Bush, Kerry, eeh I still win

R

Reverend Love

Guest
For Train, Eric, Ferret, and Donkeyrubarb:

Think about it this way guys. However it pans out tomorrow, we still win. If the incumbet gets the nod we get four more years of unspectacular but steady stewardship. If Waffle Master-K wins we get to see him break all his promises of Sociali..err public health care, redistributing the tax burden, and witness Europe spitting in his face (Whew, I almost let the "S" word slip). Also Hillary hairy knuckles Clinton won't be able to run for 8 more years :D
 
S

Svenmonkey

Guest
If Bush wins we get to have more religion incorporated into government even though the constitution specifically prohibits it and we get to have the most likely false idea of a widespread terrorist threat shoved down our collective throats for four more years. :)

Edit: Jesus told me to hate the gays.
 
R

Reverend Love

Guest
Originally posted by Svenmonkey
If Bush wins we get to have more religion incorporated into government even though the constitution specifically prohibits it and we get to have the most likely false idea of a widespread terrorist threat shoved down our collective throats for four more years. :)

Edit: Jesus told me to hate the gays.
Click to expand...
Way to spew :rolleyes:
 
M

mythosx

Guest
Originally posted by Svenmonkey
If Bush wins we get to have more religion incorporated into government even though the constitution specifically prohibits it and we get to have the most likely false idea of a widespread terrorist threat shoved down our collective throats for four more years. :)

Edit: Jesus told me to hate the gays.
Click to expand...
Go read the constitution for once...It doesn't prohibit religion being incorporated...I prohibits the limiting of only one incorporation, and in turn being forced upon the people.
 
D

DÛke

Guest
People never stopped saying that they want the son of a Bush out office; never did anyone take seriously the miraculous possibility that there is a play at work that guarantees Bush's reelection. Instead the philosophy of this election is "I will vote for X because X is not Y" or vice versa. What X in itself offers rarely comes into discussion, and the consideration that it is possible that Bush might be reelected despite all effort was not even thought of and perhaps is still unthinkable to many. I said it right after 9/11: Bush will win, it does not matter who he runs up against. Take the time to investigate, to question, to read between the lines as opposed to just wait for the elections only to face what is inevitable: that Bush will win.

I'm running out of execuses to tell friends and skeptics outside of America that America is not as bad as it may seem. Bush winning the elections says a lot (or little, if you look at it from another perspective) about many Americans and so it becomes a hopeless task trying to convince anyone about this country's greatness.
 
Oversoul

Oversoul

The Tentacled One
I was entertaining this fantasy last night of not being bothered about this business until January. I was shown quickly and painfully the foolishness of such thoughts, as Bush supporters came to me bragging and Kerry supporters came to me whining...

Oh well. At least now I don't have to worry about them nationalizing Heinz ketchup, or something evil like that...

Mmm, ketchup...
 
M

Mikeymike

Guest
Originally posted by DÛke
People never stopped saying that they want the son of a Bush out office; never did anyone take seriously the miraculous possibility that there is a play at work that guarantees Bush's reelection. Instead the philosophy of this election is "I will vote for X because X is not Y" or vice versa. What X in itself offers rarely comes into discussion, and the consideration that it is possible that Bush might be reelected despite all effort was not even thought of and perhaps is still unthinkable to many. I said it right after 9/11: Bush will win, it does not matter who he runs up against. Take the time to investigate, to question, to read between the lines as opposed to just wait for the elections only to face what is inevitable: that Bush will win.
Click to expand...
I'm usually not one for conspiracy theories, but how abou this one:

http://www.electoral-vote.com
Paragraph 3

One thing that is very strange is how much the exit polls differed from the final results, especially in Ohio. Remember that Ohio uses Diebold voting machines in many areas. These machines have no paper trail. Early in the campaign, Diebold CEO Walden O'Dell, a GOP fundraiser, promised to deliver Ohio to Bush. He later regretted having said that.

Take that however you will. The guy who runs this site is pro-Kerry, but he also happens to be surprisingly non-partisan, and has a resume that puts most to shame.

I'm running out of execuses to tell friends and skeptics outside of America that America is not as bad as it may seem. Bush winning the elections says a lot (or little, if you look at it from another perspective) about many Americans and so it becomes a hopeless task trying to convince anyone about this country's greatness.
Click to expand...
Wish I had an answer for you. But alas, I'm dumbfounded. Now that Bush won the popular vote, it seems far more likely that non-Americans will be unable to separate their opinions about American people and the Bush administration. Our reputation is now married to him, for better or worse.
 
R

Reverend Love

Guest
Originally posted by DÛke
People never stopped saying that they want the son of a Bush out office; never did anyone take seriously the miraculous possibility that there is a play at work that guarantees Bush's reelection. Instead the philosophy of this election is "I will vote for X because X is not Y" or vice versa. What X in itself offers rarely comes into discussion, and the consideration that it is possible that Bush might be reelected despite all effort was not even thought of and perhaps is still unthinkable to many. I said it right after 9/11: Bush will win, it does not matter who he runs up against. Take the time to investigate, to question, to read between the lines as opposed to just wait for the elections only to face what is inevitable: that Bush will win.

I'm running out of execuses to tell friends and skeptics outside of America that America is not as bad as it may seem. Bush winning the elections says a lot (or little, if you look at it from another perspective) about many Americans and so it becomes a hopeless task trying to convince anyone about this country's greatness.
Click to expand...
Do you ever stop?
 
D

DÛke

Guest
Do you ever stop?
Click to expand...
Do you ever stop? Sigh.

Wish I had an answer for you. But alas, I'm dumbfounded. Now that Bush won the popular vote, it seems far more likely that non-Americans will be unable to separate their opinions about American people and the Bush administration. Our reputation is now married to him, for better or worse.
Click to expand...
Well, how can the reputation of the American people not be married to Bush? The country flaunts its democracy and spits it at anyone who dares question the concept of democracy. What can we say? Here is the democracy that you adore so much, here are your people, and here is your president, widly your choice. If democracy is America's gift - supposing that democracy is indeed what is in play here, which is a bold, uninformed and thoughtless supposition - then it is also this country's curse; more so its curse than its greatness.
 
M

Mikeymike

Guest
Originally posted by DÛke
Well, how can the reputation of the American people not be married to Bush? The country flaunts its democracy and spits it at anyone who dares question the concept of democracy. What can we say? Here is the democracy that you adore so much, here are your people, and here is your president, widly your choice. If democracy is America's gift - supposing that democracy is indeed what is in play here, which is a bold, uninformed and thoughtless supposition - then it is also this country's curse; more so its curse than its greatness.
Click to expand...
The impression I got from friends, relatives, etc. outside of the States prior to the election is that most of the disdain directed at America was really at this administration (and the questionable means to which he came into office) and not at the American people. Now that marriage of President-People is much tighter, so non-American opinion about the people will be greatly impacted.

However, I definitely hear your point about Democracy being what America 'stands' for, and that image has most definitely been tarnished post and prior to this election.

That said I also have acquantances in Europe who believe that the European nations have done their own job of isolating themselves from the rest of the world and the legitimate worldwide terror threat. Some are specifically PO'ed that their respective nations (France and Italy in this case) are ignoring what should be happening (resource sharing) due other international pressure and/or issues of pride.

My personal feeling is that there is a substantial chunk of truth in each of these, and egos on both sides are getting in the way of a necessary unification of resources (i.e. alliance). I can really only focus on the American side of the coin b/c that is really where all my limited knowledge on the subject lies, and I can say that I have not been at all pleased with the way this administration has handled it. However, if Bush were to step away from his largely isolationist position and swallow his pride a bit, I'd be far more comfortable with things.

My fear is that won't happen. A leopard doesn't change its spots, especially when they have governmental autonomy in a 2nd term. It needs to happen though, because things will get worse before they get better.
 
D

DÛke

Guest
That said I also have acquantances in Europe who believe that the European nations have done their own job of isolating themselves from the rest of the world and the legitimate worldwide terror threat. Some are specifically PO'ed that their respective nations (France and Italy in this case) are ignoring what should be happening (resource sharing) due other international pressure and/or issues of pride.
Click to expand...
True enough, though it all leads back to the way America wanted to deal with "worldwide terror." What we see today is merely a consequence of things long said and done.
However, if Bush were to step away from his largely isolationist position and swallow his pride a bit, I'd be far more comfortable with things
Click to expand...
Keep dreaming. :) Even if he were to do that, we're slowly but inevitably reaching a point where it is too late, no matter what position anyone chooses to take. We're reaching a point where we "reap the rewards," so to speak, or more accurately, the consequences. If a major alternation of mindset does not sweep the world, if a flicker of awakening does not strike the eyes of the people worldwide, then before you know it the world’s current situation will look a lot more heavenly than what is still to come. I am not sure what Kerry would have done, but I am not positive about the direction we are heading with Bush...
 
M

Mikeymike

Guest
Originally posted by DÛke
True enough, though it all leads back to the way America wanted to deal with "worldwide terror." What we see today is merely a consequence of things long said and done.
Click to expand...
Yes and no. 9/11 obviously brought terrorism to the forefront and in turn it became a very American driven issue, but it has always been a problem in the international community. I strongly disagree with the way America has handled it and understand how such tactics would sway the opinions of non-Americans, but I also believe that there are many out there who do realize it is too large issue to let strained relations interfere with.

I guess the point I'm trying to make is that it is time for them to start working together, whether or not they want to. Will it happen? I don't know. It should. A good start would be Bush taking some initiative to improve relations instead of trying to position this country as if they are the only one entitled to make important decisions.

Keep dreaming. :) Even if he were to do that, we're slowly but inevitably reaching a point where it is too late, no matter what position anyone chooses to take. We're reaching a point where we "reap the rewards," so to speak, or more accurately, the consequences. If a major alternation of mindset does not sweep the world, if a flicker of awakening does not strike the eyes of the people worldwide, then before you know it the world’s current situation will look a lot more heavenly than what is still to come. I am not sure what Kerry would have done, but I am not positive about the direction we are heading with Bush...
Click to expand...
I think you are correct, but I have to hope we are both wrong. I'd rather be naive and idealistic than angry, it suites me better. Plus I'm sick and tired of being sick and tired.
 
D

DÛke

Guest
Yes and no. 9/11 obviously brought terrorism to the forefront and in turn it became a very American driven issue, but it has always been a problem in the international community. I strongly disagree with the way America has handled it and understand how such tactics would sway the opinions of non-Americans, but I also believe that there are many out there who do realize it is too large issue to let strained relations interfere with.
Click to expand...
Bingo: it became a very American driven issue when it shouldn’t have had to, when it did not have to; America didn’t handle it well? But what is this “America” if not by large the American people? And if the American people are not involved, or not as involved, then how can any American even dare to speak of “democracy” when there apparently is a gab between the government and its people? If international security was once a global issue and cause, it is now heavily placed on America, and justly so. All things, today, lead back to and point at America, whether positively or negatively. That much is undeniable today - what it means, well...that's a matter of opinion...

I'd rather be naive and idealistic than angry...
Click to expand...
And that is admirable, noble, and perhaps the most courageous a person can be in this day of age - I know because I am idealistic as well, so idealistic that I am blind to the reality in which most people are submerged on daily basis - a reality which is, if I may say so, a hundred times more "real" than our idle ideals and drowning dreams. We set ourselves up for some of the greatest disappointments in this world in this manner, but hey, I learnt that the greater the capacity of your mind and understanding, the more noble and moral, the more bound to be disappointed by this world. I am not angry, but disillusioned; that is not to say I have lost the idealistic vision, or that I have lost faith and trust in it, but that I am in fact more aware of its probable impossibility - which somehow makes it all the more powerful to hold on to and believe in...
 
M

Mikeymike

Guest
Originally posted by DÛke
I am not angry, but disillusioned; that is not to say I have lost the idealistic vision, or that I have lost faith and trust in it, but that I am in fact more aware of its probable impossibility - which somehow makes it all the more powerful to hold on to and believe in...
Click to expand...
Just want to clarify, I didn't mean to imply that I think you are an angry person, that wasn't at all my intention nor is that what I actually believe. I was just trying to say that if I look at the current situation too objectively I make myself angry. I think you caught that, but I just wanted to make sure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top