Voter Apathy and Partisan Politics

Re “Voters Still Split Sharply, and Evenly,” Oct. 26: The question in the Times poll is, “If you had to vote today, for whom would you vote?” and 3% of the people answered, “Don’t know.” The operative word in the question is “today.” How do you not know for whom to vote, people? What would you do if you were in the voting booth right now -- stand there confused, scratching your head? Would you flip a coin? What more information could you possibly need to make up your mind? It’s either going to be President Bush or John Kerry -- pick one!

How sad it is that the fate of the next four years will be decided by the apathetic and/or uninformed.

Jeff Edelstein

Sherman Oaks

*

I find it most interesting that the only group of white voters that supports Kerry as a majority are those who make $100,000 or more per year -- the people for whom Kerry has vowed to roll back the tax cuts. It’s as if they’re saying, “No, no, you go ahead, take the money. Anything to get us out of this mess!”

Stephen Smith

Blue Jay

*

Re “Hahn to Hear Kerry Speech in Wisconsin,” Oct. 26: How does Los Angeles Mayor James Hahn get off using taxpayer money to cover his security while on a trip to see Kerry give a campaign speech? Isn’t the office of mayor nonpartisan in Los Angeles?

Dennis Castanares

Los Angeles

*

Yes, Jeff Jackson of Cypress (letters, Oct. 26), if Kerry had been president for the last four years, it is likely that Saddam Hussein would still be in power in Iraq.

It also is likely that more than 1,000 American military personnel would still be alive, and that tens of thousands of other American soldiers would have stayed with their families, and that Americans would not have killed tens of thousands of civilian Iraqis, and that the American national debt would have been tremendously reduced, and that the annual American budget would continue to show a surplus, and that millions more Americans would have health coverage, and millions more Americans would have jobs.

Wouldn’t that have been a wonderful trade-off?

Salem Spitz

Cerritos

*

Thank you for your excellent article “Conflicted Evangelicals Could Cost Bush Votes” (Oct. 27) and for exploding the stereotype of evangelicals as Bush robots. As a seminary-trained, Bible- believing evangelical who voted for Bush in 2000, I too am troubled by many of the president’s policies and the apparent hubris of his administration.

The comments of Pastor Joe Urcavich of Green Bay, Wis., were pertinent: How can we say we’re pro-life and then cheer the killing of hundreds of innocent Iraqis? I would add: How can we align ourselves with Christ and neglect the Gospels’ -- indeed, the whole Bible’s -- urgent concern with the poor and voiceless?

Roger Bryant

Midland, Mich.

*

It is becoming increasingly difficult to suffer the offensive partisan and oftentimes ignorant cartoons by Michael Ramirez. Oct. 27 was a prime example, in his portrayal of Kerry as a “fear-monger.” Is he unaware that Dick Cheney recently suggested that, if one votes for Kerry, we will be in danger of a terrorist attack? If that isn’t inciting fear, I don’t know what is.

Fran Slater

Ventura

*

Congratulations to Ramirez on his “fear-monger” cartoon. I’ve never been a fan of his before, but this work was downright brilliant -- and I’m hardly a fervent Bush supporter.

Michael Jenning

Van Nuys