If you could vote, and would vote for McCain, dare you admit it here? and say why?

[lingle]

Anyone?

This is interesting. Athene, I'm impressed that you were open about this. I expect you'll get flamed, but you knew that. I am impressed with anyone that can discuss why they voted Republican/ for Bush - people I know just hang their heads and shuffle around and refuse to talk about it.

Bush is a war criminal who promotes torture
If you voted for Bush, you are directly responsible for torture.

"Because I think invading Iraq was the right thing to do. I thought it then I still think it now. I don't think it was a good thing to do."

You talk like Bush

I don't vote for a President for a second term because I think he was perfect in the first term. That is a standard which no one could ever live up to. I vote for him (or her!) because I think he/she is better than his/her opponent.

It is unlikely that the Democratic candidate would appeal to me more than the Republican one because it is unlikely that the Democrat will want to cut spending and reduce government meddling in people's lives.

For example, I am opposed to socialised medicine, and that alone makes me not want to say President Obama. Although, most likely I think that is exactly what I shall be saing on January 20th.

I can understand people having conservative principles. I can. I can understand people voting Republican - even an old left winger like me can see why people do. But Bush? He is just such a complete and utter imbecile of a man. I wouldn't trust him to order me a cup of tea in a cafe, let alone run my country.

athene, Iraq had bipartisan support.

But, when one speaks of small government, this is a total fallacy, espcially in a global economy.

if you don't want separation of Church and State, suppose you voted for the right candidate, but will need a Constitutional ammendment...

Yes, because providing medical treatment for the poor is just wicked. Not like, say, torturing mentally ill people for hundreds of hours.

I don't know how you sleep at night Athene, I really don't. You did a bad, bad thing.

I love my dog, I do want separation of church and state in America. When I said I disagreed with Bush on that point I means because he goes around taliking about God Bless America all the time and I think that is inappropriate for the President of a country which was founded on the separation of Church and state. I am a Christian and I fully support the religeon. But, in the US, it does not belong in government.

"Some of the consequences (dead people) are indeed very bad. But, leaving Sadaam in power was worse."

How?

"Some dead people" includes aminimum of 90,000 civilians, by the way.

2,900 civilians dead during 9/11 attacks = a very big deal, great tragedy that merited invading two countries, continuing wars.

90,000 civilians dead in Iraq = a bad consequence but leaving Saddam in power was worse (?!?!)

AN, i think the problem for many europeans is that while we understand "liberal" (in the european sense- ie free market, small state, etc etc) arguments and therefore understand the political reasons behind a Republican affiliation, we really struggle to relate to the increasingly relevant "moral" underpinning of the GOP. it seems to me that a republican cannot hope to be elected unless they espouse a pro-life, pro-gun, pro-death penalty ideology on the home front. that stuff is madness to us old europeans- we just don't get it, and it scares us (of course i am generalising, but i think this argument by and large applies).

i know that not all republican voters are extreme right-wngers or religious nutters, but i would feel extremely uneasy knowing that in order for my guy to get the power he needs to pander to that group.

that is compleltely aside from the catastrophe (for America, and for the world) that were Dubya's 8 years in power.

I think we have now gone past the point where you are genuinely interested in what drives my political views and entered the phase where you just want to bash me with sarcasm. So, I'm going to bugger now.

ta ta...

anyway, slightly unfair that this has turned into an AN against everyone else thread. come on come on, there must be more republicans out there!

no please don't go! i am genuinely interested. i have never met a real republican in my life (that's said without sarcasm i swear!)...

"It is unlikely that the Democratic candidate would appeal to me more than the Republican one because it is unlikely that the Democrat will want to cut spending and reduce government meddling in people's lives."

So the most important things the US President can work on to impress you are (1) cut spending and (2) reduce meddling in people's lives?

And what about human rights - you know, lots of people being held in legal purgatory in Guantanamo in your name, being tortured and held without a trial for years? What about lying to you and invading another country, starting a war that killed more Americans than 9/11?

I would think these are slightly more important than government spending, but hey ho.

Completely agree with beforesunrise's post of 19:40

I was just going to ask if we could be respectful of AN's views. Attacking her isn't going to make her want to discuss her reasoning (which I am genuinely interested in) nor will it encourage anyone else to speak out.

Athene, well done for raising your head above the parapet and defending Republicans.

Respect your opinions as you sound like a principled person, not that I agree with them (except on separation of Church and State)

And hope us Democrats have a landslide tomorrow

Athene - Why don't you answer my question? I am really interested to hear what was so horrible about "leaving Saddam in place" that 90,000 civilian deaths was the better alternative.

(cheers MrsMattie- it's the first time anyone agrees with me on MN ever! v proud now!)

It is not disrespectful to ask someone to explain their reasoning.

This is not religion we are talking about, where everyone has to respect everyone else's deity of choice with no questions asked.

The thing is that whilst Human Rights are of course very important, so is how a president will impact our everyday lives.

So, to me, healthcare, immigration and taxation are important issues and the ones that I need to be addressed. And most people vote on those kinds of issues rather than more global ones, including Human Rights.

Beforesunrise
I agree too and I also think that AN has been unfairly treated. Some of the comments where below the belt. I am not surprised that noone else has admitted to being a Republican voter.

Without wishing to defend President Bush (and I've been on numerous marches), Iraq did have bipartisan support.

I understand Athene's arguments, not that I agree with them. socialism, for instance, she argues, is a bad thing in medicine.

But isn't the federal government bailing out Wall Street and various banks also socialism?

if one does a proper analysis of health care across the US, the only ones to benefit are the insurance companies who make a profit of people being sick. Some industries, imo, should not make a profit. personally, I would go further and add transport, energy, and communication.

and one more thing, re voting Bush second time round. Kerry was such a lame candidate that i doubt most democrats could get excited about him, let alone lifelong republicans. and i am not sure he would have made a much better president.

i think Obama would be a better president than Bush, and than McCain, though not as great as Hillary would have been