[Jack of all Trades]

You forgot to put a question mark in your vanity question.

FWIW, 79.325% is my current limit, but that is subject to change.

[rdb3]

What exactly is the argument to be settled?

If you want a Google GMail account, FReepmail me.
They're going fast!

[Texas Federalist]

I would never vote independant and risk putting a Democrat into office. Why risk putting a 100% liberal Democrat into office when you can have a 99.8% liberal Republican. Some of these third party apologists are just crazy!

[Protagoras]

"If you always do what you've always done, you'll always get what you've always got".....Michael Cloud

[Maria S]

"I am a 100% guy..."


100% what? And forget about the independents...look what H.RossPerot got us.

[lilylangtree]

200% conservative Republican.

[Conspiracy Guy]

OK. In an industrial accident would you prefer to lose a finger, or a hand?

[cripplecreek]

I'm not voting for a democrat or a democrat with an (R) in front of his name and that's all there is to it.

[newzjunkey]

Well, well. You're in IOWA which means you get to decide who I, out in CA, have to have on the GOP ticket in 2008. My vote in national primaries have never mattered. It's always been settled before CA even with our primary moved forward.

In the general I'll vote for the lesser of two evils. I voted Perot in 1992 and I don't regret it. What I do regret are squandered votes for BobDole and, with how things are going, W.

With the lack of fiscal discipline, unless this NOLA situation avoids taxes and borrowing, I'll be tempted to aim for divided government. There's no will in a GOP Congress (I'm looking at you, Tom DeLay) to hold spending down when they have the White House too.

[headsonpikes]

For some reason, I'm imagining a nation of mice, debating whom to elect as leader - a black or a calico CAT.

[paul51]

I'm a 100% person. 100% disgusted with the GOP senate. There usually aren't many democrats on the ticket who are 100% anything just like there are not many GOP candidates on the ticket that are 100%. Is a 70% dim worse than a 70% GOP? I don't know. One you know is going to screw you. The other surprises you after the election. Which is worse?

[doesnt suffer fools gladly]

I would never vote Democrat. Never.

It's the devil you know.

[kevkrom]

Let's face reality... the only way you can count on a particular candidate agreeing 100% with you on every issue is if you're the candidate. Even then, you will find that in order to be effective for the things you really want, you will have to compromise on less important issues.

Politics is the art of compromise, pure and simple. I know that candidate X and I don't agree on everything. The question is, how far can I compromise to vote for candidate X because of the areas where we do agree? More to the point, on which issues will I refuse to compromise at all?

Other things to bear in mind are whether those differences in opinion, especially significant ones, are likely to become a point of contention where candidate X will be able to make (or tip) a decision (or vote)? If not, then does that difference of opinion really matter? Also, especially when considering the job of President, and even more so in a post-9/11 world, one has to ask themselves: regardless of views on policy, do I trust this person to make the big decisions under pressure?

[fight_truth_decay]

An Independent will never get my vote at this time. However, I would vote for a Zell Miller before I would vote for a John McCain. Lot of promises to sort out before 2008.

"To not vote"..is a slap in the face to all those that are fighting for this country to keep us free. If you don't vote, then effectively you will make Bill and Hillary, Al Gore, Teddy Kennedy, Chuckie Schumer, Cindy Sheehan and every other liberal who knows what's best for you and your family extremely happy.