Edric O Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 Well, it's over.And the world is shocked - not because of the result, since, after all, we all knew that it was going to be close and either candidate could win - but because of Kerry's decision to hand Bush the presidency on a sliver plate.Kerry gave up today, one single day after the election took place. He didn't even wait for the official vote count to finish in Ohio. To say that he refused to fight would be an understatement. He didn't even try to fight. Kerry lost any respect I ever had for him. He is a f**king wimp. His behaviour during the campaign and now after the election was downright frustrating for anyone on the political left. This man who wanted to represent us was a moderately conservative centrist without a single ounce of conviction in him, and yet we had to support him because of the only good thing he had going for himself: he wasn't Bush. But apparently, that just wasn't enough.And perhaps even more frustrating is the REASON why Bush won this election. It wasn't over the economy - 80% of all people who said the economy was their biggest concern voted for Kerry. It wasn't over jobs - over 70% of all people who said that jobs were their biggest concern voted for Kerry. It wasn't about health care, or education, or anything even remotely related to the economy - the polls show that Kerry utterly crushed Bush on those issues. No, Bush won thanks to personal and moral issues. Gay marriage, stem cell research, religious education - those, and the War on Terror, were Bush's strong points.I've said it before and I'll say it again: The American Left needs to grow more socially conservative and economically socialist. That is by far the dominant mood of Americans today. A candidate holding Kerry's economic views and Bush's social views would have won by a landslide. Too many working- and middle class Americans have to sacrifice their well being and their financial security in voting for a candidate who supports their moral views but who is a brown-nosing lackey of the super-rich.Having said that, however, I have to admit that, from a cynical point of view, Bush's victory may not be such a bad thing. Many people are going to suffer because of this, and once his four more years are over he'll probably be the most hated man on the planet (if he isn't already), the gap between rich and poor in America will reach new astronomical heights, terrorists will be recruiting new members in droves, and working American families will be worse off than they've ever been in a very long time. In short, the situation will be very bleak. And here's the catch: Such a bleak situation is certain to cause a massive backlash. Once Bush is finished with America, a lot more people will be turning to the left. Perhaps then we'll be able to start repairing the damage and healing the wounds. Until then, however, we have to regroup and start fighting more effectively than in this year's pathetic campaign.
Dante Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 Fine, fine. You're right, Edric, we know that. It's funny how we can agree about so much and yet disagree at such a basic level... Anyway, hopefully that prediction about Bush being hated will come true. And the light in the distance is that maybe, just maybe, this will open the doors for President Clinton (Mrs).
Dunenewt Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 I can't believe you'd take delight in people suffering just so a few failing rebellions would take place.
Dude_Doc Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 I don't see the American elections as democratic anymore. First, we have this two party system, identical candidates and all, the stuff I read how difficult it is to vote, more like a disencouraging thing to not make people vote, but to just go along with the system.Is there any democracy left in America? I hope there is a world left in 2008, but who knows...maybe Bush implement some kind of new system so that he can be "re-elected" until he dies, and then I'll just start believing in the doomsday of 2012 ;) ...
Dunenewt Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 Don't be stupid. Now some of you are taking it over the top and just being generally pathetic. Now as far I know, American Presidents can only serve two full terms, and that is all that Bush will serve. He only has limited power within his own country, less so even, than Tony Blair within the UK.
Dante Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 I can't believe you'd take delight in people suffering just so a few failing rebellions would take place.Not as such. I just take pleasure in people suffering generally. Edric, on the other hand, is merely being pragmatic. He's not taking pleasure from it, as far as I gather, but attempting to see the silver lining in the cloud.
Edric O Posted November 3, 2004 Author Posted November 3, 2004 I can't believe you'd take delight in people suffering just so a few failing rebellions would take place.Uh, what? ??? First of all, I was talking about votes, not "rebellions", and second of all, my tone was bitter and cynical, not happy. (but, of course, it's pretty hard to convey any tone in writing)Besides, it's not as if I can actually do anything about that suffering, is it? Not yet, at any rate.
Dunenewt Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 There wont be suffering, the loony lefties will never get anywhere big, Romania wil be refused entry to the EU, so yeah, you're right, there is nothing you can do.
Dante Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 Oh grow up. When will people realise that the right wing can loathe Bush too? The man's managed to unite Edric and myself in hatred, something that not even Stalin has done...
Dunenewt Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 Oh my god. Stalin is possibly one of the most evil men of modern times. Bush is not evil. He may make wrong decisions, but I don't think anyone in their right mind could call a devout Christian evil.
Dante Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 Oh my god. Stalin is possibly one of the most evil men of modern times. Bush is not evil. He may make wrong decisions, but I don't think anyone in their right mind could call a devout Christain evil.I can, and I will. Bush is either evil or just trigger-happy and moronic. I don't care which, since it seems that each is as bad as the other.
Dunenewt Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 Well are you saying 40m+ americans are wrong?
Dante Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 No, I'm saying they're stupid; and have no appreciation for either the world as a whole or any potential improvement in society.
Edric O Posted November 3, 2004 Author Posted November 3, 2004 There wont be suffering...Right, that's why Kerry scored such an overwhelming victory on economic issues, because Bush is doing a great job with the economy. ::)...the loony lefties will never get anywhere big...When your definition of the "loony left" is something considered quite right-wing everywhere else in the world, you know you've got serious issues.Romania wil be refused entry to the EU, so yeah, you're right, there is nothing you can do.Ah, there's that problem with written communication again. You must have misinterpreted my tone - and you must have missed the not yet part.
Dunenewt Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 There's a difference for me between the Left, and the Loony Left. An example of the Loony Left would be George Galloway's RESPECT party over here.
Edric O Posted November 3, 2004 Author Posted November 3, 2004 I don't think anyone in their right mind could call a devout Christain evil.Tell that to the High Inquisitors, or perhaps to the crusaders.Oh, and by the way, will you and Dante please stop spamming my topic? ;)
Edric O Posted November 3, 2004 Author Posted November 3, 2004 There's a difference for me between the Left, and the Loony Left. An example of the Loony Left would be George Galloway's RESPECT party over here.Oh, I see, you must be a member of the Mad Right. Now, unless you have something meaningful to say, I'm afraid I'm going to have to ask you to play elsewhere. Run along now.
Dunenewt Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 Well I'm going away to give me time to think up a massive post, but I'll leave you with this. Who could have done Kerry's job well?
Dante Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 Running against Bush? A monkey.Aren't you glad of my support, Edric? :'( I'd have thought you'd appreciated it... Here's me, agreeing and everything, attempting to cheer you up in my first post (what your feelings are on Hillary Clinton, I don't know, but she must be better than Bush, da?).
Edric O Posted November 3, 2004 Author Posted November 3, 2004 Who could have done Kerry's job well?As a Democratic candidate? Howard Dean.Aren't you glad of my support, Edric? :'( I'd have thought you'd appreciated it... Here's me, agreeing and everything, attempting to cheer you up in my first post (what your feelings are on Hillary Clinton, I don't know, but she must be better than Bush, da?).Oh, sorry about that... it's nice to know you agree with me on this one issue and all that, but you know we're still bitter political opponents. ;)As for Hillary, of course she's better than Bush (it doesn't take much to be better than Bush, after all), but, in fact, she's better than most Democrats, too. I'd definitely support her if she decided to run for president. Go Hillary! :)
GUNWOUNDS Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 No, Bush won thanks to personal and moral issues. Gay marriage, stem cell research, religious education - those, and the War on Terror, were Bush's strong points.I've said it before and I'll say it again: The American Left needs to grow more socially conservative and economically socialist. That is by far the dominant mood of Americans today. A candidate holding Kerry's economic views and Bush's social views would have won by a landslide. Too many working- and middle class Americans have to sacrifice their well being and their financial security in voting for a candidate who supports their moral views but who is a brown-nosing lackey of the super-rich.Bingo ! .... people didnt vote for Bush... they voted for their moral views.
TMA_1 Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 first of all, american presidential elections have never been democratic, we are a freaking republic duh! lol and follow that form of government, which is not a pure democracy.Second, I think that kerry really showed that he is an upstanding guy. Instead of whining like al gore, he made sure that debates would stop. Edric you really dont know how heated things are in america do you? we cannot have any sort of huge two week long debate on the election, and not for the sake of bush (I doint like him, but he did win the electoral college vote, as well as the popular vote), but because america is so polarized right now that it would just rip it to shreads.
exatreide Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 4 more years of eternal darkness....Another Republican president, another right ring facist neo nazi, skin head stalinistic aproach to govern america will take place in the next four years.four more years of repbulican hypocricy, four more years of war, four more years of blood shed, corrupt fraud, the return of the draft, the death of socical security and any hope this country had at health care, Iran, 2005North Korea, 2008To qoute cartmen, screw you guys, im going home.Look out Isreal when im 18, Would rather suffer daily sucuide bombings and the threat of 1.5 billion arabs then live in this place.Who's coming with me?
GUNWOUNDS Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 Look out Isreal when im 18, Would rather suffer daily sucuide bombings and the threat of 1.5 billion arabs then live in this place.Who's coming with me?Errm .... Israel is way more hardcore than USA.... if you cant stand america.... Israel is the last place you want to be.... their patriotism and fervor is
Wolf Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 All of you need to get a grip. First of all, hoping that terrorism increases, that Americans are worse off than they ever have been before, and that the United States' government becomes the most hated on Earth just so the political climate is more amiable to your political/economic views is disgusting. I don't care how you justify it, I know there would be schadenfreude all-around you fellows if, four years from now, the United States is in just that situation.Second of all, Edric is still right -- his hoping-against-hope prediction that Americans suffer aside -- what the United States needs is someone socially conservative but economically liberal. Someone closer to a John McCain than a John Kerry. I know that's still not what Edric had in mind, exactly, but he's the only current-day example of such a politician that exists in modern American politics.Third of all, all this "armageddon," "eternal darkness," stuff is a bunch of crap. You are not going to die. You are not going to be herded into ghetto districts. You will not be forcibly mutiliated or sterilized. You are all, for the most part, middle-class Americans or Europeans. You have access to this very forum. Granted, Bush has done a lot we disagree with, but to tell people to "burn in hell" because of that is childish, stupid, and doesn't help us fix this problem.If anything, such immaturity on the part of Bush's opponents might explain why the President beat Senator Kerry by 4,000,000 popular votes: because your behavior, on the whole, was inexcusable. And it is no wonder that John Kerry is a poor candidate from a rational perspective. Your candidates cannot grow up if you will not.I did not vote for President Bush, and neither did my state, for the most part, but he is still going to be our president. A wise man once said that if the man I voted for won, I would criticize him, and if the man I voted for lost, I would give the winner his chance. That's social responsibility, and I havn't seen any of it.
Recommended Posts