Thursday, July 22, 2004
Post primary thoughts...
It was certainly a hot one passing out fliers on Tuesday. Roger Eaton's brochures are well-designed, and for a change, actually spell out information useful for voters. The slick design is eye-catching, and I noted quite a few people actually stopping to read them details.
At the Emerald Isle spot, I probably only saw a total of 150 people, and managed to get fliers in the hands of 75-100. This, in a district which has about 2000 registered voters. Of course, many of these likely have more than one home, and stay away from the Island during this hot months and tourist season.
I spoke to a couple of die-hard Republicans who will be voting Kerry this year if he can present a reasonable argument. Even if he does not, these people asserted, Bush would not get their votes. The war in Iraq, in particular, was a subject of heated discourse. I listened as one Korean Vet railed against what he called the "murder" of our service members in the name of a personal grudge match between Bush and Saddam. On man told me he had voted Republican in every election over his lifetime (probably about 50-55 yo), but would never vote for Bush. In fact, he is so disgusted with Republicans that he declared he would not vote for a single Republican this year. I talked to him for a long period of time about Roger's campaign against Wacky Walter Jones, and pointed out Roger's strong belief in protecting our military, and seeing them rewarded at a level which better represents the depth of sacrifice these people make. Concurrent receipts, I told him, is a big issue for Eaton, and expect him to push his support for improving the lives of our military men and women in every way possible.
Another man I spoke to told me that he was a Republican, but occasionally voted Democratic when he felt the need. A Mike Easley (Dem Gov-NC) supporter, he said he voted for Bush 1 but not the second time (he voted Perot), Dole, and then Bush 2. He's not a great fan of Kerry, but said the supporting the "alternative to Kerry would be like me having voted for Clinton in 1992." Though I'm not quite sure whether that is a good thing or ill, I'll nonetheless take that as meaning he'll not vote for Bush2 this year.
All in all, I believe I talked to six open Republicans who voiced at least moderate support for Kerry, four of which gave an affirmative when asked if they believed Kerry would get their vote. Now for some rough math (I'm too lazy to draw up a chart, so bear with me)...
2000 voters, split 45%Rep35%Dem20%UA. 900 Reps, 700Dems, 400UA.
The register was split fairly evenly on turnout. Quick guess said 55% voted in Rep, 45% in Dem (NC unaffiliateds can apparently vote in either) This falls almost perfectly in line with overall makeup of district, assuming UAs are split in this area between the two parties. Out of 900 Reps, approx 75-15UA=60 showed up to vote. 4 of those chose to voice strong opinions against Bush, with a vote for Kerry in Nov. 2 more sounded likely, but I won't stand on it. And these are just the few who chose to stay and speak to me. May not sound like a great deal, but honestly, in this dominating conservative district, where Reagan Dems are common, 4 strong opinions, in public, by die-hard Republicans, against Dubya, is a very, very positive sign. 1 in 15 were outspoken, and I am confident there are many others who feel similarly who, however, did not voice them to me.
I have no doubt, despite the likely poll swings between now and November, that many traditional Repubs are sick of the growing government, defense carelessness, and fiscal deficiencies, and will, at the least, not vote for Bush.
If the GOP is going to push Nader, we should be pushing Michael Badnarik, the Libertarian candidate. Badnarik has even started buying ad space on Daily Kos and other liberal sites in the effort. Not that I necessarily agree with the GOP tactics, but unfortunately, this is not the year to be hampered by "white" ethics concerns. White, as in "white lie", no racial overtones here. If a Badnarik campaign can draw Nader-like votes from Bush, which I honestly be greater of an impact than Nader, the third party race would effectively achieve a draw, and therefore, a landslide victory in November for Kerry (mark my words.) That is, unless e-vote hackers or terrorists don't manage to alter the votes totals in the voting machines.
At the Emerald Isle spot, I probably only saw a total of 150 people, and managed to get fliers in the hands of 75-100. This, in a district which has about 2000 registered voters. Of course, many of these likely have more than one home, and stay away from the Island during this hot months and tourist season.
I spoke to a couple of die-hard Republicans who will be voting Kerry this year if he can present a reasonable argument. Even if he does not, these people asserted, Bush would not get their votes. The war in Iraq, in particular, was a subject of heated discourse. I listened as one Korean Vet railed against what he called the "murder" of our service members in the name of a personal grudge match between Bush and Saddam. On man told me he had voted Republican in every election over his lifetime (probably about 50-55 yo), but would never vote for Bush. In fact, he is so disgusted with Republicans that he declared he would not vote for a single Republican this year. I talked to him for a long period of time about Roger's campaign against Wacky Walter Jones, and pointed out Roger's strong belief in protecting our military, and seeing them rewarded at a level which better represents the depth of sacrifice these people make. Concurrent receipts, I told him, is a big issue for Eaton, and expect him to push his support for improving the lives of our military men and women in every way possible.
Another man I spoke to told me that he was a Republican, but occasionally voted Democratic when he felt the need. A Mike Easley (Dem Gov-NC) supporter, he said he voted for Bush 1 but not the second time (he voted Perot), Dole, and then Bush 2. He's not a great fan of Kerry, but said the supporting the "alternative to Kerry would be like me having voted for Clinton in 1992." Though I'm not quite sure whether that is a good thing or ill, I'll nonetheless take that as meaning he'll not vote for Bush2 this year.
All in all, I believe I talked to six open Republicans who voiced at least moderate support for Kerry, four of which gave an affirmative when asked if they believed Kerry would get their vote. Now for some rough math (I'm too lazy to draw up a chart, so bear with me)...
2000 voters, split 45%Rep35%Dem20%UA. 900 Reps, 700Dems, 400UA.
The register was split fairly evenly on turnout. Quick guess said 55% voted in Rep, 45% in Dem (NC unaffiliateds can apparently vote in either) This falls almost perfectly in line with overall makeup of district, assuming UAs are split in this area between the two parties. Out of 900 Reps, approx 75-15UA=60 showed up to vote. 4 of those chose to voice strong opinions against Bush, with a vote for Kerry in Nov. 2 more sounded likely, but I won't stand on it. And these are just the few who chose to stay and speak to me. May not sound like a great deal, but honestly, in this dominating conservative district, where Reagan Dems are common, 4 strong opinions, in public, by die-hard Republicans, against Dubya, is a very, very positive sign. 1 in 15 were outspoken, and I am confident there are many others who feel similarly who, however, did not voice them to me.
I have no doubt, despite the likely poll swings between now and November, that many traditional Repubs are sick of the growing government, defense carelessness, and fiscal deficiencies, and will, at the least, not vote for Bush.
If the GOP is going to push Nader, we should be pushing Michael Badnarik, the Libertarian candidate. Badnarik has even started buying ad space on Daily Kos and other liberal sites in the effort. Not that I necessarily agree with the GOP tactics, but unfortunately, this is not the year to be hampered by "white" ethics concerns. White, as in "white lie", no racial overtones here. If a Badnarik campaign can draw Nader-like votes from Bush, which I honestly be greater of an impact than Nader, the third party race would effectively achieve a draw, and therefore, a landslide victory in November for Kerry (mark my words.) That is, unless e-vote hackers or terrorists don't manage to alter the votes totals in the voting machines.
