Who is everyone voting for?
Moderators: Brian, Metalfreak, MS_39455, AtlantaMetal Staff
yeah, Bush is really out of touch w/ reality. I usually vote Libertarian because I don't like either Reps or Dems but Bush bothers me so bad I'll actually jump on the democrat wagon to try and oust him. PDiddly, Sean Penn or any other clueless entertainer are not influencing me. Kerry may not be all that but Bush has proven to be incredibly wrong in so many areas that he should go.
The funny thing about this election is the fact that the Democrats are focusing solely on what a douche they think Bush is (hehehe) and they never focus on "good" qualities of Kerry. Essentially, they're running an "anything but Bush" campaign. While that's just great for people that don't like Bush already, that's not going to easily swing people that are undecided. This is an election the democrats could have won easily, but have instead, only proved their incompetency by selecting Kerry as their choide. To all of Democrats, the party could be running the damn donkey for president, and it wouldn't matter. Very poor strategy on the part of the Democratic party. Chalk one up for "strategery". :wh4cky:
<!--QuoteBegin-bobnoxious+Oct 19 2004, 09:21 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (bobnoxious @ Oct 19 2004, 09:21 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> yeah, Bush is really out of touch w/ reality. I usually vote Libertarian because I don't like either Reps or Dems but Bush bothers me so bad I'll actually jump on the democrat wagon to try and oust him. [/quote]
LOL , No Kidding Bob
I wouldn't even vote for Kerry , but if anyone votes another party that ain't gonna help get Bush outta office. So Kerry for sure gets my vote. At least he has a chance of winning. Last I heard it was around a 50/50 split. So this means there is alot of ignorant people in the USA. Anyone who would have bothered watching all the debates could easily see that Bush is a puppet and not a leader. He looked so confused half the time. Anyway , Can't wait to see what happens.
LOL , No Kidding Bob
I wouldn't even vote for Kerry , but if anyone votes another party that ain't gonna help get Bush outta office. So Kerry for sure gets my vote. At least he has a chance of winning. Last I heard it was around a 50/50 split. So this means there is alot of ignorant people in the USA. Anyone who would have bothered watching all the debates could easily see that Bush is a puppet and not a leader. He looked so confused half the time. Anyway , Can't wait to see what happens.
-
- WREKage Staff
- Posts: 1757
- Joined: Fri June 25th, 2004, 2:28 am
- Location: Immanion, Almagabra
- Contact:
The frightening thing about this election is.......people are in such a hurry to vote against Bush, that they don't know what they're voting for. There's also a lot of misinformation going around....and I'm not just talking about faulty field intelligence from CIA or the Brits. Do yourselves a favor: double-check all the facts. I did that about the ANWR fiasco and it really opened my eyes.
<!--QuoteBegin-WREKage-Paul+Oct 24 2004, 08:49 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (WREKage-Paul @ Oct 24 2004, 08:49 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> The frightening thing about this election is.......people are in such a hurry to vote against Bush, that they don't know what they're voting for. There's also a lot of misinformation going around....and I'm not just talking about faulty field intelligence from CIA or the Brits. Do yourselves a favor: double-check all the facts. I did that about the ANWR fiasco and it really opened my eyes. [/quote]
Sure Kerry's no prize but who is? It sucks but we only get to vote between two people despite the fact that others run (just listen to the news when they talk about "both" candidates, "both" parties, etc).
The fact is that neither side has all their facts straight - we're not going to get perfection so you have to pick the better of the bunch. Bush has a four year history of some really scarry shinanigans. So considering we don't have the luxury of interviewing more applicants, I'm going to vote against the guy that's performed poorly in almost every aspect of the job.
Paul- what facts have you found and what affect have they had on you?
Sure Kerry's no prize but who is? It sucks but we only get to vote between two people despite the fact that others run (just listen to the news when they talk about "both" candidates, "both" parties, etc).
The fact is that neither side has all their facts straight - we're not going to get perfection so you have to pick the better of the bunch. Bush has a four year history of some really scarry shinanigans. So considering we don't have the luxury of interviewing more applicants, I'm going to vote against the guy that's performed poorly in almost every aspect of the job.
Paul- what facts have you found and what affect have they had on you?
Bush is, in my opinion a much better choice. lets just get this one thing straight, bush is no idiot.......he isn't confused by debate questions, not only did he graduate from HARVARD LAW but he is very rich from being a very smart business man. the fact that bush actually listens to questions, thinks, then answers shows that he is not a robot or a puppet. kerry is robotic, all of his answers are rehearsed and never actually answers the questions asked. plus, kerry can't stop talking about his "plans" but he never says what they are........wonder why??? he either doesn't have any or he just doesn't actually know them. the only ones that he has outlined are the exact same as bush.
no matter what, its hard to blame everything that has happend the last four years on bush. no president has had to deal with terrorist attacks on our shores.......pearl habor was an attack by an actual army from a nation. and at least he is doing something about terrorists, he is picking his battles and going for it. bin laden has been killing americans for many years, clinton ignored him and didn't take care of his country so inturn thousands of innocent people died and millions of jobs were lost. i'm glad that bush doesn't try to please the world, he looks out for us..........people pleasing is a quality that all of us here probably hate when we see "normal" people doing it, but we want our presidents to be pussies! i don't get it.
i'm with everyone that thinks that the presidency has been turning into a "lesser of two evils" type thing........Bush wasn't my first choice last time, but i think that considering the circumstances he has done a good job........better then al gore wouldn't done.
no matter what, its hard to blame everything that has happend the last four years on bush. no president has had to deal with terrorist attacks on our shores.......pearl habor was an attack by an actual army from a nation. and at least he is doing something about terrorists, he is picking his battles and going for it. bin laden has been killing americans for many years, clinton ignored him and didn't take care of his country so inturn thousands of innocent people died and millions of jobs were lost. i'm glad that bush doesn't try to please the world, he looks out for us..........people pleasing is a quality that all of us here probably hate when we see "normal" people doing it, but we want our presidents to be pussies! i don't get it.
i'm with everyone that thinks that the presidency has been turning into a "lesser of two evils" type thing........Bush wasn't my first choice last time, but i think that considering the circumstances he has done a good job........better then al gore wouldn't done.
-
- Member
- Posts: 23
- Joined: Sun July 4th, 2004, 5:40 pm
Hehe,i don't get it ..are we blind ..Thinking about who is better ...You should know that both fuckers Bush and Kerry are members of the CFR ,and manipulated by the Elite,it's an Oligopolized bussines ,just a few control this shit..talking about the Bin Laden didn't you know the Bush-Bin Laden used to be real friends? How come Osama still out there? Are we blindfolded?The 9/11 the biggest lie...Fuck the sistem!!!!
-
- WREKage Staff
- Posts: 1757
- Joined: Fri June 25th, 2004, 2:28 am
- Location: Immanion, Almagabra
- Contact:
<!--QuoteBegin-BlazeTSU+Oct 24 2004, 02:39 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (BlazeTSU @ Oct 24 2004, 02:39 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
i'm with everyone that thinks that the presidency has been turning into a "lesser of two evils" type thing........Bush wasn't my first choice last time, but i think that considering the circumstances he has done a good job........better then al gore wouldn't done.[/quote]
I agree with ya there.
One humorous thing I've noticed in the media.... We've now concluded, after a thorough search, that Iraq didn't have WMDs. And Bush is being pilloried for invading Iraq supposedly on false pretenses, etc.
A few things that get glossed over:
1. It's not as if Bush decided overnight to invade Iraq. It was about thirteen MONTHS after the first UN -- not U.S., but UN -- resolution calling upon Saddam to allow inspection of his facilities. For thirteen months, he refused....or, he'd allow the UN to inspect a site, with 3 days' advance warning. Etc. We had intelligence -- apparently flawed -- from CIA or the Brits or both that there were WMD programs ongoing. For 13 months the Iraqi government acted suspiciously about it. If you had been President, if any of us had been, you'd have gone in, too.
2. We've searched Iraq thoroughly for WMDs. Think about that. We no longer have to speculate; we know. But the ONLY way we could be sure was to invade. You can't search for stuff -- or for that matter, capture Saddam on the ground -- by lobbing a couple of Tomahawks somewhere. You have to go in on the ground.
As for post-war casualties.....it's ironic as all hell that the same people who were aghast that we were sending any troops in...are the same ones calling for 400,000 or 500,000 troops to be deployed now.
Bob, as for facts that I've discovered for myself, some of them concern the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge. A friend told me that I should cross-check what the Sierra Club (and other groups in Big Environment) were saying about drilling for oil in the ANWR. "You'll be surprised." I went to the U.S. Geological Survey's web info on the ANWR and sure enough, the information they were quoting was either wrong ('misquoting' gallons instead of barrels) or misleading ("only enough oil up there for six months, why drill?") Anyway, the long and short of it was,....if you're paying too much for gasoline right now, thank the Sierra Club and their friends. Better yet, take their cars away for a month.
I've found <a href='http://www.factcheck.org' target='_blank'>www.factcheck.org</a> to be a great resource. It's nonpartisan, and both sides have made misstatements or outright fabrications. I noticed they were particularly brutal toward Edwards recently on a tax 'misstatement', though, because it was pretty indefensible.
i'm with everyone that thinks that the presidency has been turning into a "lesser of two evils" type thing........Bush wasn't my first choice last time, but i think that considering the circumstances he has done a good job........better then al gore wouldn't done.[/quote]
I agree with ya there.
One humorous thing I've noticed in the media.... We've now concluded, after a thorough search, that Iraq didn't have WMDs. And Bush is being pilloried for invading Iraq supposedly on false pretenses, etc.
A few things that get glossed over:
1. It's not as if Bush decided overnight to invade Iraq. It was about thirteen MONTHS after the first UN -- not U.S., but UN -- resolution calling upon Saddam to allow inspection of his facilities. For thirteen months, he refused....or, he'd allow the UN to inspect a site, with 3 days' advance warning. Etc. We had intelligence -- apparently flawed -- from CIA or the Brits or both that there were WMD programs ongoing. For 13 months the Iraqi government acted suspiciously about it. If you had been President, if any of us had been, you'd have gone in, too.
2. We've searched Iraq thoroughly for WMDs. Think about that. We no longer have to speculate; we know. But the ONLY way we could be sure was to invade. You can't search for stuff -- or for that matter, capture Saddam on the ground -- by lobbing a couple of Tomahawks somewhere. You have to go in on the ground.
As for post-war casualties.....it's ironic as all hell that the same people who were aghast that we were sending any troops in...are the same ones calling for 400,000 or 500,000 troops to be deployed now.
Bob, as for facts that I've discovered for myself, some of them concern the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge. A friend told me that I should cross-check what the Sierra Club (and other groups in Big Environment) were saying about drilling for oil in the ANWR. "You'll be surprised." I went to the U.S. Geological Survey's web info on the ANWR and sure enough, the information they were quoting was either wrong ('misquoting' gallons instead of barrels) or misleading ("only enough oil up there for six months, why drill?") Anyway, the long and short of it was,....if you're paying too much for gasoline right now, thank the Sierra Club and their friends. Better yet, take their cars away for a month.
I've found <a href='http://www.factcheck.org' target='_blank'>www.factcheck.org</a> to be a great resource. It's nonpartisan, and both sides have made misstatements or outright fabrications. I noticed they were particularly brutal toward Edwards recently on a tax 'misstatement', though, because it was pretty indefensible.
Well regarding Iraq, the entire thing is a sham and everyone on the planet realizes this except a handful of Americans that believe we're either 1) liberating the Iraqis or 2) making America safer. Over 15000 Iraqi civilians have been killed since their liberation - that's over 5 times the number of casualties from 9/11 and their numbers keep climbing. Screw liberation... Having our army all in that shithole does nothing to protect America. America is on the other side of the world. And regarding the motive for attack: the UN inspectors were in there from 2002 til 2003 and found nothing. Weapons programs were dormant since '94. There are plenty of other countries taunting real nuclear weapons programs - we're ignoring those. The US is developing more nuclear weapons. Who the hell are we to police the rest of the world with rules that we don't follow ourselves???
Economy: I've seen work from my own company outsourced to India. Tech jobs still suck. I'm well educated, I work with talented people who have PhDs and we're at risk of loosing our jobs because Bush rewards companies for sending work overseas. Bush's response during the debate: he set up a program were I can get government money (taxes I already paid) to go to community college. yay.... and I'll gladly give up my $400 tax rebate for broader job opportunities were I can make a decent amount more than $400 freaking bucks. It's an insult.
American Safety: we're no safer. Furthermore, as working in the security industry I can confidently say that you can never protect yourself 100% from someone determined to get you. So instead of making airport checks uselessly longer and increasing foreign visa fees (yet doing nothing else), why not look at why people want to attack us and address the root cause? Besides, BinLaden and the Taliban are US government creations. They were meant to keep the Russians out of the oil region 20 years ago, trained by the CIA, feed money and weapons, and here they are today attacking their makers. Shit happens when you stir up too many things....
Privacy: forget about it. Patriot Act is used for going after domestic issues (pot growers, etc). Look at the attitude toward the Iraq WMD outcome: since there was absolutely nothing related to WMDs going on and Hussein wanted to get sanctions lifted, that was reason to attack because it somehow implied that he intended to make WMD later on. WTF crazy 3rd grade excuse is that??? and how long before that way of thinking inflitrates American society? Paul - we've been monitoring you and you exhibit the characteristics of someone who's going to be a trouble maker so we'll need to arrest you now. Fiction movies become reality...
Bullshit program names. Give a program a cute & pretty name and use it to do whatever the hell you want - that's Bush's way. Whether it's environment or Iraq. So while you typically only hear the names if yo look at the details they usually contradict what the name implies.
Presentability: people say the debates don't really matter. Sure they weren't real debates, they were dual campaign ads. Bush wasn't taking time to think of well thought answers, he fumbles around and even admits it. Kerry's delivery is no more robotic than Bush's in the sense that both have these answers already in their heads - they're not really "thinking". Kerry can present himself with confidence. It takes confidence to influence other people and that's a big skill for a president.
You can't blame Bush for everything that happens. You can't stop it from raining but you can take an umbrella. We're pretty wet right now...
Pleasing the world. The president should not try to 'please the world'. But he should try to fit in. You can get a lot more done, in anything, by cooperating with those around you instead of being an isolated outcast.
Well, I don't want to isolate myself as a ranting lunatic. Get out and vote.
Economy: I've seen work from my own company outsourced to India. Tech jobs still suck. I'm well educated, I work with talented people who have PhDs and we're at risk of loosing our jobs because Bush rewards companies for sending work overseas. Bush's response during the debate: he set up a program were I can get government money (taxes I already paid) to go to community college. yay.... and I'll gladly give up my $400 tax rebate for broader job opportunities were I can make a decent amount more than $400 freaking bucks. It's an insult.
American Safety: we're no safer. Furthermore, as working in the security industry I can confidently say that you can never protect yourself 100% from someone determined to get you. So instead of making airport checks uselessly longer and increasing foreign visa fees (yet doing nothing else), why not look at why people want to attack us and address the root cause? Besides, BinLaden and the Taliban are US government creations. They were meant to keep the Russians out of the oil region 20 years ago, trained by the CIA, feed money and weapons, and here they are today attacking their makers. Shit happens when you stir up too many things....
Privacy: forget about it. Patriot Act is used for going after domestic issues (pot growers, etc). Look at the attitude toward the Iraq WMD outcome: since there was absolutely nothing related to WMDs going on and Hussein wanted to get sanctions lifted, that was reason to attack because it somehow implied that he intended to make WMD later on. WTF crazy 3rd grade excuse is that??? and how long before that way of thinking inflitrates American society? Paul - we've been monitoring you and you exhibit the characteristics of someone who's going to be a trouble maker so we'll need to arrest you now. Fiction movies become reality...
Bullshit program names. Give a program a cute & pretty name and use it to do whatever the hell you want - that's Bush's way. Whether it's environment or Iraq. So while you typically only hear the names if yo look at the details they usually contradict what the name implies.
Presentability: people say the debates don't really matter. Sure they weren't real debates, they were dual campaign ads. Bush wasn't taking time to think of well thought answers, he fumbles around and even admits it. Kerry's delivery is no more robotic than Bush's in the sense that both have these answers already in their heads - they're not really "thinking". Kerry can present himself with confidence. It takes confidence to influence other people and that's a big skill for a president.
You can't blame Bush for everything that happens. You can't stop it from raining but you can take an umbrella. We're pretty wet right now...
Pleasing the world. The president should not try to 'please the world'. But he should try to fit in. You can get a lot more done, in anything, by cooperating with those around you instead of being an isolated outcast.
Well, I don't want to isolate myself as a ranting lunatic. Get out and vote.
-
- Member
- Posts: 146
- Joined: Thu July 8th, 2004, 12:12 am
- Location: Dacula, GA
- Contact:
first off...im voting libertarian
second...the way i look at our two major candidates is that they are both idiots...everything has shown that for both of them...but when it comes to deciding which idiot to choose...id rather have bush in office than kerry...we know what bush is going to do...kerry is on the fence on everything...theres no telling what he will do...theres no way i could vote for kerry...even with how much i dislike bush
second...the way i look at our two major candidates is that they are both idiots...everything has shown that for both of them...but when it comes to deciding which idiot to choose...id rather have bush in office than kerry...we know what bush is going to do...kerry is on the fence on everything...theres no telling what he will do...theres no way i could vote for kerry...even with how much i dislike bush
play your gloom axe
-
- WREKage Staff
- Posts: 1757
- Joined: Fri June 25th, 2004, 2:28 am
- Location: Immanion, Almagabra
- Contact:
I consider myself to be a small-ell libertarian anyway, since that's the party that comes closest to my own views (fiscal conservatism, social liberalism). But the Libertarian Party itself is so completely out-of-touch with reality that they'll never be a realistically potent force in any election.
A shame, really. I admire their dedication, while screaming at the futility of it all.
A shame, really. I admire their dedication, while screaming at the futility of it all.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 54 guests