Leftist's for who 08'

[CHEtheLIBERATOR]

I know it already past but I was wondering who my fellow leftists voted for please peply ny time.









I am interested:crying:

[ashaman1324]

in the US presidential elections?
i didn't lol.
i dont like either candidate.
i dislike obama less though.

[Sam_b]

I'm not a US citizen, and don't live in America.
But for what its worth I would have probably voted for the McKinney/Clemente Green Party ticket.

[More Fire for the People]

I voted for Obama but I was more interested in the ballot questions in my state. (Which made me sad, because I voted against prop 1 which banned gay and other unmarried couples from adopting children). I voted for Obama because I think / hope his government will support / pass the EFCA. But Obama's political econmy must be subjugated to a thorough critique. Sure he's a radical displacement in bourgeois politics but ultimately he is a representative of the bourgeois state.

[Red Rebel]

The Party for Socialism and Liberation: Gloria La Riva/Eugene Puryear. Socialist Action had a good platform for supporting the PSL, SPUSA, and SWP. They called all three of these parties legitimate socialist parties and urged socialist to support any of them.

[RevMex]

I voted for Obama, a McCain administration would have been scarier. I know Obama is not "change we can believe in." I voted for the lesser of two evils. It seems that unions will have a brighter future with Obama.

I also voted against prop. 1. Comrade MoreFireForThePeople, if I not mistaken we live in the same state. Its really shitty that prop. 1 passed.

[ZeroNowhere]

There was no lesser evil, so I wouldn't have bothered voting even if I lived in the US.

[FreeFocus]

I voted for Anarchy '08. :)

[swirling_vortex]

Obama. But as others have said, he's still a part of the bourgeois. However, at least an Obama administration would be more friendly towards unions and using the government rather than McCain's old "here's a tax cut, now go invest" strategy. Truth to be told, I have some respect for McCain as a man of character, but I have absolutely no respect for Sarah Palin. Given McCain's age, I would seriously consider moving to Canada ASAP if she became the President.

[hugsandmarxism]

I voted... wish i could take back my ballot though. It was more or less the same as the others here, in i voted for the lesser of two evils and cared more about the ballot questions. My state voted to keep it's income tax, and voted to decriminalize marijuana possession, which is good, but still... he's furniture in Corporate America's Oval Office. I don't expect a whole lot of "change." I really don't.

[Comrade B]

I turn 18 in 5 days, so I missed out on the election, but I advocated for La Riva with people I already knew were voting Obama, and advocated Obama for those who were more to the right

[CubaSocialista]

I voted for Gloria La Riva/ Eugene Puryear, of the PSL. I met Gloria when she came to a PSL meeting at the Answer HQ in Harlem. Very intelligent, articulate, sincere individual who held the concerns of working people at utmost importance. She had my vote. I wasn't voting for the joke pseudo-progressive Obama.

[Bilan]

I voted for Obama but I was more interested in the ballot questions in my state. (Which made me sad, because I voted against prop 1 which banned gay and other unmarried couples from adopting children). I voted for Obama because I think / hope his government will support / pass the EFCA. But Obama's political econmy must be subjugated to a thorough critique. Sure he's a radical displacement in bourgeois politics but ultimately he is a representative of the bourgeois state.

So you voted for no reason?

[AnarchyIsOrder]

Well, at the start I supported the SPUSA, since I had only just become a socialist, but soon enough I became more familiar with the left, and their candidate was slipping up on a daily basis. Thus, Anarchy '08.

[Kassad]

I voted for Gloria La Riva/ Eugene Puryear, of the PSL. I met Gloria when she came to a PSL meeting at the Answer HQ in Harlem. Very intelligent, articulate, sincere individual who held the concerns of working people at utmost importance. She had my vote. I wasn't voting for the joke pseudo-progressive Obama.

I also voted for Gloria La Riva/Eugene Puryear. Filled out my mom's ballot. :lol:

Sadly, I had to write her in, since she was not on the ballot in Ohio. She was probably the most active socialist activist running for the presidency. I can say that I'm very disappointed by those who voted for Barack Obama.

[More Fire for the People]

So you voted for no reason?
Whatever. It's self-evident that the terrain of the struggle is different under Obama than McCain and that an Obama administration is in the last instance preferable for the working class & it's organization.

[Angry Young Man]

American cde.s: vote republican to speed up historical materialism. I mean, yea there's risks, but with a reaganite (I imagine his influence over the Republican party still overhangs like a fart-canopy) bloodgulp in control, workers both in the states and in the 3rd world are gonna get very agitated.

Course I don't mean this seriously. I just wanted to take the piss out of all the far-left-wingers who voted ctr-right.

[Davie zepeda]

lol bush won with the lefts help last time lol speed up the revolution brother lol

[More Fire for the People]

Yeah, under Bush we've seen great strides for unions, left-wing organizations, and workers' political activity. Oh wait...

[Davie zepeda]

lol we have seen the left reemergence in Latin america under bush heh

[ernie]

It's self-evident that the terrain of the struggle is different under Obama than McCain and that an Obama administration is in the last instance preferable for the working class & it's organization.
It's not self-evident at all. In fact, a lot of us think that there is no difference whatsoever.

[More Fire for the People]

Well, I'm sorry you're a dumbass.

[Kassad]

Well, I'm sorry you're a dumbass.

Our deepest apologies for acknowledging Obama's support for militarization, colonialism and bourgeoisie elitism. We're deeply sorry that you don't fathom the fact that he is an enemy of the working class who will not make the necessary social, military and economic reforms that will acknowledge the civil rights of everyone in the United States.

He has consistently altered his opinion on Iraq, NAFTA and a multitude of other issues. He wants to fuel the military machine in the Middle East by advocating a troop increase in Afghanistan, as well as hanging on Israel's every word. You truly think that things will improve? Don't attempt to become a part of the bourgeoisie elections. Help fuel a social movement that will tear it down.

[More Fire for the People]

So you honestly think there's no difference for worker's organization under a McCain presidency than an Obama presidency. You think McCain would pass the EFCA. Absenteeism is as much bullshit as reformism. Never mind the fact that in college Obama associated with radical teachers, Marxists, and pan-Africanists. The only Marxists McCain knows are the ones he shot.

[Kassad]

So you honestly think there's no difference for worker's organization under a McCain presidency than an Obama presidency. You think McCain would pass the EFCA. Absenteeism is as much bullshit as reformism. Never mind the fact that in college Obama associated with radical teachers, Marxists, and pan-Africanists. The only Marxists McCain knows are the ones he shot.

Any reforms he makes will be completely eviscerated by his support for capitalist reform, bailouts and his consistent support for imperialism. Honestly, any positive steps will be shot down very quickly.

[More Fire for the People]

I think that position is too cynical. Under Obama there's a wedge in the political space that working class politics can seize whereas under McCain there would be no hope. Comrade Miles likes to call Obama's presidency Bush's third term but really he's Clinton, not Bush's, third term. And under Clinton's glossy third way semi-left neoliberalism (especially before 1996), working people saw gains that they definitely didn't see under Bush.

[Kassad]

Well, Obama's fascination with globalization and support for free trade agreements stops me from thinking he will ever work towards supporting or emancipating the working proletariat, but I do see your perspective.

[FreeFocus]

A McCain presidency would have forced worker militancy and anti-imperialist awareness and activity abroad. Obama kills the possibility of both. The only good thing with Obama could be the EFCA, but there are no guarantees that a real worker's movement would start.

You are more likely to fight a bully after he punches you.

[More Fire for the People]

But under that same logic freefocus, we would see the same under Bush. But the 1990s were more politically active than the 2000s. More reaction =/= more resistance.

[FreeFocus]

Yes, but Obama is not Clinton. Obama changes the perception of the United States and this new image will last decades at the least, unless his presidency is catastrophic. This pretty much kills much of the anti-imperialist activity occurring in the Third World. As I said in another thread, once Obama's picture hangs on the walls of people's homes in shantytowns and slums alongside Che's, there will be something seriously wrong with people's interpretation of history and reality. That would be a sign of the left's failure and the bourgeoisie's victory. It wouldn't be a death blow, by any means, but a serious wound.

Also, Bush prompted a lot of anti-imperialist activity. Iraq, Afghanistan, Venezuela, Bolivia, etc. Millions of people from all corners of the world marched against the invasion of Iraq. American imperialism's poll numbers plummeted in just about every country, except India and maybe China. Now the poll numbers rise again, because it is perception, not substance, that plays the biggest role in people taking action or being passive.

[DancingLarry]

Those who buy the "lesser of two evils" theory of bourgeois liberalism need to read George Sorel's Reflections on Violence which makes clear beyond a shadow of a doubt how bourgeois liberalism guarantees the suffocation of any viable radical workers' movement.

[Lacrimi de Chiciură]

I wrote in La Riva/Puryear for the PSL because they weren't on the ballot in my state. I prefer Obama over McCain but that's really not saying much

[ernie]

And under Clinton's glossy third way semi-left neoliberalism (especially before 1996), working people saw gains that they definitely didn't see under Bush.
Bullshit. Workers didn't see any significant improvement in their standard of living, much less one that was directly related to what Clinton did.


Absenteeism is as much bullshit as reformism.
Well, you would know: by your posts here, you seem to be on the verge of reformism yourself.


Well, I'm sorry you're a dumbass.
I'm convinced! Let's all go out and work with Obama. Change is here. Yes we can! Yes we can! :rolleyes:

[Crux]

One vote does not matter. If I toed the party-line I would have voted for Nader. But of course, there neeeds to be built a reala lternative, you know, in those days between elections.

[LOLseph Stalin]

I know it already past but I was wondering who my fellow leftists voted for please peply ny time.

I'm not an American citizen so I would have not been able to vote, but I probably would have voted for Ralph Nader or Brian Moore although niether one stood a chance.

[Spasiba]

I've said it before but this is why I really hope Obama survives and serves his term(s) because he WILL be made a Che like figure if he's killed, and that will be a disaster for all of us as his ideas of liberalism become the 'radical' ones- whereby people get super pissed off and vote for someone else- and the actual left is totally cast aside. Or we might get lucky and gain support, that's possible, but I KNOW he will be made an idol, more so than he already is.

And how much difference under Clinton-Bush-Obama had/will the average American worker feel? I know Bush sucked, but what president really didnt? The defining thing about Bush was his atrocious foreign policy and strengthening his powers, but as far as your everyday life went, whats the difference?

[manic expression]

But under that same logic freefocus, we would see the same under Bush. But the 1990s were more politically active than the 2000s. More reaction =/= more resistance.

:lol: So we're supporting bourgeois factions based on how much people demonstrate against their horrible policies? Bush's little adventure into Iraq mobilized millions, so I guess we should be supporting the Republicans based on how much they engender opposition.

And yeah, if you want to go back even further, the 1910's saw a lot of political activity, too...let's reelect someone like Woodrow Wilson! :lol:


So you honestly think there's no difference for worker's organization under a McCain presidency than an Obama presidency. You think McCain would pass the EFCA. Absenteeism is as much bullshit as reformism. Never mind the fact that in college Obama associated with radical teachers, Marxists, and pan-Africanists. The only Marxists McCain knows are the ones he shot.

Do you even remember what the Clinton administration did? NAFTA? CAFTA? The "end of welfare as we know it"? Any of these little things ring a bell? If your memory stretched back a few years longer than the average Obama supporter, you might remember that during the Clinton administration, unions and workers suffered great losses. And here you are singing the praises of his successor. Workers lose both ways. Period.

Most people aren't encouraging absenteeism, that's a misrepresentation of a lot of posters here.

And if you read portions of Obama's "The Audacity of Hope", as I did, you'd know Obama expressed his express disagreement with the "radicals" he associated with in college. Actually, in one specific passage he writes off all those groups you mentioned. Perhaps if you knew Obama's words beyond "change" and "hope", you'd be less enthusiastic about playing cheerleader to the new face of imperialism.