BuffettNews.com

I'm probably slightly biased here because I lean right and vote R, but I wish JB wouldn't be doing these political fund raising performances of stumping for a candidate.

I imagine his fan base is pretty well down the middle in terms of politics but either way, IMHO, he should remain neutral.

He has done it for years.

I've got no problem with it myself and wonder if folks on the right would feel the same way if he shared those same beliefs. However you look at it, he doesn't turn his concerts into political rallies so you're not in danger of feeling like you're at a Tom Morello concert (not that there's anything the matter with that). However you care to slice his mixmash of musical styles, Buffett has always essentially been a folk singer with an eye towards causes that mean something to him. That goes back as far as the liner notes for Son of A Son of A Sailor where he made no secret of his support of Greenpeace, a controversial environmental organization if ever there was one. As far as I'm concerned he can lend his support to whatever cause (or candidate) he sees fit. When it's all said and done I'm going to vote for who I want to anyway, not who Buffett (or whoever else) endorses. As I've mentioned previously, music and politics have been forever linked, which can be traced back to the likes of Woody Guthrie. It's called Folk music and it's not ever going to go away, nor should it. To me, Buffett's political affiliations don't detract one iota from his music. He has a voice just like the rest of us, he just has a much larger platform from which he can be heard. Again, these seem to be mainly private affairs, it's not like he's stumping for Obama in concert and even if he was, I'd have no problem with that. More power to him.

surfpirate wrote:I wish politicians would
sing and do more concerts,
open casinos and restaurants
and sell frozen drink gizmos.

But maybe that's just me.

It doesn't bother me, I look at it no differently then any of us helping out a candidate or donating money during an election. The only difference for jimmy Buffett is that he is a singer and decides to use it as a tool to raise more funds for a respective candidate. Though I don't agree with Jimmy's support of democrat candidates, I don't get upset with him. It is his right to support whoever he wants, just like it is ours to support whoever we choose.

If I were to base my music choices based on who the musicians support, I wouldn't be listening to music. AND take Alice Coopers' advice: If you vote (or not vote) just because a celebrity is supporting a candidate, you should lose your right to vote.

jbfinscj wrote: It is his right to support whoever he wants, just like it is ours to support whoever we choose.

Yep.

bonefish wrote:I'm probably slightly biased here because I lean right and vote R, but I wish JB wouldn't be doing these political fund raising performances of stumping for a candidate.

I imagine his fan base is pretty well down the middle in terms of politics but either way, IMHO, he should remain neutral.

no you dont wish Jimmy would stay out of politics , you wish he was republican.


I bet your dad voted republican and his dad, and his dad

Most people dont vote their opinions and beliefs they vote for their "team" and then b**** when others dont vote for their team

msu#1 wrote:

bonefish wrote:I'm probably slightly biased here because I lean right and vote R, but I wish JB wouldn't be doing these political fund raising performances of stumping for a candidate.
I imagine his fan base is pretty well down the middle in terms of politics but either way, IMHO, he should remain neutral.

no you don't wish Jimmy would stay out of politics , you wish he was republican.
I bet your dad voted republican and his dad, and his dad
Most people don't vote their opinions and beliefs they vote for their "team" and then b**** when others don't vote for their team

Ummmm.. this conversation was going quite nicely. No reason to push your assumptions on another.

I can't imagine why any person, whether a singer or a secretary, should not be able to have the same right to support a candidate or share a position on an issue. Why should he be required to keep quiet just because of who he is/what he does?


To me that would be just like wishing a celebrity didn't publicly support a particular religion because his fans might not be of that same religion.

All of us have the right to follow our own beliefs

I have binders full of Parrotheads.

buffettbride wrote:I have binders full of Parrotheads.

buffettbride wrote:I have binders full of Parrotheads.

Sounds like a Trapper Keeper to me!

You just have to learn to keep poliitical life separate from your personal life even though failed policy may affect you personally. I am fiscally conservative. So you see what I mean. Some of my dearest friends are liberal and that's OK. The biggest thing we remember (not) to do is discuss politics or religion beyond a certain point. We know our affiliations and have mutual respect. Simple as that. Another poster mentioned this but if you decide whether or not you listen to music based on the musician's politics and you're conservative you'll have a very limited music library. That holds true for movies too. Most folks in the entertainment industry are liberal. Not all, most. BTW if you're dissatisfied with the only parties invited to the national debates take a look at The Constitution Party, Virgil Goode and Jim Clymer. Take a look at Virgil's plan. He spent 13 years in the house He jumped parties to find a more conservative group. He finally got fed up and hooked up with The Constitution Party. Virgil takes no money from corporations and no more than $200 from any individual. He will owe no favors. There are bunches of socialist parties out there. Roseanne Barr is even running for Prez. There is a website that is allowing The Green Party, The Constituition Party, and The Justice Party to answer the debate questions. Here's the big list.
http://www.politics1.com/p2012.htm

I can hear you now. I'm wasting my vote. Not really here in SC. My state is always red. Mitt will get all our electoral votes. So my statement makes a difference to me. Some people have actually told me not to go to the polls. Do people realize how many local races are going on and how many referendums there are that will require a vote which may affect citizens right down to their neighborhoods? Heck yes I'm voting.

Really thought about whether it was worth posting in this thread or not, but here goes...

I'm pretty certain JB and I are on opposite sides of the political spectrum. Indications are he's somewhat to the left, and I'm somewhat to the right. Take that for what it's worth, I suppose.

As for JB coming out to support candidates... a couple of thoughts....

First, I appreciate that when he DOES come out in support of a candidate, he does it in an arena where it's not going to bother most of the folks in attendance. People who come to a fundraiser for a Democratic candidate aren't going to be upset if JB sings and endorses the candidate. They came to support the candidate anyway, so it's all cool.

On the flip side, when we all go to concerts, we're there to hear JB sing and to party along. (NOT to hear about politics.) Jimmy knows that, respects it (us), and aside from maybe a funny song (A Lot to Drink About), stays away from politics.

IMHO, that's not only good business, it shows respect for his fans.

Maybe I'm a glass-half-full, cockeyed optimist, but that's how it looks to me.

Great thread.

I was on another political forum and guys were giving me guff for going to see JB next week. I told them the same thing many of you here said, it's not about his politics to me it's about his talent. I actually appreciate his commitment to his causes. If more people cared about the system it wouldn't be in such a shambles.

msu#1 wrote:

bonefish wrote:I'm probably slightly biased here because I lean right and vote R, but I wish JB wouldn't be doing these political fund raising performances of stumping for a candidate.

I imagine his fan base is pretty well down the middle in terms of politics but either way, IMHO, he should remain neutral.

no you dont wish Jimmy would stay out of politics , you wish he was republican.


I bet your dad voted republican and his dad, and his dad

Most people dont vote their opinions and beliefs they vote for their "team" and then b**** when others dont vote for their team

I'm a registered Dem , but i don't always vote that way.. I didn't in the last election....in CT, for The Governor's position ,in the last election, i voted republican , the Dem won , and is hated here.

Awww geez you guys just made me laugh out loud.

Really? You can't see the world wide trends in politics?

Why would anyone in the electorate care about politics? None of the incumbents or candidates do.

I don't care if you are Liberal/Conservative/Labour(Labor)/Green/Democrat/Republican/Neo-Nazi/Monster Raving Loony Party... They are all exactly the same.

Politicians in this world (the whole world) are not altruistic do-gooders who have dedicated their lives to making the world a better place. No way, No how.

They are career politicians who only care about power and money. This means they are intrinsically corrupt and untrustworthy.

They will do and say anything to gain or retain that power.

So why would we (the electorate) trust or listen to them?

It doesn't matter, at all, who gets elected, who gets to sit in the Prime Ministers or Presidents office. We get screwed, they collude and connive, they generate entire industries based on waste, corruption and mismanagement (aka "the public service") and we get to pay for it. Actually in the US, at a deficit of $14 trillion, your great grand kids and their great grand kids will still be paying it off.

I read this week that each of the parties in the US presidential election will spend over $3 billion dollars each on the campaign. $6 Billion! What disease could we cure for $6 Billion? Do you reckon that the rebuilding of the Katrina damage and the clean up of the Gulf Oil spill could use some of that? How about the health system? Your local schools? What about your grand kids footy/soccer/baseball/cricket/netball or whatever association?

Yet $6 Billion will be wasted promoting two career politicians and their entourage. Just so one can cling to power and one to gain power. And you know in the end we will pay for it, one way or another. The money doesn't appear out of nowhere and even the private and corporate bribes err donations are paid for by the consumer.

If it is worth them spending $3 Billion on one campaign then how much do they rake in while in office?

Why do poor saps bother to follow or support these people when as soon as they are elected they will ignore the electorates wishes and do what is profitable for them?

Big money and career politicians derail democracy - it just doesn't work if the politicians are doing it for a living and will do anything to save their jobs.

Here in Oz, during our last elections the leader of one of our party's (Liberal - conservatives) said during negotiations with minor party's "I would do anything except sell my arse to be Prime Minister". Quality eh?

If JB wants to grab a slice of the $6 Billion while it is on offer, then I reckon he should do it - afterall then us Parrotheads can vicariously be on the gravy train too.

At least Jimmy does not alienate fans by shoving his political views in your face in songs or at shows like, say, Hank Jr.