MolecularMan14 Posted July 29, 2004 Posted July 29, 2004 I dont know specifically, mainly b/c im not old enough to vote, but I ust cant figure out what 2004 candidate I stand behind! I mean every democrat on the plantet doesnt really want Kerry, its just that they hate Bush. And ever Republican wants Kerry to spontaneously combust! What do you think?
Tesseract Posted July 29, 2004 Posted July 29, 2004 I dont know specifically' date=' mainly b/c im not old enough to vote, but I ust cant figure out what 2004 candidate I stand behind! I mean every democrat on the plantet doesnt really want Kerry, its just that they hate Bush. And ever Republican wants Kerry to spontaneously combust! What do you think?[/quote'] You have to ask yourself who is the lesser of two evils.I say bush should be elected.Becuase he will eventually be assasinated.
MolecularMan14 Posted July 29, 2004 Author Posted July 29, 2004 lol good point, I only hope that come 2008, when Im allowed to vote, there will be a better selection. Otherwise I would laugh all the way to the voting booth to vote for Sharpton. lmao!
Tesseract Posted July 29, 2004 Posted July 29, 2004 lolgood point' date=' I only hope that come 2008, when Im allowed to vote, there will be a better selection. Otherwise I would laugh all the way to the voting booth to vote for Sharpton. lmao![/quote'] Why sharpton.
MolecularMan14 Posted July 29, 2004 Author Posted July 29, 2004 b/c hes only in it for the money. Hell I would be too if I had something to stand for. Any $$$ that people donate to your canpaign YOU CAN KEEP! Cha-Ching for the Rev. Anyway, I just love seeing the people that actually think he's serious. I would never actually vote for him
Tesseract Posted July 29, 2004 Posted July 29, 2004 b/c hes only in it for the money. Hell I would be too if I had something to stand for. Any $$$ that people donate to your canpaign YOU CAN KEEP! Cha-Ching for the Rev. Anyway, I just love seeing the people that actually think he's serious. I would never actually vote for him Why vote let the country fall in a hellish pit of idiotic yankees and congressman.
MolecularMan14 Posted July 29, 2004 Author Posted July 29, 2004 lol, I would vote seriously, if there was a seriously good candidate. Someone that everyone could stand behind. Kerry is kind of like "Im for good! Bush=BAD!" That really gets on my nerves. lol
Tesseract Posted July 29, 2004 Posted July 29, 2004 lol, I would vote seriously, if there was a seriously good candidate. Someone that everyone could stand behind. Kerry is kind of like "Im for good! Bush=BAD!" That really gets on my nerves. lol Kerry is an idiot, the only reason hell win is because everyone hates Bush so much.
budullewraagh Posted July 30, 2004 Posted July 30, 2004 i support kerry although, personally i found howard dean to be the best dem candidate; he's economically conservative and socially progressive. the kucinich. next comes edwards who could lead well despite his lack of experience. remember that socialism is the cure for capitalism another good liberal is obama who will be president eventually
SurfSciGuy Posted July 30, 2004 Posted July 30, 2004 Well I would stand behind Bush, with a larger hammer. Bush is scary, Kerry is a no brain soft republican who the Demcrats are using to get back in power - he should get on well with 'President' Tony though.
blike Posted July 30, 2004 Posted July 30, 2004 edwards I can't stand edwards for what he did to doctors in North Carolina as a trial lawyer. Kerry is Bush, minus the convictions. Bush Lite.
Tesseract Posted July 30, 2004 Posted July 30, 2004 Since terrorists want to attack to disrupt your democratic process are terrorists supporting Kerry?and if so, are people that support Kerry terrorists?
Dave Posted July 30, 2004 Posted July 30, 2004 I suggest you go and ask a supporter whether they've bombed some places recently and get your answer. Some of your comments really leave me dumbfounded. As far as the topic goes, Kerry is blatently going to win, unless Bush decides to pull a Flordia on him a la Gore.
budullewraagh Posted July 30, 2004 Posted July 30, 2004 Kerry is Bush, minus the convictions. are you serious? kerry is socially progressive whereas bush oppresses. kerry is economically conservative whereas bush is economically neoliberal. kerry supports internationalism where bush supports isolationism and imperialism (sort of a paradox). are people that support Kerry terrorists? i for one am not
Tesseract Posted July 30, 2004 Posted July 30, 2004 I suggest you go and ask a supporter whether they've bombed some places recently and get your answer. Some of your comments really leave me dumbfounded. As far as the topic goes' date=' Kerry is blatently going to win, unless Bush decides to pull a Flordia on him a la Gore.[/quote'] But you will admit that some people that support Kerry (or maybe just hate Bush) are terrorists. Kerry is going to win mainly because most people hate Bush.But I dont think Kerry is a very good president, he just talks and dosnt do anything.
budullewraagh Posted July 30, 2004 Posted July 30, 2004 But I dont think Kerry is a very good president, he just talks and dosnt do anything. right, because he's spent so many years in the white house doing nothing?
Tesseract Posted July 30, 2004 Posted July 30, 2004 right, because he's spent so many years in the white house doing nothing? Exactly now you go it.
atinymonkey Posted July 30, 2004 Posted July 30, 2004 I found a game someone made to illustrate what they think of Bush and his years in office. http://www.emogame.com/bushgame.html I found it funny. It has Hulk Hogan and the A-Team in it, which is just pure class.
NavajoEverclear Posted July 31, 2004 Posted July 31, 2004 You have to ask yourself who is the lesser of two evils.I say bush should be elected.Becuase he will eventually be assasinated. Hah! you just helped me make my decision. Except i'll be three months too young to vote . . . I read some stuff about Nader, i think he'd be a good leader. I think he SHOULD be our leader, i know hardly more than shit about the two 'main' ones anyway, so why cant they we just forget their campaigns and . . . . maybe i could kidnap, and brainwash all candidates to resign (xcept nader of coarse)
budullewraagh Posted July 31, 2004 Posted July 31, 2004 nader is alright but all people know about him is that he likes the enviornment, lives on $20,000/year and would be good with the economy. he sounds a bit sketchy otherwise.
Phi for All Posted July 31, 2004 Posted July 31, 2004 I only hope that come 2008, when Im allowed to vote, there will be a better selection.I think this is the biggest problem with US politics. With everybody convinced you have to vote either Republican or Democrat, they can keep us at odds with each other over platform differences. We don't stop to question when their actions go against these platforms, we don't question when they make promises they don't keep and we somehow forget that it's the lobbyists they listen to. The PACs and special interest groups are in their faces EVERY DAY and the voting public is not. The US is so competitive we even treat our politics like a game of football. Will your team win or mine? If the other side wins you mope and grumble and refuse to get behind the office or the concept itself. I would like to see a president who wasn't so obviously tied to the major corporations. We are frightened and unwilling to stand up for ourselves when we think our livelihoods might be on the line, but the truth is the corporations would find a way to make money no matter who was president, even if he supported the people first.
blike Posted July 31, 2004 Posted July 31, 2004 Kerry is blatently going to win The two candidates are very close, within the margin of error for most polls. I'd say its going to be a close election, but I don't know the outcome. kerry is John Kerry is whatever will get him elected. He doesn't have a backbone. because he's spent so many years in the white house doing nothing? What did John Kerry accomplish in his 20 years in the senate?
Skye Posted July 31, 2004 Posted July 31, 2004 I don't think it's fair to judge Kerry yet, he hasn't had time to make an idiot of himself. Bush has had four years of pure comedy public speaking. He's cute in a baby-learning-to-walk kind of way. Clinton had two terms of delightful scandals, it's only a shame that Clinton wasn't PM of the UK, the tabloids would have made him a god. Funnily enough a poll of Americans put Blair as the most respected world leader. I think Blair should run in the US (he practically serves them now) and Clinton in the UK. Finally the people would have what they want.
budullewraagh Posted July 31, 2004 Posted July 31, 2004 What did John Kerry accomplish in his 20 years in the senate? didn't he have a great deal of influence in ending the vietnam war? nothing more noble than that.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now