW shouldn't get a free-ride in the respect dept. Nor should anyone, ultimately.
     
  15. Chip NoVaMac macrumors G3

    Chip NoVaMac

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    #15
    Though to be honest, if Kerry wins - if he did not live up to expectations and promises I would not fault you for the way i do about GW. Now going GHW bush, if he had won over Clinton, I would have supported him more than I have with his son.

    Respect and support is something earned, not given.
     
  16. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #16
    Criterion: singular
    Criteria: plural


    MRGS :rolleyes:
     
  17. wwworry macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2002
    #17
    really the top 2% see the most benefit in Bush's fiscal policy. Since they do own about 40% of the country it only makes sense for Bush to talk about an "ownership" policy. However, most people are not in the top 2% (the top .5% is who really makes a killing). So it's sort of like playing the lottery. You have to believe you will eventully become super wealthy. You have to believe that by the time you become wealthy the US will not have become a bankrupt debtor nation (I think Bush has already run up about a trillion dollars in new debt). You have to believe that the middle class, who is going to pay for the debt that comes from the tax breaks the top .5% is getting, will not wise up and vote their pocketbooks.

    You have to swallow the tuition increases that have come with the Bush administration policies.

    You have to chance not having some terrible medical malady. I think Kerry wants to make catostrophic health care insurance more affordable.

    You have to accept the logic that bans states from bargaining for cheaper drug prices.

    You have to discount the higher fuel prices and the almost complete lack of support Bush has given to conservation, keeping the false hope alive that we will not run out of fossil fuels.

    You have to hope that the Bush policies that have led to a dramatic increase in terrorism worldwide will not have an effect on you.

    You have to hope that your entry level job in the big corporation will not have been shipped off to another country because of the high cost of US healthcare.

    etc.
    etc.

    pretty risky. you might be better off with a lottery ticket.
     
  18. LeeTom macrumors 68000

    LeeTom

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    #18
    Yeah, quite the opposite in my neck of the woods. Technically we're a battleground state, but we're by no means a toss-up state. Washington hasn't voted Republican since 1984. And if you put a Bush sticker on your car anywhere near Seattle, you're probably gonna get the bird.

    It's too bad we're this divided, eh?
    It seems like there's a better way...... . . . . . . . .

    Lee Tom
     
  19. mactastic thread starter macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #19
    Oddly enough, I've seen a whole lot of Kerry/Edwards stickers around here this year. Odd because even though I am in California, the county I am in went something like 2-1 for Bush last time. In 2000 I saw nearly zero Gore/Lieberman stickers. It will be interesting to see the numbers this time. I highly doubt Kerry will win the county, but I betting it will be a much closer number this year.
     
  20. macsrus macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2004
    Location:
    Terra Firma
    #20
    First of all... BEFORE the tax cut the upper 2% as you say.... WAS paying 40% of the federal tax burden....
    Now you can say that the middle class is paying it now... but the fact is noone is paying more than they did before the tax cut...(Not as federal taxes anyway)

    Second while we have run up a much larger debt during the last 4 years...
    What actually makes you think it would not have been worse if Gore would have been elected....
    The stock market still would have crashed... people still would be out of work.. The corporate scandals still would have happened.... The recession still would be going on without any tax relief to the people...
    AND
    If as the Democrats would have done if they had the majority in both houses and the Whitehouse....Given us socialized medicine.... Then with the economic down turn we had... we would have plumeted further into a recession with no way to pay for the expanded Gov't services....

    NOW....
    Im not saying that BUSH is GREAT and that GORE would have destroyed us...
    Im just saying that given what happened... we could have been as bad and more than likely worse off under Gore.
     
  21. Neserk macrumors 6502a

    Neserk

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2004
    #21

    Totally wrong. The Clinton/Gore administration were keeping a close eye on Al Qaida. Bush dropped the ball - completely ignored them. It is unlikely 9/11 would have ever happened given Clinton's track record of thwarting attacks. I have no reason to belive Gore would have been any different.
     
  22. LeeTom macrumors 68000

    LeeTom

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    #22
    Yeah, I can't think of a way to screw up any more than ignoring a security briefing that says "Bin Laden Determined to Strike Within U.S."

    Lee Tom
     
  23. macsrus macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2004
    Location:
    Terra Firma
    #23

    That is Bull.....
    The Clinton Administration's way of keeping track was by the successful attacks that Al Qaida performed...
    US Cole, Somalia, First World Trade Center Bombing, Kenja, and Tanzania...
    Yes they did a great job.... They just followed the bombings....


    The Clinton Administration had a offer from Sudan to have bin Laden turned over to them.... They didnt act on it... (It can be debated that Sudan may not have been able to deliver... along with Saudia Arabia....BUT since Clinton didnt act we will never know)


    Furthermore.... your post does not address anything about my last post...
    My last post was about economic conditions not the war.
    As usual when you reply to me you dont add anything useful... and just search for something to argue about....
     
  24. MattG macrumors 68040

    MattG

    Joined:
    May 27, 2003
    Location:
    Fletcher, NC
    #24
    Here's one more for you. :)
     

    Attached Files:

    • car.jpg
      car.jpg
      File size:
      91.5 KB
      Views:
      28
  25. mactastic thread starter macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #25
    Apples and oranges my friend. They make 40% of the income in this country, shouldn't they pay 40% of the taxes? Or would you prefer the head tax system where everyone pays the same amount?
     

Share This Page