« The Mormon Work Ethic | Main | Coalitions of Power and Redistributive Change »


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Undecided is a category designated for the weak-hearted who cannot make a commitment. I cannot decide if I belong there, or in some other poorly-defined pigeon hole.

What does "does" mean?

I disagree Jim. I was, until about a month ago, very undecided. It wasn't because I was weak hearted but simply because I had but two crappy choices.

Undecided means to smart to drink the kool-aid.

I think it is funny to hear again and again the "undecided" voters.

"There is no choice, there is no choice..." I am sorry to sound rude, but that just shows plain ignorance.

This is politics, or what, have there been better choices in the past? President Bush? Just who?, who do you want to be in the tickets for them to be "worthy of your choice?" Please.

I think these people simply do not research deep enough and most issues probably pass them way above their understanding. With so much at stake these elections, "there are only crappy choices" sounds awfully and ridiculously uneducated.

If you are a conservative then yes, McCain could be considered a "crappy" choice since most conservatives didn't like him before for being liberal, and they don't like him now because they either don't buy his promises or they are sick and tired of the Bush administration. But please don't bring every other candidate (independents too) to this level.


Now you've got me really confused. I thought I was undecided before -- now I can't make up my mind.

For a good and honest description of the undecided voters see here:


This is politics, or what, have there been better choices in the past? President Bush? Just who?, who do you want to be in the tickets for them to be "worthy of your choice?" Please.

I think that the problem of Ross Perot and the American voting system's inability to function properly with more than two serious candidates aside that the choices in the 90's were reasonably compelling. While Bob Dole was a horrible choice by the Republicans to run against Clinton at least he was a more serious candidate for Republicans than McCain/Palin. I can understand Democrats being excited by Obama, but let's be serious, with the possible exception of Mondale Democrats have had pretty good choices until 2000. (Even many Democrats were underwhelmed by Gore and many supported Kerry just because they thought he could win and not because they liked him)

For Republicans the choices since 2000 have sucked. In 2000 it was basically Bush or McCain. In 2004 it was Bush. In 2008 it is McCain/Palin. Ugh. Heck, I'll even throw in 2006 since Dole was an underwhelming choice although seriously better than anything that came after.

If you are a liberal though let's be honest. What was the bad year for you? (Ignoring electability issues) I know many liberal Democrats didn't like a Blue Dog Democrat like Clinton running. But now he's almost like a saint even to many liberals. Outside of Carter who was the bad candidate for you guys? Dukakis?

Although I am not a fan of some of his positions, I think McCain is a much better candidate than Dole ever was. In today's environment a run-of-the-mill big government agricultural subsidy Republican would be toast. You can't win by being a pastel version of the alternative.

I have reservations about Palin - I don't even like the way she talks - but she unquestionably balances the ticket and brings a lot of supporters who might otherwise stay home - arguably many more than the few who will switch tickets because she is not up to speed on foreign policy.

For what it's worth, I'm undecided. The more I learn, the more disgusted I get. I was better off voting ignorantly off a gut feeling. Which should I wave good-bye to, social morality and caution or international relations and the environment?

In the end, I'm undecided because I can't help seeing a vote as an endorsement, and I can't bring myself to sign my name to either amoral swindler. I say dump the entirety of their campaigns and all their most fiery supporters in the Colosseum and let them at it, last one standing is the president.

Not to mention either side would probably rather see me dead than voting. That really puts a damper on party loyalty.

SR, sounds like Gladiator. As long as the media can stick a knife or two in McCain's back before the actual contest, I'm sure Obama would be up for it.


I can't believe your comparison. You are comparing McCain with Maximus and Obama with Commodus of the popular movie Gladiator. (So much for your objectivity)

Given that McCain's campaign has been the one full of negativity, lies and backstabbing (probably one of the many factors why people aren't supporting him), I would say a better comparison would be the reversal of the above roles.

Anyways, do you think Obama would need any help with McCain? C'mon, the old man can hardly walk!!!! HAHAHAHA, he wouldn't last one minute even if they stuck a knife or two on Obama's back before the actual contest.

OK, sorry for the threat hijack... now coming back to the original post...

One of the things I have learned in the industrial world, is how important it is for either product manufacturers or service providers to understand the real concerns of the consumer: this is commonly called in the industrial lingo Voice of the Customer.

Now, when it comes to undecided voters, I honestly have had a hard time hearing real specific needs/plans/concerns/programs/etc that the candidates are not addressing properly for them. All I hear is whining that nobody is good enough, which I am sorry but I stand even further with my previous comment: not only is it uneducated to say that, but also cowardly and irresponsibly comfortable.

Whining does not take any merit. Being uncomfortable with everything is not a virtue. Therefore, I think a good idea would be a medium through which undecided voters can VOICE their REAL AND SPECIFIC concerns.

So far, I am sorry to continue with my extremely critical attitude, you undecided voters have done the poorest of jobs describing WHAT IS IT that you want and how do you believe is best to MEASURE that what you want in a candidate.

Many blogs have addressed this undecided voters issue and no undecided voter has provided real Voice of the Customre. Perhaps if you were able to properly communicate your concerns, candidates would have a better vision of your particular needs and offer strategies to address them.

But so far, the only thing you provide is whining, and well, that will not take anything anywhere.

Oh, that's funny Victor. As a POW, McCain absorbed years of physical punishment and torture that would reduce you or me to a little pool of jello inside thirty minutes. You're "ha ha ha" isn't worth spit.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Now Reading

General Books 09-12

General Books 06-08

General Books 04-05

About This Site

Mormon Books 2015-16

Mormon Books 2013-14

Science Books

Bible Books

Mormon Books 2012

Mormon Books 2009-11

Mormon Books 2008

Mormon Books 2007

Mormon Books 2006

Mormon Books 2005

Religion Books 09-12

Religion Books 2008

Religion Books 2004-07

DMI on Facebook

Blog powered by Typepad