Would you vote for John Kerry if...

dd74 · 05-13-2004, 11:04 PM

John McCain were his running mate?

I know McCain said "no." But Kerry's still courting McCain, among others.

Granted, a Kerry-McCain set could be a powerful ticket, especially toward pulling together a polarized country.

If at all, I could see Bush's camp sweating hard over an arrangement like that...

speeder · speeder's Garage

I would rather see a McCain/anybody but Cheney ticket myself, but yes it would be an unbeatable ticket IMO. McCain would be the attack dog, (like Cheney is now), when the Bush campaign brings up Viet Nam. Kerry and McCain are good friends, which is another reason why I doubt the whole "Kerry was a traitor to fellow vets" line that pops up.

lendaddy · 05-14-2004, 04:30 AM

Hmm.. Thats a tough one. I think I'll have the oatmeal

Superman · 05-14-2004, 04:32 AM

If Mr. Bush cannot pull some decent performance out of his @$$ between now and November, Kerry could run with Pluto and win. On all issues (social security, medical costs, environmental, etc) his performance has been abysmal at best. His actions have been to either do nothing, or make those situations worse. Those of you who think he's been efffective at stimulating the economy are kidding yourselves. The current state of the economy is as poor as this nation COULD have rebounded from 9-11. He had a perfect opportunity (economy in the tank early in his term, and not his fault), and tubed it. Unless his economic numbers become AMAZING, he'll end his term with a more sickly economy than he started with. And finally, all his eggs are in a single basket with several labels. "Iraq." "Terrorism." Etc. And that situation is unrevelling FAST.

As I have said, we liberals actually like government, and actually understand how to run it, and have a stofy of our own to tell that has not gotten out to the voting public very effectively. In my wildest dreams, this might be the political equivalent of the old rope-a-dope boxing technique. If Mr. Bush is drowning in October (and clearly he is now), Kerry and the democrats may have the good sense to put a hose in his mouth.

I am still smiling about my earlier comment. I was told this once, and then I noticed over several years how true it is. Democrats like government, and know how to run it. Republicans hate government, and are clueless when they have leadership responsibility. As I know you are all aware, the majority party in a government "house" (House Of Representatives or Senate) gets to chair all the committees. When Republicans are chairs, hearings go poorly, are disorganized, good bills die from lack of attention and the republican chair persons are forever leaning over and asking the ranking Democrat how to handle stuff. It's fairly comical, actually.

lendaddy · 05-14-2004, 04:38 AM

"As I have said, we liberals actually like government, and actually understand how to run it"

I am not kidding, you literally made me laugh out loud at my desk. Thats good stuff.
I'll give it to you, you have a never give up attitude. I can see that you are convinced that your opinions are fact as well, are you sure you're not a Kennedy

dhoward · dhoward's Garage

John Kerry walks into a bar.
The bartender asks "Why the long face?"

lendaddy · 05-14-2004, 04:54 AM

Kerry replies
Er.........Ahhhhhhhh.........I...............Waaaa s.........Born......this.......Ahhhhhhhhh...Waaaaa ay, Er.........Ah........

Superman · 05-14-2004, 06:43 AM

I do indeed believe that government is our way of pooling resources to accomplish community goals. I'm not surprized you find this amusing. By contrast, some folks seem to believe that government is the evil "them." And they're right. Even the conservatives that are involved in public policy-making know that government is something to deal with constructively, ratehr than ignorantly throwing stones. The term "some folks" used three sentences earlier excludes those conservatives that that are engaged.

You're right about one thing though. I think this is important and you have no idea how persistent I can be.

lendaddy · 05-14-2004, 06:54 AM

The government that governs best is the government that governs least.

Superman · 05-14-2004, 07:03 AM

I keep baiting you guys, and you won't take the bait. So, government is bad, huh. Let's take it one at a time:

Do you use public roads? I don't expect you to take the bait now, so let's assume that the simple answer to this question is "Yes Jim, I use public roads and I intend to keep using them."

Okay, then you would agree that government has some appropriate role to play. Unless of course, you are not one of those Libertarians who would like to see all roads be toll roads, built, maintained and operated at a profit.

Then the next question will be "Do you like safe drinking water delivered to your house?"

And the list goes on and on. If, as you say, "The government that governs best is the government that governs least," then you don't want these things.

lendaddy · 05-14-2004, 07:10 AM

Mmmmmm Bait.....

There are certain things tax money should pay for, agreed.

I have no problem with roads, I do have a problem with it being controlled by the government, (just sub the ***** out to real professionals). Stiiinnnng

They don't pay sign holders $60 / hr

lendaddy · 05-14-2004, 07:18 AM

It's how the government builds in social engineering to everything. Wage adjustment, minority companies, forcing contractors to use less durable recycled materials, blah blah. Just get my damn road built and do it efficiently. Stop trying to use the back door to push agendas.

Superman · 05-14-2004, 07:43 AM

I'm all for anything that makes sense, and I suspect that if we had an opportunity to chat, we'd agree on a great many things.

As I've reported, I deal with public works. So does Cliff, so he'd be a good source of stories about wasteful policies/requirements. My field is labor relations (he says timidly, ducking). Interestingly, wages on public works (which are mandated by prevailing wage laws in more than half the states....CATO lies about this number) are interesting. As it turns out, low-wage contractors are actually LESS efficient than high-wage contractors. Go figure. And direct-wages (including benefits) rarely exceed 25% of project costs.

But I have never, ever heard of $60 Flagger wages. Not even for overtime work. In Seattle, the "prevailing wage" for Flaggers is the union wage. Including benefits, it is $27.18. You probably make more than that, without standing in the rain with cars whizzing by.

Moses · 05-14-2004, 07:45 AM

The inefficiencies of government are staggering. No one is suggesting we don't need water and roads. We are saying we pay way too much when the government provides those services. It's all about the efficient spending of our tax dollars.

We should all be on the same page here. If you reduce some of the legendary government waste, there will be more money to spend feeding starving caribou or some other pressing social urgency.

lendaddy · 05-14-2004, 07:50 AM

"In Seattle, the "prevailing wage" for Flaggers is the union wage. Including benefits, it is $27.18. You probably make more than that, without standing in the rain with cars whizzing by."

lol, actually, no. I make signifacantly less than that, and I'm sure my benefits are MUCH less. But heck all I do is run a business that employs 25 people and has revenues over $1 million a year. If only my job were as important and demanding as the "flaggers"

What schooling do I need to go into that field? It's amazing how detached from reality you get when in government, huh.

fintstone · fintstone's Garage

Quote:

Originally posted by Superman
I do indeed believe that government is our way of pooling resources to accomplish community goals.

I have no problem with voluntarily pooling resourses. The way government does it is more akin to a mugging...Sorta like a couple of your neighbors coming over to use you tools or wife without asking first. If you choose not to allow this, they throw you in jail and take the rest.

island911 · 05-14-2004, 08:30 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Superman
. ..
Not even for overtime work. In Seattle, the "prevailing wage" for Flaggers is the union wage. Including benefits, it is $27.18. You probably make more than that, without standing in the rain with cars whizzing by.

what about with overtime? . . .double time? ( I doubt they offten get the chance, but what is the #?)

Moses · 05-14-2004, 08:46 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by lendaddy
"In Seattle, the "prevailing wage" for Flaggers is the union wage. Including benefits, it is $27.18. You probably make more than that, without standing in the rain with cars whizzing by."

The trauma surgeons at the local hospital make $45/hour. And they don't have all that sign holding stress. Talk about a cushy gig!

island911 · 05-14-2004, 09:36 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by lendaddy
. . .. It's amazing how detached from reality you get when in government, huh.

Uh-oh. . .I think you may have just opened a box of kryptonite, with that one.

lendaddy · 05-14-2004, 09:44 AM

Seriously Sup, Can I get some info on Flaggers school? I was just running some numbers and I would be able to better support my family. Is it a 2 or 4 year degree? Are there any physical requirements? Based on you're numbers I would be looking at an over 10% increase in my income! Then if I get a little OT I'll be in the catbird seat! Sure I'll have to deal with a little more stress and anxiety but you gotta go with the money in this country. The wife is gonna be excited tonight! I always knew I was capable of more and I think this is my opening!

Just once in his life
A man has his time
And my time is now
I'm coming alive