Zach F Wrote: I was raised in a Republican house and even though my mom isn't the best person to be able to represent the Republican views I often have talks with her. I asked her a simple question. Knowing what you know today. If you could go back in time, knowing that the Bush Administration would crash the economy, start a war in Iraq, strip civil liberties and generally go down in history as almost the worst U.S. President (all stuff she generally concedes were terrible and the fault of the Bush Admin) would you change to vote to Gore or Kerry?
Her reply was "I thank God that Gore was not President after 9/11, so no I wouldn't."
Me:"9/11 was pretty much a no-brainer response. 99% of all lawmakers agreed to go after Bin Laden in Afghanistan. It was the Iraq, which had nothing to do with 9/11, that Gore would have likely handled differently. Would you change your vote in 2004?
Her: "No, I do not agree with the Dem platform."
Me:"Does it not feel weird to say that? That you would vote for a guy that you were 100% sure would create the worst U.S. economy since the 30's and cost millions of people their jobs just because you don't agree with the other guy?"
I'm guessing she did feel a little weird saying that because she changed the subject to Libya.
I know that debates, campaigns, and speeches are not aimed at audiences like my mom. And there are people who not vote for the "other guy" under any circumstances on both sides of the aisle. I just think it's terrible when people stop looking at facts and just go with their guy feeling no matter what.