Jump to content

Who wouldn't vote for him?

Andoreion

By Andoreion
in General

 Share

Recommended Posts

Wolf

Wolf

Posted
Posted

It's this swift boat thing that's bothering me, now. Seriously. The RNC is supposed to be sneaky, and now one of the very lawyers they had working on the campaign is caught assisting the group? Either the Bush campaign tried to be sneaky and screwed up spectacularly, or they're so naive they thought assissting the group really was perfectly innocent. I'm so disillusioned.

HasimirFenring

HasimirFenring

Posted
Posted

Kerry should win just because he isn't Bush. People are just idiots.

So true.

It's this swift boat thing that's bothering me, now. Seriously. The RNC is supposed to be sneaky, and now one of the very lawyers they had working on the campaign is caught assisting the group? Either the Bush campaign tried to be sneaky and screwed up spectacularly, or they're so naive they thought assissting the group really was perfectly innocent. I'm so disillusioned.

I'm so sorry for your disillusionment.  Are you disillusioned because you used to think that the RNC was sneaky, or because you thought they were not so low as to do something like that?

slaphapy

slaphapy

Posted
Posted

i dont know why you would say to vote for kerry just because he isnt bush...

To be honest, i think that both of the candidates suck this election... i believe mostly in what the Republican party stands for... but i really do not like 'Dubya' ... and Kerry is obviously mostly not supported anymore because, he has no set standings and shifts with the "political winds"...

good thing i cant vote this election i would probably just vote for the green party lol

Wolf

Wolf

Posted
Posted

Disillusioned because a major party of the United States is either corrupt and inept or naive and inept. Take your pick, it's either one of those two or it's just a fluke.

HasimirFenring

HasimirFenring

Posted
Posted

Disillusioned because a major party of the United States is either corrupt and inept or naive and inept. Take your pick, it's either one of those two or it's just a fluke.

I would have thought that the Watergate scandal was enough to prove the GOP to be corrupt.  Hopefully the Democrats are better (even if only a little bit).

Kiyouta

Kiyouta

Posted
Posted

I would have thought that the Watergate scandal was enough to prove the GOP to be corrupt.  Hopefully the Democrats are better (even if only a little bit).

The Committee to Re-elect the President, nicknamed CREEP...

Pffft even Ray Charles could see there was something dodgy about that.

SpiceGuid

SpiceGuid

Posted
Posted

Bush at least has a quality: he is entirely sincere.

Chirac is an opportunist and a manipulator.

With pitiful results.

I mean was it a good idea to oppose when we could have been neutral?

Diplomacy is to be careful not to upset our ally, especially as he has proved to be trustful and is bigger than we are.

I really can't see what we have gained.

Most if not all think we have the best diplomacy, that's pure brainwhashing.

If Bush is elected i think Michael Moore is partly to be blamed because he made political engagement look like a custard pie gag.

TMA_1

TMA_1

Posted
Posted

all I know is if kerry won, there would be almost no difference.

It reminds me of when tiberius the emperor died, everybody was discontent, and then young caius came along, the son of germanicus, and people said "there! he is an answer to all our problems!"

well then you know the rest of the story, caligula didnt exactly help much at all.lol

Now I know htat sounds drastic, but seriously throughout history people who are discontent with a leader always talk about the "good old days", or the times before the leader was in office. They forget that usually there are other powers at work than just that leader. Especially in america since most of the things that people are so angry about were perpitrated by the congress and not by president bush himself. Instead they blindly follow anybody who is just "a little better" than the current leader.

HasimirFenring

HasimirFenring

Posted
Posted

all I know is if kerry won, there would be almost no difference.

I hear this sort of thing a lot, and can't understand why.  Kerry wants to increase funding to public education (a substantial change), he wants to make healthcare affordable to all Americans (not nationalized, but one step at a time; he wants to do this with money from the bush tax cuts), he will allow the taxcuts to sunset when their time comes (rather than making them permanent), he has a more multi-lateral approach to foreign policy, he won't propose nonsense like a consitutional amendment against gay marriage and he will acutally protect the environment.

People said the same sort of nonsense about bush/Gore in 2000.  Does anyone actually think we'd be in the same place today if Gore had won?

VigilVirus

VigilVirus

Posted
Posted

LOL, during the republican party conference (or whatever), he said that 10 billion people in Afghanistan now have the opportunity to receive a free education.

Like the sort of missionary schools as they had in China in the early 20th century that taught you about loving Jesus? ;).

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.