NationStates Jolt Archive

I was just wondering... with the election coming up in only about seven months, who do you want to win? So I thought I'd take a poll:Who do you want to win the 2004 presidential election?

Bush :D or Kerry :twisted: ?

Please give at least one reason why you like Bush, or why you like Kerry.(note: saying why you don't like Bush is not a reason why you like Kerry and vis versa)

I want Bush to win... my two main reasons for liking him are:

1. I like tax cuts (unlike Kerry, raising taxes over 300 times)
2. I like the way he is handling the war on terror.

I think those are both important issues, and I like how Bush deals with those issues. People on the left keep attacking Bush (by the way, I think a lot of people are being really disgraceful, saying he is a traitor and things like that, I'm tired of this Bush bashing) but I have yet to really hear how Kerry would be a better president. Most people when asked why do you want Kerry to win? They say how Bush does this and that, and how awful Bush is. But they don't say why they want Kerry to win... how would he better? What do you like about Kerry? And they can't answer that question.

for starters, John Kerry can figure out the difference between a tax increase and a tax cut. When Bush was coming up with the 350 tax increases accusation, he first counted Kerry's votes to increase taxes. That's fine so far. Then he added to that Kerry's votes to keep taxes the same. Huh? Then he added to that some of the times Kerry voted to cut taxes. What the fuck?

I have seen nothing but negative campaigning from Bush so far. At least John Kerry is willing to talk about what he would do as president, like reduce the deficit, strengthen environmental laws, oppose pork barrel spending, streamline the Patriot Act to focus more on terrorism and less on innocents, have the Department of Education actually enforce No Child Left Behind, and shift more military focus from Iraq to Afghanistan

Bush
1.) He has the guts to do the right thing, at the right time, without reguard to his political future.

2.) He doesn't give into special interest groups that advocate things like gay marriage.

I am so disappointed that this thread limits us to only two reasons when there are hundreds more. Two reasons is like limitting George W. Bush to only two terms, may be one of the changes that need to be made. Who says Conservatives are against change? Eliminating presidential term limits is one change that I think all Conservatives are in favor of.

If you do your history, conservatives, particularly the Republican Party as a whole in the US, were the major supporters of term limits, since the Democrats had been in office for 20 years by the time Truman's presidency ended.

I would argue that most people support term limits, since it is a good preventive measure of a virtual crowning. Even conservatives know that, had he been able to run again, Clinton probably would have won a third term and still be president right now.

With the "Anybody but Bush" mentality of the average player, on this game, I predict your poll will end in at least a two to one margin in Kerry's favor. At least in the real world there are a lot more intelligent people, who will actually be doing the voting, and the outcome will be the inverse.

John Kerry--
1. He'll move us back in the direction of fiscal sanity and away from the ludicrous deficit spending we find ourselves in right now.
2. He'll move us back in the direction of international cooperation and away from our current imperialistic, unilateral stance.

I predict your poll will end in at least a two to one margin in Kerry's favor. At least in the real world there are a lot more intelligent people, who will actually be doing the voting, and the outcome will be the inverse. Which is amusing since election patterns show that the higher educated tend to vote Democrat more often.

With the "Anybody but Bush" mentality of the average player, on this game, I predict your poll will end in at least a two to one margin in Kerry's favor. At least in the real world there are a lot more intelligent people, who will actually be doing the voting, and the outcome will be the inverse.I'm reminded of a quote from the late, great Harry S. Truman. He said "Desperate men do desperate things, and stupid men do stupid things. We're in for a desperately stupid summer."

I'm sure your choice of the candidate who is more desperate and stupid differs from mine, Jay, but perhaps you'll still find the quote amusing.

I just read an interesting item. It seems Dubya's tax cuts have benifitted the president himself to the tune of 31k this last year alone. Let me repeat that slowly and clearly for all the Republicans out there. Tax cuts put through by Bush since he took office benifitted the president himself last year by an amout that is roughly equal to the average americans yearly income.

Guess who I'm not voting for.

i think we're pretty well screwed either way.
bush=more wars
kerry=hippy state

I predict your poll will end in at least a two to one margin in Kerry's favor. At least in the real world there are a lot more intelligent people, who will actually be doing the voting, and the outcome will be the inverse. Which is amusing since election patterns show that the higher educated tend to vote Democrat more often.The older/ more educated voters tend to be Conservative. The Democratic party used to be referred to as the hippy supported party. High School drop outs are more likely to be liberal (they can benifit the most from all the welfare handouts.).

I predict your poll will end in at least a two to one margin in Kerry's favor. At least in the real world there are a lot more intelligent people, who will actually be doing the voting, and the outcome will be the inverse. Which is amusing since election patterns show that the higher educated tend to vote Democrat more often.The older/ more educated voters tend to be Conservative. The Democratic party used to be referred to as the hippy supported party. High School drop outs are more likely to be liberal (they can benifit the most from all the welfare handouts.).

College grads give Republicans the edge, but College grads having gone to grad school have a slight Democrat leaning. That's my memory anyway.

With the "Anybody but Bush" mentality of the average player, on this game, I predict your poll will end in at least a two to one margin in Kerry's favor. At least in the real world there are a lot more intelligent people, who will actually be doing the voting, and the outcome will be the inverse.I'm reminded of a quote from the late, great Harry S. Truman. He said "Desperate men do desperate things, and stupid men do stupid things. We're in for a desperately stupid summer."

I'm sure your choice of the candidate who is more desperate and stupid differs from mine, Jay, but perhaps you'll still find the quote amusing. :lol: Did like the quote. Hmm.. The Democratic Party and other liberals are desperate to get President George W. Bush out of office, which would be a stupid move on their part, so I guess it fits very well. :lol:

I predict your poll will end in at least a two to one margin in Kerry's favor. At least in the real world there are a lot more intelligent people, who will actually be doing the voting, and the outcome will be the inverse. Which is amusing since election patterns show that the higher educated tend to vote Democrat more often.The older/ more educated voters tend to be Conservative. The Democratic party used to be referred to as the hippy supported party. High School drop outs are more likely to be liberal (they can benifit the most from all the welfare handouts.).Your right about the older part, but statistics show that Dems are better educated. High school dropouts are more likely not to vote than they are to vote for either party.

We, Americans, are screwed again! A dullard and a jelly-fish, helluva choice! I couldn't vote in the poll because I find bothy men unacceptable. Of the two, I guess I narrowly favor Bush. Bush believes in things beyond what polls show but he is somewhat tactless and doesn't seem to be able to hide his fanaticism well enough to be President.

With the "Anybody but Bush" mentality of the average player, on this game, I predict your poll will end in at least a two to one margin in Kerry's favor. At least in the real world there are a lot more intelligent people, who will actually be doing the voting, and the outcome will be the inverse.I'm reminded of a quote from the late, great Harry S. Truman. He said "Desperate men do desperate things, and stupid men do stupid things. We're in for a desperately stupid summer."

I'm sure your choice of the candidate who is more desperate and stupid differs from mine, Jay, but perhaps you'll still find the quote amusing. :lol: Did like the quote. Hmm.. The Democratic Party and other liberals are desperate to get President George W. Bush out of office, which would be a stupid move on their part, so I guess it fits very well. :lol:Or, Bush is desperate to remain in office and pretty much every action he's taken in his 3 years has been stupid, so it fits him perfectly.

Nader

Kerry- I don't particularly like him, but he's better than Bush and his administration IMO.

NaderIn other words, Bush. :lol:

Kerry- I don't particularly like him, but he's better than Bush and his administration IMO.

Better how?

1. May actually provide straight answers at his press conferences
2. Will go after terrorists and not Saddam
3. No more Cheney and Rumsfeld *shudders*
4. Might actually be more fiscally conservative
5. Slightly less disingenuous than the current administration

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of Kerry per se. I simply dont like the Bush administration at all.

Kerry - I'm afraid I'll burst if I have to spend another four years in a Republican-governed USA...

Kerry - I'm afraid I'll burst if I have to spend another four years in a Republican-governed USA...

Bah, you'll be fine. That's what Zoloft's for anyway, isn't it? :wink:

I hate to break it to you liberals, but Bush is pulling away from Kerry according to the latest polls despite the fact that Kerry and the 527's have recieved almost double the donations that Bush's campaign has.

The latet numbers I saw were, without Nader, Bush 51%, Kerry 46%.
With Nader, Bush 50%, Kerry 44%

http://www.gallup.com/content/?ci=11419

sorry Republicans, I guess we will have to hear the liberals bitch for another 4 years.

I hate to break it to you liberals, but Bush is pulling away from Kerry according to the latest polls despite the fact that Kerry and the 527's have recieved almost double the donations that Bush's campaign has.

The latet numbers I saw were, without Nader, Bush 51%, Kerry 46%.
With Nader, Bush 50%, Kerry 44%

http://www.gallup.com/content/?ci=11419

sorry Republicans, I guess we will have to hear the liberals bitch for another 4 years.

Haha, 6% is pulling away?

I hate to break it to you liberals, but Bush is pulling away from Kerry according to the latest polls despite the fact that Kerry and the 527's have recieved almost double the donations that Bush's campaign has.

The latet numbers I saw were, without Nader, Bush 51%, Kerry 46%.
With Nader, Bush 50%, Kerry 44%

http://www.gallup.com/content/?ci=11419

sorry Republicans, I guess we will have to hear the liberals bitch for another 4 years.

I wouldn't break out the champagne just yet. Polls are gonna be erratic for a while, I'm guessing. :wink: Another 4 years of liberal whining is fine by me, given the alternative.

I hate to break it to you liberals, but Bush is pulling away from Kerry according to the latest polls despite the fact that Kerry and the 527's have recieved almost double the donations that Bush's campaign has.

The latet numbers I saw were, without Nader, Bush 51%, Kerry 46%.
With Nader, Bush 50%, Kerry 44%

http://www.gallup.com/content/?ci=11419

sorry Republicans, I guess we will have to hear the liberals bitch for another 4 years.

Haha, 6% is pulling away?
read the fuck ing article. over the past 2 weeks his lead has doubled. anytime a canidate doubles his lead, i would say he is pulling away

I hate to break it to you liberals, but Bush is pulling away from Kerry according to the latest polls despite the fact that Kerry and the 527's have recieved almost double the donations that Bush's campaign has.

The latet numbers I saw were, without Nader, Bush 51%, Kerry 46%.
With Nader, Bush 50%, Kerry 44%

http://www.gallup.com/content/?ci=11419

sorry Republicans, I guess we will have to hear the liberals bitch for another 4 years.All depends on what polls you see--you're quoteing the Gallup numbers. Zogby has Kerry 47, Bush 44 and has them tied at 45 with Nader included.

Besides--this is April and the election isn't until November. If you get excited about every little fluctuation between now and then you'll be psychotic before June. Get over yourself.

All depends on what polls you see--you're quoteing the Gallup numbers. Zogby has Kerry 47, Bush 44 and has them tied at 45 with Nader included.

Besides--this is April and the election isn't until November. If you get excited about every little fluctuation between now and then you'll be psychotic before June. Get over yourself.
I trust Gallup's numbers.
All that is going to happen is Bush's lead grow and grow when the "secret Saudi oil deal" makes the gas prices go down.

I hate to break it to you liberals, but Bush is pulling away from Kerry according to the latest polls despite the fact that Kerry and the 527's have recieved almost double the donations that Bush's campaign has.

The latet numbers I saw were, without Nader, Bush 51%, Kerry 46%.
With Nader, Bush 50%, Kerry 44%

http://www.gallup.com/content/?ci=11419

sorry Republicans, I guess we will have to hear the liberals bitch for another 4 years.

Haha, 6% is pulling away?
read the f--- ing article. over the past 2 weeks his lead has doubled. anytime a canidate doubles his lead, i would say he is pulling away

30 more people said they would vote for Bush over Kerry than two weeks ago. That is hardly pulling away.

I hate to break it to you liberals, but Bush is pulling away from Kerry according to the latest polls despite the fact that Kerry and the 527's have recieved almost double the donations that Bush's campaign has.

The latet numbers I saw were, without Nader, Bush 51%, Kerry 46%.
With Nader, Bush 50%, Kerry 44%

http://www.gallup.com/content/?ci=11419

sorry Republicans, I guess we will have to hear the liberals bitch for another 4 years.All depends on what polls you see--you're quoteing the Gallup numbers. Zogby has Kerry 47, Bush 44 and has them tied at 45 with Nader included.

Besides--this is April and the election isn't until November. If you get excited about every little fluctuation between now and then you'll be psychotic before June. Get over yourself.

The better-sounding Bush numbers are among 'likely voters,' that's the difference. You're right though, polls are probably gonna bounce around. That's why voter registration is so important. :wink:

1. May actually provide straight answers at his press conferences
2. Will go after terrorists and not Saddam
3. No more Cheney and Rumsfeld *shudders*
4. Might actually be more fiscally conservative
5. Slightly less disingenuous than the current administration

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of Kerry per se. I simply dont like the Bush administration at all.

No politician is going to talk straight in front of the press. What makes you think that he will go after terrorists? If he does, will he wait for UN or some other international permission? Can't argue about Cheney and Rumsfeld. Less disingenuous? The only thing the man seems to be able to do is curry public favor, he seems to have no real position on anything.

i think we're pretty well screwed either way.
bush=more wars
kerry=hippy state
I agree...well, with your initial statement anway
where is the "Oh, please god, neither" option?

I hate to break it to you liberals, but Bush is pulling away from Kerry according to the latest polls despite the fact that Kerry and the 527's have recieved almost double the donations that Bush's campaign has.

The latet numbers I saw were, without Nader, Bush 51%, Kerry 46%.
With Nader, Bush 50%, Kerry 44%

http://www.gallup.com/content/?ci=11419

sorry Republicans, I guess we will have to hear the liberals bitch for another 4 years.All depends on what polls you see--you're quoteing the Gallup numbers. Zogby has Kerry 47, Bush 44 and has them tied at 45 with Nader included.

Besides--this is April and the election isn't until November. If you get excited about every little fluctuation between now and then you'll be psychotic before June. Get over yourself.

The better-sounding Bush numbers are among 'likely voters,' that's the difference. You're right though, polls are probably gonna bounce around. That's why voter registration is so important. :wink:If you look at the trend lines over the last two months, here's what you see--Bush never gets much above 50% and never falls below 42%. Kerry is almost exactly the same. That means that any poll taken today that falls within that range tells us nothing new--no one is running away with this election any time soon.

If anything, one might argue that considering the huge amount of money Bush has poured into advertising--$40 million in the last two months--the fact that he's only held steady ought to be bothersome, but I still think that it's too early to make any sort of judgments. And for a little prespective on that spending--Kerry's spent about $12 million in the same time frame, and that includes the last week or two of the primaries when he still had challengers.

I hate to break it to you liberals, but Bush is pulling away from Kerry according to the latest polls despite the fact that Kerry and the 527's have recieved almost double the donations that Bush's campaign has.

The latet numbers I saw were, without Nader, Bush 51%, Kerry 46%.
With Nader, Bush 50%, Kerry 44%

http://www.gallup.com/content/?ci=11419

sorry Republicans, I guess we will have to hear the liberals bitch for another 4 years.
You Americans talk about Kerry flip-flopping (still beats the outright lies by Bush) so do the voters. One week it is Bush, next week it is Kerry. So I would imagine that the polls from here until about September are really something to not get too concerned about. You can get the same effect if you go to the ocean----the tide goes out, the tide comes in, the tide goes out, the tide comes in, if you catch my drift?

I believe Kerry will take the necessary measures to bring our economy out of the toilet and create jobs for the many millions of recently unemployed Americans. One way Kerry can do this is by giving companies incentives to actually keep jobs in this country instead of outsourcing them across the globe. I also believe Kerry will begin the long and arduous task of mending relations with our allies. Since we have alienated most of Europe with our Hegemonic policies, it is absolutely necessary to unite the 1st world behind us once again. Especially with the costs of the War on Terror escalating out of control. A leader like Bush does not have the mental capacity to comprehend the mess he has made of the world, and this is why it is essential that Kerry is elected in November.
.

Which is amusing since election patterns show that the higher educated tend to vote Democrat more often.

True, but false. The very highest educated, like the top 5% tend to be liberal, but considering that's made mostly of college professors, we already knew that. The rest tend to be conservative, thankfully. In reality, when people are young and ignorant as to the real world, they are idealistic and liberal, when they see what the world is really like (and have to work for their money) they go conservative.

Personally, I love Bush because...
1. He's more worried about the protection of our nation than petty politics, unlike John Kerry.
2. He believes that those who work hard shouldn't be punished for it.

I hate to break it to you liberals, but Bush is pulling away from Kerry according to the latest polls despite the fact that Kerry and the 527's have recieved almost double the donations that Bush's campaign has.

The latet numbers I saw were, without Nader, Bush 51%, Kerry 46%.
With Nader, Bush 50%, Kerry 44%

http://www.gallup.com/content/?ci=11419

sorry Republicans, I guess we will have to hear the liberals bitch for another 4 years.All depends on what polls you see--you're quoteing the Gallup numbers. Zogby has Kerry 47, Bush 44 and has them tied at 45 with Nader included.

Besides--this is April and the election isn't until November. If you get excited about every little fluctuation between now and then you'll be psychotic before June. Get over yourself.

The better-sounding Bush numbers are among 'likely voters,' that's the difference. You're right though, polls are probably gonna bounce around. That's why voter registration is so important. :wink:If you look at the trend lines over the last two months, here's what you see--Bush never gets much above 50% and never falls below 42%. Kerry is almost exactly the same. That means that any poll taken today that falls within that range tells us nothing new--no one is running away with this election any time soon.

If anything, one might argue that considering the huge amount of money Bush has poured into advertising--$40 million in the last two months--the fact that he's only held steady ought to be bothersome, but I still think that it's too early to make any sort of judgments. And for a little prespective on that spending--Kerry's spent about $12 million in the same time frame, and that includes the last week or two of the primaries when he still had challengers.

The money spent is misleading. Kerry got an imeasurable amount of free exposure before, during and after the primaries.

Does anyone else see this becoming a giant flame fest in a few pages?

*dons radiation suit*

If anything, one might argue that considering the huge amount of money Bush has poured into advertising--$40 million in the last two months--the fact that he's only held steady ought to be bothersome, but I still think that it's too early to make any sort of judgments. And for a little prespective on that spending--Kerry's spent about $12 million in the same time frame, and that includes the last week or two of the primaries when he still had challengers.
Actually, Kerry and the 527's have spent $96 million so far and Bush has spent $50 million so far. Granted Kerry did spend some of the money trying to secure the Dem. nomination, but Kerry's spending far outweighs Bush's.

All depends on what polls you see--you're quoteing the Gallup numbers. Zogby has Kerry 47, Bush 44 and has them tied at 45 with Nader included.

Besides--this is April and the election isn't until November. If you get excited about every little fluctuation between now and then you'll be psychotic before June. Get over yourself.
I trust Gallup's numbers.
All that is going to happen is Bush's lead grow and grow when the "secret Saudi oil deal" makes the gas prices go down.
Bush has taken out his sword. He just hasn't fallen on it yet. Give him time.

If anything, one might argue that considering the huge amount of money Bush has poured into advertising--$40 million in the last two months--the fact that he's only held steady ought to be bothersome, but I still think that it's too early to make any sort of judgments. And for a little prespective on that spending--Kerry's spent about $12 million in the same time frame, and that includes the last week or two of the primaries when he still had challengers.
Actually, Kerry and the 527's have spent $96 million so far and Bush has spent $50 million so far. Granted Kerry did spend some of the money trying to secure the Dem. nomination, but Kerry's spending far outweighs the Bush.Linking Kerry and the 527s is crap--the two groups are prohibited from coordinating for one thing, and secondly, how much of that 527 money dates back to the primary season? Also, what about 527s like the Club for Growth who have spent money backing Bush? Is their money included in the $50 million figure? Compare apples to apples at the very least--I did. I compared the money spent by both campaigns over the same period--no outside groups--and the net result seems to be a wash. You ought to be glad--with all the hits Bush has taken over Iraq in the last month, he ought to be down in the 30s by now. Spending that money might be the only reason he's still in the race.

the way the 527's, especially moveon.org have attacked Bush is just mudslinging.

I hate Moby. I hope Eminem kicks his ass.

The way the 527's can campaign against a canidate and not have to disclose their donor names and amounts is something that needs to be changed before the 2008 election, or Moveon.org and Moby's friends will be doing the same to attack the republican canidate for Ms. Clinton

the way the 527's, especially moveon.org have attacked Bush is just mudslinging.

I hate Moby. I hope Eminem kicks his ass.

The way the 527's can campaign against a canidate and not have to disclose their donor names and amounts is something that needs to be changed before the 2008 election, or Moveon.org and Moby's friends will be doing the same to attack the republican canidate for Ms. ClintonIt's not mud if it's true.

Come back when you've turned into a real beer. :lol:

Which is amusing since election patterns show that the higher educated tend to vote Democrat more often.

True, but false. The very highest educated, like the top 5% tend to be liberal, but considering that's made mostly of college professors, we already knew that. The rest tend to be conservative, thankfully. In reality, when people are young and ignorant as to the real world, they are idealistic and liberal, when they see what the world is really like (and have to work for their money) they go conservative.

Personally, I love Bush because...
1. He's more worried about the protection of our nation than petty politics, unlike John Kerry.
2. He believes that those who work hard shouldn't be punished for it.True but false also. Libs tend to be higher educated on average. Conservative voters also include quite a bit of the lowest educated americans which hurts their average. So basically the idealistic highest educated and intelectual are Liberal, while the educated rich and those who they can dupe comprise the Conservatives.

Personally, I hate Bush because....
1. He's more worried about lining his pockets and those of his cronies than the lives of Americans
2. He believes that the rich should get richer and the average american should help them do it.

I want Bush to win... my two main reasons for liking him are:

1. I like tax cuts (unlike Kerry, raising taxes over 300 times)

Current US Debt: 04/16/2004 $7,154,523,400,391.22
US Debt: 09/29/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86
US Debt Increase: $1,480,345,190,504.36 (3.5 Years of Bush)

That is an increase in US Debt of $5,104.63 for EVERY man, woman, and child in US (290,000,000) for the past 3 ½ years!! Enjoy your tax cut. :shock:


2. I like the way he is handling the war on terror.
The war on terror took a back seat to the illegal war on Iraq, which is going to add Billions onto that ever increasing debt. I wonder if the US will be able to seek bankruptcy protection?

http://www.opendemocracy.net/debates/article-3-77-1463.jsp#

On a global level, there is $100 trillion of debt outstanding, but only $33 trillion of income with which to repay those debts. Even the drastic recent stock market falls have barely dented the credit superstructure. When this credit bubble bursts in the United States and Britain, it will be middle-class consumers that will first bear the brunt of the financial crash.

the way the 527's, especially moveon.org have attacked Bush is just mudslinging.

I hate Moby. I hope Eminem kicks his ass.

The way the 527's can campaign against a canidate and not have to disclose their donor names and amounts is something that needs to be changed before the 2008 election, or Moveon.org and Moby's friends will be doing the same to attack the republican canidate for Ms. Clinton
I saw this and decided to get off on a rant about Moveon.org

Moveon.org was supposedly founded by Moby's shitty music making ass to encourage Americans to "move on" from the Monica/Clinton thing, but then moveon.org would never "move on" from the final, official Florida recount, now they appear to have lost the ability to "move on" from the Bush/Iraq deal.

I guess Moveon.org picks what issues they want Americans to "move on" from.

"...and Moby/ you could get stomped by Obie/ you 36 year old bald headed fag, blow me/ you don't know me but you won't let go/ it's over/ nobody listens to techno/". - Eminem

With the "Anybody but Bush" mentality of the average player, on this game, I predict your poll will end in at least a two to one margin in Kerry's favor. At least in the real world there are a lot more intelligent people, who will actually be doing the voting, and the outcome will be the inverse.

STOP CALLING PEOPLE WHO DON"T LIKE BUSH UNINTELLIGENT! ! ! ! ! !

It's just rude, I think Bush is a dumba**e moron and people who support him are dumb as hell, just eyed ultra nationalist who swallow hook, line and sinker whatever the media tells them.

But hey, that's just my opinion, may or may not be the truth. SO I DON"T GO AROUND ACTING LIKE IT IS!

Stop equating support for a particular presidental canidate with intelligence, it's groundless.

STOP CALLING PEOPLE "DUMB" FOR NOT SUPPORTING THE MOST UNINTELLIGENT US PRESIDENT IN HISTORY.

I CAN'T TAKE YOUR CONDENSENDING TONE ANYMORE, YOU DO IT ALL THE TIME ! ! ! ! !

BTW - This wasn't meant to be offensive, that line at the start was just letting Jay W know what I think.

(had to get that out of my system, it was just pissing me off too much, I'll allow you to get back to your usual conversation)

the way the 527's, especially moveon.org have attacked Bush is just mudslinging.

I hate Moby. I hope Eminem kicks his ass.

The way the 527's can campaign against a canidate and not have to disclose their donor names and amounts is something that needs to be changed before the 2008 election, or Moveon.org and Moby's friends will be doing the same to attack the republican canidate for Ms. Clinton
Are Republicans afraid of a level playing field?

Don't sweat it YWHNB--compared to the post above yours, your rant was positively poetic.

the way the 527's, especially moveon.org have attacked Bush is just mudslinging.

I hate Moby. I hope Eminem kicks his ass.

The way the 527's can campaign against a canidate and not have to disclose their donor names and amounts is something that needs to be changed before the 2008 election, or Moveon.org and Moby's friends will be doing the same to attack the republican canidate for Ms. Clinton
Are Republicans afraid of a level playing field?
I'm not, bring down Moveon.org and the rest of the 527's and the field will be level.

Why shouldn't private lobby groups attack candidates? People are still free to vote as they choose- my saying "BUSH IS A MORON" doesn't force anyone to vote for John Kerry, does it? I thought 'freedom of speech' was one of the things Constitutionalists usually got all hot and bothered about. It's never more important than at election time.
Voters are not property. You have no right whatsoever to be annoyed at another faction for using tactics you disagree with to 'steal' your side's floating voters, unless the tactics themselves are dangerous (playing to extremism, for instance, or militarism).

Don't sweat it YWHNB--compared to the post above yours, your rant was positively poetic.

A poetic rant, something I've been aiming for all these years. I know weren't saying it was, but it was still nice to to have the word 'rant' in the same sentance as 'poetic'.

Ever heard of Bill Hicks 'Rant in E minor'? Damn good title

Why shouldn't private lobby groups attack candidates? People are still free to vote as they choose- my saying "BUSH IS A MORON" doesn't force anyone to vote for John Kerry, does it? I thought 'freedom of speech' was one of the things Constitutionalists usually got all hot and bothered about. It's never more important than at election time.
Voters are not property. You have no right whatsoever to be annoyed at another faction for using tactics you disagree with to 'steal' your side's floating voters, unless the tactics themselves are dangerous (playing to extremism, for instance, or militarism).
okay, then don't bitch about it when the oil, perscription drug, gun, tobacco, or automobile lobbys donate to help the Bush campaign

Kucinich. Covert foreign intervention won't change with Kerry, but I do think he is a better choice than Bush. At least Kerry will act like he cares about his own country by improving social programs, but I still can't justify voting for him. I vote for the abolishment of the two party system and a real democracy.

Why shouldn't private lobby groups attack candidates? People are still free to vote as they choose- my saying "BUSH IS A MORON" doesn't force anyone to vote for John Kerry, does it?
in the two party system that we have here in the USA, yes it does. If you convince a voter that a certian canidate is evil or dumb to hold an office, you just took a potential vote away that "moron" and gave it to the other guy.

the way the 527's, especially moveon.org have attacked Bush is just mudslinging.

I hate Moby. I hope Eminem kicks his ass.

The way the 527's can campaign against a canidate and not have to disclose their donor names and amounts is something that needs to be changed before the 2008 election, or Moveon.org and Moby's friends will be doing the same to attack the republican canidate for Ms. Clinton
Are Republicans afraid of a level playing field?
I'm not, bring down Moveon.org and the rest of the 527's and the field will be level.
Doesn't George Bush have far more money then everyone else combined? If so, then it wouldn't be a level playing field?

Doesn't George Bush have far more money then everyone else combined? If so, then it wouldn't be a level playing field?
as in personal money or donations?

Doesn't George Bush have far more money then everyone else combined? If so, then it wouldn't be a level playing field?
as in personal money or donations?
Bush has like 3 times as much personal donations as compared to Kerry? If so, then the Democrats require "soft money" to stay in the ball game?

Doesn't George Bush have far more money then everyone else combined? If so, then it wouldn't be a level playing field?
as in personal money or donations?
Bush has like 3 times as much personal donations as compared to Kerry? If so, then the Democrats require "soft money" to stay in the ball game?
counting the soft money, Kerry's doations are 90 something million, Bush's donations only total somewhere around 50 million.

i would say Kerry is staying in the ball game when it comes to donations.

Why shouldn't private lobby groups attack candidates? People are still free to vote as they choose- my saying "BUSH IS A MORON" doesn't force anyone to vote for John Kerry, does it?
in the two party system that we have here in the USA, yes it does. If you convince a voter that a certian canidate is evil or dumb to hold an office, you just took a potential vote away that "moron" and gave it to the other guy.
Only if the other guy/gal agrees that Bush is indeed a "moron". Ahhh democracy and freedom of speech.

Alright, a very personal opinion here. First off, I'm from Continental Europe, so my views of what's going on in the USA come filtered through media or come directly from my Democratic-minded friends, so maybe I'm a bit out of Bush's glory, but from the cold hard facts I can deduce the following:

1. Mr. Bush should be sent back to grade school, because he obviously doesn't have the faintest grasp of grammar most of the time, and in general seems to have trouble understanding spoken or written English.

2. Mr. Kerry can speak several languages, which from a European's point of view is commonplace, but from what I've heard from my friends is rather rare in the States. I think of it as a sign of interest in the global community.

3. During the 3.5 years that Mr. Bush has been the president, USA has engaged in international violations of the human rights and the UN agreements (guess, BTW, whish country hasn't paid its UN membership fees in the last, say, twenty years?). The resulting alienation of other countries is something that will be _very_ difficult to mend in the coming years and I seriously doubt that Mr. Bush and his administration have the capacity to tackle the problem.

4. Someone mentioned gasoline becoming cheaper and thus favoring Mr. Bush - so you admit that USA attacked Iraq only for the oil? Because that is what the global opinion is quickly turning into. And the gas can only become cheaper if the production ever gets underway, which it won't, thanks to the ever-escalating hostilities in the area.

5. Iraq is becoming "Vietnam 2" to USA, and Mr. Kerry _was_ in Vietnam, while Mr. Bush had a desk job somewhere safe. Perhaps Mr. Kerry would understand how to cut losses and withdraw from Iraq without completely losing face, since that seems to be so important to USA.

Thanks you for paying attention.
Any personal flamers, please address them to joelceda@cc.jyu.fi to avoid crowding NationStates Forum.

Doesn't George Bush have far more money then everyone else combined? If so, then it wouldn't be a level playing field?
as in personal money or donations?
Bush has like 3 times as much personal donations as compared to Kerry? If so, then the Democrats require "soft money" to stay in the ball game?
counting the soft money, Kerry's doations are 90 something million, Bush's donations only total somewhere around 50 million.

i would say Kerry is staying in the ball game when it comes to donations.
Bush Raises $170 Million; Kerry's Donations Surge (Update2)

March 26 (Bloomberg) -- President George W. Bush passed his goal of raising a record $170 million for his re-election campaign, while challenger John Kerry raised more money in one month than any Democratic candidate in history.


Kerry, a 60-year-old U.S. senator from Massachusetts, has increased his fund-raising total by half to at least $61 million in the three weeks following the March 3 withdrawal of his last main rival, North Carolina Senator John Edwards.

Yup----some level playing field. Almost 3 times as much money for Bush.

And Bush is spending it three times as fast right now too--he's spent $40 million in the last couple of months while Kerry has spent $12 million. And the 527 groups haven't even really kicked in with their spending yet either.

This could be the first time in a long time that the Democrats are in the ballpark with the Republicans in the money race--we'll still get outspent, but at least it won't be 4 to 1 like it usually is.

And if you think about that--the Democrats usually get outspent 3 or 4 to 1 and yet we still win roughly half the elections in this country. Could our success while being outgunned so badly possibly be because we have better ideas? :lol: Hmmm? Maybe?

Why shouldn't private lobby groups attack candidates? People are still free to vote as they choose- my saying "BUSH IS A MORON" doesn't force anyone to vote for John Kerry, does it? I thought 'freedom of speech' was one of the things Constitutionalists usually got all hot and bothered about. It's never more important than at election time.
Voters are not property. You have no right whatsoever to be annoyed at another faction for using tactics you disagree with to 'steal' your side's floating voters, unless the tactics themselves are dangerous (playing to extremism, for instance, or militarism).

I think you misunderstood my post, unfortunately mud-slinging is part of politics (seems to more so in US politics, from what my media tells me anyway) and I wasn't commenting on that. Personally, I think that straying from policies is detrimental to a healthy democracy but that's another issue.

I was commenting on how Jay W and other conservatives (not all, but allot) start calling people 'stupid' and 'unintelligent' if they don't support their views and opinions on Bush. I have seen Jay W do it heaps of times on other threads and it just annoys the hell out of me, I just couldn't take it anymore with the condescending tone ect. He also effectively called anyone who doesn’t get a chance to vote in the US elections 'unintelligent', which also happens to be most of the worlds population (the majority of whom don't like Bush at all, even conservatives here don't like)

Please, re-read my post, you'll get what I meant by it