exatreide Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 Well I have more suport for Isreal then I do of the USA
Wolf Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 10,000 people? Most of them from Europe? That poll in itself is biased (not, as in, it was faked, biased is in one group of opinions is more heavily weighted than others). Number one, Europeans disproportionately represent the amount of counted votes (approximately 65-70 percent). Further, the sample size is 10,000 while the world population is 6,500,000,000 - 290,000,000. I don't think that's very representative of an accurate answer.
jeff2429 Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 I think what Kerry did was the honorable thing to do rather then keep at it like a jerk cause it was over and he lost.
Kiyouta Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 I have but one thing to say...FOUR MORE YEARS! FOUR MORE YEARS! ;D
Dunenewt Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 Jeff:I respect John Kerry for what he did. Edric:When the Democrat candidate elections were taking place I thought Dean would win. There was all that "Deaniac" stuff as well. He seemed more in touch with the youth, but I didn't think he was 'left' enough for you, Edric.Four years gives the Democrats chance to find a worthy candidate, which I expect will be Dean or Edwards, and the Republicans chance to find a successor to Bush. Bring on George Bush III! (That's a subtle hint to George Jr and Laura Bush to sort that out) What would be the chance of a third party coming out a lot more stronger in four years? I doubt Nader will still be running but it seems there are quite a few minor parties out there and with the right publicity they could pull a fair few votes, and maybe break the grip of the two main parties. If only the average American voter knew more about these other parties, they would know they might have a better option. I think the real problem with America is not Bush, but their electorial system itself.
jeff2429 Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 Down here in Texas it coulda been in jeperdy to going to Kerry if all the illegals mexicans could vote.Add on - Although from compared to 2000 elections, this election the hispanic vote for Bush went of 5-7%.
Dude_Doc Posted November 4, 2004 Posted November 4, 2004 With Bush winning, I might add, there will be yet another four years without any chance of implementing the Kyoto protocol. I'm not sure if Kerry would or wouldn't implement it should he been elected, but since he is more liberal than Bush I think there would be a greater chance.
exatreide Posted November 4, 2004 Posted November 4, 2004 Uh..Who gives a fuck what the world thinks?uh maybe we should...becouse like I stated, their are more of them then us...And are jobs are currently being sent over their....You really are stupid if you think world opinion doesnt matter, you think the worlds just going to sit there while we go around bombing the frell out of countries? You dont think it matters?Let me tell you a lil something, The world opinion of us is not that great, heck today or yesterday Hungry anounced it would pull its troops out of iraq, Which puts more strain on american troops!(not much strain but still)The number of insurgents went up from roughly 7,000 in May to 12,000 curently, and you think this is a good thing? You think we can handle all these conflicts on our own? Controlling Iraq, Afhanistan, hunting osma in The philipeans, Maintaining our troops in the DMZ in south Korea? with out any help? My views on Isreal are far different from that of the U.S. I belive that Isreal should do WHATEVER it takes to protect itself from the 1.5 BILLION(roughly) Muslims that dislike them...However My views on the U.S are slightly DifferentI think that America as the sole remaining super power should do whatever it takes Economicaly and Socially to stay on top, our econemy is falling apart, were falling back into 19th century views on soscial classes.Yes, Bush has created jobs, I will give him that but they pay on average 9,000 dollars less then the ones we had before. And the strong manufacutring jobs that were the lifeblood of this country are being shipped over seas!We went from a several billion dollar surplessTo a Multi billion dollar deficit in 4 years!We can not relly on our military alone to suport this great nation...Rome needed more then Legions to keep its life blood flowing....Jeff im ignoring that abortion comment for now, different place maybe.
thomas Posted November 4, 2004 Posted November 4, 2004 Bingo ! .... people didnt vote for Bush... they voted for their moral views.
Andrew Posted November 4, 2004 Posted November 4, 2004 So ur for abortion? By having an abortion you are comiting murder. You may not think that but that cell will evolve into a human being. If the guy is to stupid to not know how to use a condom then he might aswell not have sex. The women or girls should be responsible enough to take the pill atleast. It ant quantum physics ::)So do you think that rape victims should also follow through with their pregnancy?What about if there will be complications with the baby or mother (not necessarily related to rape)?
slaphapy Posted November 4, 2004 Posted November 4, 2004 We went from a several billion dollar surplessTo a Multi billion dollar deficit in 4 years!where the f*ck was this several billion dollar surplus? Forgive me for not being as politically informed as many on this forum, but i do believe we were already losing any surplus (which was only in the low 100 millions if i remember correctly... not even close to billions) clinton may or may not have had before bush was elected...Why is everyone on Bush's case about puting more troops into iraq? that was in kerry's "plans" as well dumbasses... and wtf is this talk about the draft, not a single political leader is even thinking about puting the draft into effect because they would be committing political suicide, and most likely removed from office.I personally think kerry failed because it began becoming painfully obvious he was doing everything to get votes.I give him credit for his actions on giving the presidency to Bush. It was the more honorable way of defeat, as opposed to the actions taken in the 2000 election (however it was much closer)... I cant remember exactly but i think Kerry would have needed something around 85-90% of the remaining votes in ohio to have a chance at winning the election... obviously impossible.
jeff2429 Posted November 4, 2004 Posted November 4, 2004 So do you think that rape victims should also follow through with their pregnancy?What about if there will be complications with the baby or mother (not necessarily related to rape)?With regular people they shoulda been more responsible but with a rape vitim its hard to say. I've though about this and I just couldn't come to a conclusion. Why should the future beings have to pay for what has happened and die, but it wasn't the mothers fault in anyway either. Only thing I can think of is that if a vitim is raped, hopefully they were on some kind of birth control or either it was a willing mother to follow through though I don't believe they would be. Tought call here.
Andrew Posted November 4, 2004 Posted November 4, 2004 Yeah, I know someone who's sister was raped, and she had the child, but ended up killing herself about 3 years after giving birth. Dunno if an abortion would have helped the mother or not. But the fact that rape really messes with a womans mind is disturbing. They never get over it.
Dante Posted November 4, 2004 Posted November 4, 2004 One moment of weakness should not condemn someone to a lifetime with a child that they may not be able to care and provide for. One individual should not have the right to deny a couple, any couple, the right to be happy together. Voting for moral issues? Yes, very moral I'm sure.
GUNWOUNDS Posted November 4, 2004 Posted November 4, 2004 Uh..Who gives a fuck what the world thinks?uh maybe we should...becouse like I stated, their are more of them then us...And are jobs are currently being sent over their....You really are stupid if you think world opinion doesnt matter, you think the worlds just going to sit there while we go around bombing the frell out of countries? You dont think it matters?Let me tell you a lil something, The world opinion of us is not that great, heck today or yesterday Hungry anounced it would pull its troops out of iraq, Which puts more strain on american troops!(not much strain but still)The number of insurgents went up from roughly 7,000 in May to 12,000 curently, and you think this is a good thing? You think we can handle all these conflicts on our own? Controlling Iraq, Afhanistan, hunting osma
Dante Posted November 4, 2004 Posted November 4, 2004 Whee. A world police force led by a single country. Just what we need. Isn't that what the UN is for?
GUNWOUNDS Posted November 4, 2004 Posted November 4, 2004 Whee. A world police force led by a single country. Just what we need. Isn't that what the UN is for? yes but the UN contains Europeans who are sqeamish and who cannot stomach what has to be done in order to police the world.
Dante Posted November 4, 2004 Posted November 4, 2004 Has it occured to you that maybe the world doesn't need your policing?
GUNWOUNDS Posted November 4, 2004 Posted November 4, 2004 Has it occured to you that maybe the world doesn't need your policing? Saying the world doesnt need policing is like saying cities or states or countries dont need policing. Its simply not the case. If towns and cities have police... and if states have SWAT ... and if countries have National Guards... the the world needs policing as well.You either police the world.... or you end up dealing with World War...Before WWI and WWII we didnt police the world.... and guess what? WWI and WWII broke out... and ever since we started policing the world.... there hasnt been a WWIII... coincidence? I think not.
Andrew Posted November 4, 2004 Posted November 4, 2004 I think the reason for that being is proliferation and more homogenous cultures. Not policing of the world.You do not see the US policing India and Pakistan whenever they start to fight over aan area of land do you. Because they got WMD. (And of course if the US were to side with one country it would start a war.)
GUNWOUNDS Posted November 4, 2004 Posted November 4, 2004 I think the reason for that being is proliferation and more homogenous cultures. Not policing of the world.You do not see the US policing India and Pakistan whenever they start to fight over aan area of land do you. Because they got WMD. (And of course if the US were to side with one country it would start a war.)Policing can take on many forms... doesnt have to be in the form of bombs and armies. When i say we police the world i dont necessarily mean in the form of warfare it could be weapons or food or satellite intelligence.And yes the WMD do pose a problem.... which is why the UN and the USA is working hard to stop nuclear proliferation.Also... if the US sided with one side it would not start a war. If USA sided with Pakistan then India would back down. India knows it could not defeat a USA/Pakistan Alliance.
Dunenewt Posted November 4, 2004 Posted November 4, 2004 Then India would join sides with China, and Russia. Stalemate.
Dunenewt Posted November 4, 2004 Posted November 4, 2004 Missed these to gems from Gunwounds:yes but the UN contains Europeans who are sqeamish and who cannot stomach what has to be done in order to police the world.Maybe because America hasn't been devastated by War like Europe has, and we do all we can to resolve things through diplomatic means first. We can stomach it, we just prefer the alternatives.Lets not forget all the ass we kicked in WWI Your contribution was appreciated, but a little, and very late. Britain and France won that war. And Russia won WW2 in Europe.
ordos45 Posted November 4, 2004 Posted November 4, 2004 Having read through this thread I have come up with a summation of its contents "F*** You All""Europeans are [subhuman/liberal hemp smoking pansie] idiots""The only way to prevent World War Three is to kill everyone""America is a big meanie"Did I hit all the high points? Because if so I'd just like to say this is the official flame warning.
Recommended Posts