WHB Collab Topic 1/20: How, as a feminist, are you preparing yourself to decide who to vote for in the 2004 primary? Which issues are deal breakers? Which you can bend on? If a candidate says one thing, but you know they vote another way, which do you tend to believe? Where do you get your information?

In my short run as a member of the voting public, I've made my decisions based on both strategy and ideology. I suppose I should be ashamed to admit it, but all other things being equal, I'll decide based on strategy first.

For example, the 2000 presidential election. I was very much a Nader supporter, but if it looked like Gore had a chance to win Ohio, I would have voted for him. So I monitored the polls and when it looked like Bush would certainly take Ohio by November, I decided to help Nader on the way to his 5%. I certainly wouldn't blame Nader for Gore's failure, but I wouldn't have allowed my vote to send Ohio's electoral votes Bush's way if it would have made a difference.

And I don't think that is anything to be ashamed about. Ideology is ideology; politics is strategy. Yes, when it comes down to it, I would take the weakest Democrat over Bush. There are very few people in politics I support wholeheartedly anyhow, and perhaps no one who has a chance to win and really change things. So I support them with all my heart, and I'll vote for them if I can, but I would much rather put someone who will represent my right to choose in office, even if he supports the death penalty, rather than voting my conscience and allowing someone like Bush to plow ahead with his conservative agenda.

That said, ideologically I support Kucinich. As I've said before I do believe he is the only real progressive in the race, and the one who has most consistently and most strongly spoken out in support of gay rights, reproductive rights, ending unjustified and preemptive war, and any number of issues I strongly believe in.

On the other hand, and this is by way of reply to Natalie's comment, I cannot understand his strange alliance with John Edwards, and to tell you the truth I'm a bit disillusioned by it. First of all, it's a strange strategic move for someone who has, naive though he may be, insisted he can win and he alone represents the needs of the public. But if he were to encourage his supporters to vote for any other candidate, why Edwards? I don't mind Edwards terribly, he's not Lieberman, but he supports the Patriot Act, voted in favor of the war in Iraq, supports the death penalty, and would put gay rights in the hands of the states (and if Ohio keeps doing what it is doing, believe me I won't be here long).

But I haven't decided who I will vote for in the primary. There's a long time before it's Ohio's turn, and anything could happen to change my vote. I would probably vote for Dean if the race were close and he was still in the running for the nomination but not a lock. Dean is my second choice. If Lieberman somehow polls strongly, I'll vote for whoever can beat him. But if strategy is not a concern, my vote still goes to Kucinich.

The issues that are deal-breakers for me:

Reproductive rights. I absolutely will not vote for anyone who does not support a woman's right to choose what happens to her own body. I will not vote for anyone who supports the partial-birth abortion ban. The most important issue for me in this election is maintaining Roe v. Wade, that is the ultimate deal-breaker. I think I would vote for anyone who would see that it is upheld.

Gay marriage. The other really emotional issue for me. A candidate must at minimum support gay adoption and gay rights. Though not a deal-breaker, I would much prefer a candidate who fully supports civil unions if not full marriage rights. Gay marriage in other states ought to be recognized by all states.

War and imperialism. I won't vote for a candidate who supports the war in Iraq or any further preemptive endeavors. Now that we've done it, I don't think we ought to fully withdraw from Iraq but we must immediately put the UN and allies in shared power and as soon as possible put Iraq in full governmental control. We are a committed part of the rebuilding process now but we don't need any kickbacks, we don't need an empire.

I would bend on:

The death penalty. I am anti-capital punishment. But I can accept its continued use for now.

Drugs. I'm in favor of decriminalizing drugs, eliminating mandatory minimums and emphasizing treatment over imprisonment. But I could live with any of the candidates' positions on drugs. Except for Lieberman's, but I wouldn't vote for him under any circumstances.

Education. The No Child Left Behind Act is a joke. Lieberman and Edwards supported it, and I would really need a radical shift in reasoning from them to earn my vote. And I really can't get on board with school vouchers. But any other proposals, I could live with.

Health care. We need universal health care. But again, willing to put that on the backburner, any of the Democrats' positions are fine.

If a candidate's voting record and promises don't match up? Obviously, the voting record is the only important factor. It speaks for itself. However, I will say you can't put Kucinich in this category for his turnaround on abortion. So the thought of aborting a fetus is personally disgusting to the man. I don't care what's in his mind or what he used to support. The fact is he would uphold Roe v. Wade today and he opposes to partial birth abortion ban. In politics, it's what you do with your beliefs that counts.

And as to where I get my information. At home I don't have cable so I'm not a 24-hour news junkie. I have picked up the habit of watching the BBC news every night on PBS (to which my mother remarked, "Do you actually believe that stuff?" Whaaat?), and if I'm around at 5pm I watch Jim Lehrer. I check in to CNN and The New York Times online for my dose of mainstream news, and get most everything else from Common Dreams and Alternet. Check out my links page, I'm too lazy to a href these and others.

No matter what the issue, my positions and decisions are colored by the fact that I am a feminist. Every issue is a feminist issue. And when it comes down to it, I will take any Democrat (except Lieberman) over Bush. Oh, even then, I guess I would vote for Lieberman, though it disgusts me to do so. The fact is, a lot of huge decisions are going to be made over the next four years. The kind of decisions that might affect whether I can stomach living in this country for the rest of my life. I feel that this is an especially important election, especially for feminists, and we have to make sure the right guy is doing the job.