NationStates Jolt Archive

I want to campaign for Kerry, and I'd like to do it in a state that would actually make a difference, IE: a swing state, thats large enough to have a major impact on the election.

I looked at Ohio, which seemed both large enough and close-fought enough to be perfect, but then I've seen some other polls which has Ohio for Bush by quite a few points, outside the margin.

So, anyone with any ideas (and ideally some data to back it up) would be very welcome to make a suggestion here.

Ohio would be great. The stigma is, republicans who don't win Ohio, don't win the election. Take Ohio from Bush, and if things go as planned then the US will be a better place for those of us making < 1 million a year.

Hello again, Spoffin. Back from my summer internship, hehehe.

Personally, I will be rooting for George Bush. Think about his record so far - he has driven up a huge budget deficit, discredited the US before the whole world, including making it a laughing stock in the West, made countless Americans feel less safe and secure about their future, and begun dismantling the freedoms that they have so far enjoyed. If Kerry wins, something might be done about all this. But a second Bush presidency would ensure this damage becomes irreversible. Is improvement in US credibility and strength really something you would like to see?

I will be hoping Bush wins the election, because that will ensure the decline continues.

[/hijack]

ya ya but ohio sucks
you should go someplace worth going to at the same time you are campaigning for kerry
even the small states count this year
maine, new mexico, oregon?....arizona??
they are all well worth visiting at the same time as you campaign.

Hello again, Spoffin. Back from my summer internship, hehehe.

Personally, I will be rooting for George Bush. Think about his record so far - he has driven up a huge budget deficit, discredited the US before the whole world, including making it a laughing stock in the West, made countless Americans feel less safe and secure about their future, and begun dismantling the freedoms that they have so far enjoyed. If Kerry wins, something might be done about all this. But a second Bush presidency would ensure this damage becomes irreversible. Is improvement in US credibility and strength really something you would like to see?

I will be hoping Bush wins the election, because that will ensure the decline continues.

[/hijack]Hey, welcome back

I understand everything you're saying, and respect you for your views, but I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree

Its great to see you again btw.

Virginia is a good state.

bump

bump

Yes, come to Ohio. Too many of my fellow states-men are undecided.

I want to campaign for Kerry, and I'd like to do it in a state that would actually make a difference, IE: a swing state, thats large enough to have a major impact on the election.

I looked at Ohio, which seemed both large enough and close-fought enough to be perfect, but then I've seen some other polls which has Ohio for Bush by quite a few points, outside the margin.

So, anyone with any ideas (and ideally some data to back it up) would be very welcome to make a suggestion here.
Minnesota is a battle ground state, even though it has a history of going to Democrats...why do you think Bush and Kerry would be visiting Minnesota at all, unless they were important to the election? it's not like much of anything actually happens there. i would know, i was a Minnesotan for many many years.

Minneapolis is actually a really cool place to live, too, so you could have some fun whilst on the campaign trail.

how are you planning on supporting yourself while you are here? would you be wanting to stay with a family? what would you do about a car?
you cant do ANYTHING in the US without a car

Go to Colorado.

It is considered a Republican state, but it has been a dead heat between Bush and Kerry for months. The last poll I know of had them tied at 47% each. The Democratic senate candidate, Ken Salazar is ahead of the Republican, Pete Coors by almost double digits. It would only take a little push to get this state over the edge and go for Kerry.

:sniper: what I think of terrorists
:headbang: what I think of Bush's terrorism "plan"

No one has mentioned Pennsylvania?

i would suggest pennsylvania, but i do like the colorado idea :)

No one has mentioned Pennsylvania?
you beat me to it! ;)

A good place for rally for Kerry would be France where the rest of the corrupt politicians are HAHAHA. Kerry is the most liberal democrat on the planet, military speaking on his voting record if we had his way Africa would have better military technology then us. Kerry couldnt defend a trash can from a thief looking for credit card numbers much less the united states.

Not to mention he's a traitor, damn right he's a traitor, when you fight in a war, come back and condemn every soldier who showed as much bravery as yourself, calling them rapists, pillagers, and genocidal war criminals, you betray those that protected your sorry ass, cuz if he went to that war alone he wouldnt survive without those "genocidal war criminals" watching his back.

Kerry is good at foreign policy because he has a trait Bush doesnt have, Kerry has the ability to lie, but unlike Clinton, Kerry doesnt have the ability to cover it up or get away with it. What really ticks me off is his absolute arrogance, his entire campaign revolves around him waving his purple hearts around and proclaiming he's a war hero, he aint no war hero, he's a sham. A hero doesnt have to brag about being a hero, a "real hero" is a man that is respected by his peers, a man that the soldiers that fought alongside him say he's a hero. I dont see that, as a matter of fact i see the same men that fought next to him saying the exact opposite, Kerry aint no hero, he just wishes he was one.

If Kerry gets elected, he wont be running the country, he'll be a figurehead, a image of leadership while others run in the background, i see that by watching his campaign trail, the man couldnt make up his mind on a topic even if they gave him only one option. He changes his position on everything, and militarily speaking if Kerry is commander in chief are military will be a joke, a laughing stock of the world like it was under Clintons administration.

Under Clinton, we went to five different wars, Bosnia, Kosovo, Somalia, Iraq, and Uzbekistan. In Somalia, we watched our brave deceased soldiers get dragged through the streets of Mogadishu, their bodies mutalated and instead of Clinton going to bring the guilty to justice and avenge our troops, he pulls us back with our tail inbetween our legs like cowards. Iraq was the biggest waste of money on the freakin planet, the war didnt even last a week, we wasted billions of dollars in weapons firing into iraq then we went home and WE GOT NOTHING ACCOMPLISHED! Bosnia, we lost hundreds of soldiers and because Clinton's ego was taking a hit he sent us home, same in Kosovo and Uzbekistan. Kerry is the same way as Clinton.

Bush may have made some mistakes during wartime, hello, nothing ever goes to plan, thats why when your in the military they train you to "improvise", but past the mistakes at least we are getting something done. The Taliban is on its knee's, only thing Hussein is ruling is the occassional rat that crawls into his jail cell.

Some things just dont look pretty, but take into account that iraqi people with the rest of the islamic world are brainwashed in their schools, their history books to hate us, they are brainwashed to believe we are evil, and beyond all the brainwashing and corruption, the new generation and non corrupted iraqi's are glad we are there and thats why they are eager to rush and join the new iraqi police force.

Only thing Kerry can do in his campaign is A) cause dissent among the US, lowering our morale and making us lose support for our troops B) kiss the United Nations corrupted ass, you want our country to be the panzy ass-kisser of the world, vote for Kerry, want us to be all we can be, fight for justice and keep the terrorism away from us, Bush is the way to go, cuz if they are to busy dying on the other side of the ocean, those genocial psychopaths dont have the time to blow us up over here.

Colorado is probably a good idea, as is Ohio and perhaps Pennsylvania (although I'm far more sanguine about Kerry's chances there) but for now, my call is Florida. It's got the biggest electoral prize, and it's certain to be hotly contested no matter what the polls say. And besides, it's Florida--bikinis and rummy drinks with umbrellas. What's better than that?

As a random statement to a certain poster on this thread, you'll get a lot more people to listen to you if you use more paragraph breaks and less coarse language. *cough*

I will be hoping Bush wins the election, because that will ensure the decline continues.Pffft, we love you too, TG. :p

I'll keep that in mind heh, but im military and was raised in downtown LA, *shrugs* language wasnt a factor in either category, i'll consider the paragraph bit though. Hmmm.....using my articulate speech pattern...hmm..eh worth a shot.

Ohio would be great.

you beat me to it! ;)




Hehe, maybe I should start up a pro-Nader campaign here. Wouldn't that be fun? I think it would be hilarious if Nader actually won a state. And PA would be even better since its got all of these precious electoral votes.. Could be just enough to throw the Electoral College into disarray ;)

There's your paragraphs....not gonna change my wording though, im just using what my vietnam veteran grandpa calls Kerry.

There's your paragraphs....not gonna change my wording though, im just using what my vietnam veteran grandpa calls Kerry.
Nothing personal, but maybe you ought to try thinking for yourself instead of listening to your grandpa. Older does not necessarily equal wiser.

I am thinking for myself, but i do listen to my grandfather's aspect of Kerry, its called be open-minded. Personally, i dont like Kerry for calling brave soldiers like my grandfather a genocidal, pillaging, rapists, which he did because during his speech he was speaking in a general sense and not pointing the finger at any particular person.

My grandfather has a purple heart, damn he only has one arm and third degree burns over half his body, Kerry got three purple hearts....where's his wounds? where's his wheelchair? his wooden leg? he seems to have both arms or thats the best cybernetic implant ive ever seen, oh wait, we dont have that technology yet. Where's his "severe" wounds that got him three purple hearts where soldiers like my grandfather havent been able to walk for the past 30 years.

You see him prancy around in front of the media talking about his great exploits while he puts every other soldier down, degrading their bravery with slander and proclamations that they committed terrible war crimes. You dont see soldiers like my grandfather prancing around and waving their medals do you?

As a supporter of all military personnel, Kerry will always be a traitor in my eyes. You dont sell out the very men that fought and protected you for personal glory no matter the circumstances.

Maybe you ought to read what Kerry actually fucking said then--he didn't accuse your granddad, and he didn't accuse all Vietnam soldiers, despite what the RNC and all the right-wing attack monkeys have said. He repeated what other people had told him--that's all. So stop acting like you're open-minded until you've actually read what the man had to say.

Kerry referred to army as a resemblence of Ghengis Khan, if you knew history, you would know Ghengis Khan was by far one of the worst invaders, rapists, pillagers, the most horrid of war crimes that we have laws against these days. He described the mutalation of vietnam prisoners that our soldiers committed. Did he blame a specific person or did he blame the US army "in general" cuz i didnt hear him name off any names.

Kerry stated before a Congressional Committee that he had seen AND personally participated in atrocities. This is a matter of public record and was filmed. He said that these atrocities were comitted "daily."

One of two conclusions must be reached about this:

1. Either John Kerry lied about what he had done in Vietnam, or ...

2. He should be prosecuted for war crimes.

I want to campaign for Kerry, and I'd like to do it in a state that would actually make a difference, IE: a swing state, thats large enough to have a major impact on the election.

I looked at Ohio, which seemed both large enough and close-fought enough to be perfect, but then I've seen some other polls which has Ohio for Bush by quite a few points, outside the margin.

So, anyone with any ideas (and ideally some data to back it up) would be very welcome to make a suggestion here.

Well if you really want to campaign for John Kerry...you could go to a swing state and start asking folks if they've seen John Edwards. I mean honestly now until the papers pointed out that he's MIA I didnt even notice myself. I think Edwards face offically belongs on the side of a milk carton now.

There's your paragraphs....not gonna change my wording though, im just using what my vietnam veteran grandpa calls Kerry.
Well, it is an improvement. ;)

And meh, I had an uncle die in Vietnam. Not in combat or anything "worthy" like that, he caught some disease over there that they couldn't treat effectively. I mean yeah... that was terrible... but it doesn't mean Kerry's service over there is any less "worthy" because others had worse times of it.

Kerry stated before a Congressional Committee that he had seen AND personally participated in atrocities. This is a matter of public record and was filmed. He said that these atrocities were comitted "daily."

One of two conclusions must be reached about this:

1. Either John Kerry lied about what he had done in Vietnam, or ...

2. He should be prosecuted for war crimes.

Check your facts bud, the quote is that "I met with a group of veterans in Detroit who told stories they had personally seen..."


I would like to talk, representing all those veterans, and say that several months ago in Detroit, we had an investigation at which over 150 honorably discharged and many very highly decorated veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia, not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command.

It is impossible to describe to you exactly what did happen in Detroit, the emotions in the room, the feelings of the men who were reliving their experiences in Vietnam, but they did. They relived the absolute horror of what this country, in a sense, made them do.

They told the stories at times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, tape wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the country side of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war, and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country....

Hickdumb: The fact is, some of our troop did do these things, it has nothing to do with the honest ones. And military policy was to blame for letting it happen, the rules too Vietnam we're ridiculas at times. John Kerry's problem was with policy, so he took it up with policy-makers.

His service in vietnam is not what im talking about, im sure he fought admirably, this is what i dont like. He gloats, he brags about his medals and his exploits, while at the same time he slandered fellow veterans and calls them war criminals? Resemblence of the Ghengis Khan army? He goes around and tries to make himself look good while putting down others that fought just as hard as he did if not harder, thats traitorous to a fellow soldier, thats selling him out for personal gain. The vietnam war was very unpopular with americans, thats a known fact, so what does Kerry do? He comes back and appeals to the masses by slandering the war and the soldiers fighting it to gain political power and popularity.

Why else would he do such a thing? He's a traitor and always will be and he sure as hell wont be my president. He gets elected im packing my bags and moving to mexico, i'll be safer from terrorists there.

That's the thing, Hickdumb--no matter how much you'd like to make it slander, it wasn't. US troops did all the things he described--maybe not your granddad, maybe not most of the troops, but US troops did do all the things he described. It was indeed atrocious, and all the excuse making in the world won't change that.

If you don't want to believe it, I suppose that's your right. If you don't want to vote for John Kerry, that's certainly your right. But don't think for one second that we're not going to exercise our rights to free expression to correct your misconceptions and mischaracterizations of Kerry's record and statements.

Why else would he do such a thing? He's a traitor and always will be and he sure as hell wont be my president. He gets elected im packing my bags and moving to mexico, i'll be safer from terrorists there.Yeah well, I'm moving to France if Bush gets a second term.

Yeah well, I'm moving to France if Bush gets a second term.
I'm leaning toward Canada. Maybe some banana republic in the Carribbean or even New Zealand.

Kerry came back to fight to get all of his brothers out of a situation that was unfair, against what either side (blind support for troops or bring our troops home regardless the consequences) wanted. That's it.

I'm leaning toward Canada. Maybe some banana republic in the Carribbean or even New Zealand.

Even Russia looks good at this point! :D

I want to campaign for Kerry, and I'd like to do it in a state that would actually make a difference, IE: a swing state, thats large enough to have a major impact on the election.

I looked at Ohio, which seemed both large enough and close-fought enough to be perfect, but then I've seen some other polls which has Ohio for Bush by quite a few points, outside the margin.

So, anyone with any ideas (and ideally some data to back it up) would be very welcome to make a suggestion here.


I'd recommend Missouri. The cities of St. Louis and Kansas City will vote Kerry, but the county is full of Bush supporters. Four years ago, many blacks from poor communities were disenfranchised, in part because of efforts by Republican Senator Kit Bond, so that they could not go to the polls and vote for Gore. These people who were not allowed into the polls cost Gore the election. If they get to the polls this time, Kerry may just have a chance of winning Missouri.

Even Russia looks good at this point! :DI wouldn't go that far--Putin is looking increasingly Stalin-esque every day.

Don't let the door hit your collective asses on the way out! :)

Don't let the door hit your collective asses on the way out! :)
Oh--we don't plan on leaving. We plan on winning.

Oh--we don't plan on leaving. We plan on winning.

Didn't Dean say that too? :)

See, your wrong at this point. It may have been a fact that Kerry was merely representing the minority of soldiers that were against the war. It may have started that he was pointing out the atrocities of a few. But he didnt end that way.

His own personal bias on the situation changed the entire speech into a slanderfest. When you say that the US Armed Forces in Vietnam resemble a force of Ghengis Khan, you are slandering the entire US Armed Forces. His own bias made his speech slanderous and when you make accusations like that, you are a traitor because you do nothing but help the enemy by undermining the country you fight for at home.

Furthermore, he has admitted to committing atrocities himself on public television, on talk shows, this not only makes him a traitor, but it also makes him a hypocrit. He claims he committed atrocities, then he betrays fellow soldiers by selling them out and then has the nerve to prance around waving his medals and calling himself a hero AFTER claiming he committed acts of mass genocide! You gotta be freakin kidding me!

Bush gets a second term, you guys could move to France, Russia, Spain, whatever, i know i'll be safe here in the US. Its been three years since we've been hit, hell just a couple weeks ago Russia got the beating of their lives and now their policy resembles that of the United States. "Fighting terrorism abroad" seems the only way the world will learn is the hard way. Seems Russia, France and Germany got to wait until terrorism hits them hard before the rude awakening strikes.

Kerry wanted to cut intelligence spending, the same intelligence that keeps terrorists from landing planes on your porch. He's voted against every major weapon system we've developed since 1972. He wants to arm us with yesterday's technology, hand me down weapons, if you think our army is taking hits in iraq now, think what would happen if we had Kerry's way, no body armor for our troops, less funding for our troops, hand me down weapons and technology. We dominate militarily over any country, if we had Kerry's way, common everyday terrorists would be better armed then us, and how efficient can we be then? How can we protect ourselves when we are armed with M-1 Garand rifles from WWII while the common terrorist is armed with fully automatic weapons? You all better start waking up and realize that everything he proclaims now on his campaign contradicts EVERYTHING he stands for in the past. People dont change, John Kerry is no exception. He's a crowd pleaser and a liar, a bad one at that.

See, your wrong at this point. It may have been a fact that Kerry was merely representing the minority of soldiers that were against the war. It may have started that he was pointing out the atrocities of a few. But he didnt end that way.

His own personal bias on the situation changed the entire speech into a slanderfest. When you say that the US Armed Forces in Vietnam resemble a force of Ghengis Khan, you are slandering the entire US Armed Forces. His own bias made his speech slanderous and when you make accusations like that, you are a traitor because you do nothing but help the enemy by undermining the country you fight for at home.

Furthermore, he has admitted to committing atrocities himself on public television, on talk shows, this not only makes him a traitor, but it also makes him a hypocrit. He claims he committed atrocities, then he betrays fellow soldiers by selling them out and then has the nerve to prance around waving his medals and calling himself a hero AFTER claiming he committed acts of mass genocide! You gotta be freakin kidding me!

Bush gets a second term, you guys could move to France, Russia, Spain, whatever, i know i'll be safe here in the US. Its been three years since we've been hit, hell just a couple weeks ago Russia got the beating of their lives and now their policy resembles that of the United States. "Fighting terrorism abroad" seems the only way the world will learn is the hard way. Seems Russia, France and Germany got to wait until terrorism hits them hard before the rude awakening strikes.

Kerry wanted to cut intelligence spending, the same intelligence that keeps terrorists from landing planes on your porch. He's voted against every major weapon system we've developed since 1972. He wants to arm us with yesterday's technology, hand me down weapons, if you think our army is taking hits in iraq now, think what would happen if we had Kerry's way, no body armor for our troops, less funding for our troops, hand me down weapons and technology. We dominate militarily over any country, if we had Kerry's way, common everyday terrorists would be better armed then us, and how efficient can we be then? How can we protect ourselves when we are armed with M-1 Garand rifles from WWII while the common terrorist is armed with fully automatic weapons? You all better start waking up and realize that everything he proclaims now on his campaign contradicts EVERYTHING he stands for in the past. People dont change, John Kerry is no exception. He's a crowd pleaser and a liar, a bad one at that.
Blah blah blah--right wing talking points. It's all crap, and you obviously don't give enough of a shit to actually read the testimony yourself and see what Kerry actually said. Welcome to the ignore list. Come back when you actually want to have a serious discussion.

I've been trying to find a copy of the New American Soldier (by Jean Francois Kerry himself) but it's exceedingly difficult to locate. From the excerpts and quotes I've run into Kerry definitely sounds like he is accusing the entire American armed forces of genocide, and many members of the VVAW turned out to be total frauds.

Until Kerry admits he lied under oath, I will not even consider voting for him.

Funny how 256 Swift boat veterans that fought alongside him in the same freakin unit seem to disagree with you and not me. Why ignore me? Cant handle a simple debate or did you just get cornered and now backing off to save face? My political views are right wirng yours are hard left and you cant handle a simple debate? Dont dabble in politics if you cant handle a debate.

Funny how 256 Swift boat veterans that fought alongside him in the same freakin unit seem to disagree with you and not me. Why ignore me? Cant handle a simple debate or did you just get cornered and now backing off to save face? My political views are right wirng yours are hard left and you cant handle a simple debate? Dont dabble in politics if you cant handle a debate.A debate requires an exchange of ideas. I've shot holes in your points more than once and you've blithely ignored them. I've pointed out where you've misquoted Kerry or taken him out of context and you refuse to even address it. That's not debate. That's useless. When you're ready to debate, then we'll talk. Until then, don't expect anything.

Alright, i'll make it simple, you seem to be well informed on his speech, so whatever you believe i misinterpreted, pull up his speech and quote the paragraph related on that subject. Seems you know it well enough to do that for me, so im giving you the shot, cuz so far you've given me no evidence to prove im wrong and i got Swift Boat veterans saying your wrong, so here's my idea for you to prove me wrong, im giving you the bullet, question is can you find the gun? What's your defense for Kerry going on national television and talks shows and claiming he himself committed acts of mass genocide and war crimes? What's your defense of his liberal anti-weapon voting record? His intelligence spending cuts? Prove to me how he can be a defender of peace, and a Commander of this country? What are his qualifications? Whats his plan? Fill me in please cuz his flip-flopping has got me all confused.

Alright, i'll make it simple, you seem to be well informed on his speech, so whatever you believe i misinterpreted, pull up his speech and quote the paragraph related on that subject. Seems you know it well enough to do that for me, so im giving you the shot, cuz so far you've given me no evidence to prove im wrong and i got Swift Boat veterans saying your wrong, so here's my idea for you to prove me wrong, im giving you the bullet, question is can you find the gun? What's your defense for Kerry going on national television and talks shows and claiming he himself committed acts of mass genocide and war crimes? What's your defense of his liberal anti-weapon voting record? His intelligence spending cuts? Prove to me how he can be a defender of peace, and a Commander of this country? What are his qualifications? Whats his plan? Fill me in please cuz his flip-flopping has got me all confused.Here's the link to his Senate testimony (http://www.richmond.edu/~ebolt/history398/JohnKerryTestimony.html). Read it yourself.

As to the Swifties, well, so far every one of their charges about Kerry's action in Vietnam has been debunked--every one of them--by official records and by the fact that many of the people making the charges did not actually serve with Kerry personally. The war crimes statement is fully explained when you read the entire statement--but you have to read the whole thing to see what he was talking about.

His anti-weapon voting record is shared by none other than John McCain, and the cuts were being pushed by then Secretary of Defense Richard Cheney.

As to the rest of it, well, once you've looked at this and admitted that you're misjudged John Kerry's actions and statements, we'll talk--if you're serious. If you're not, then don't bug me.

Im reading this as i go and my point reaches here. He starts off good, talking about his investigation, makes sense its legit. Then he reaches the middle of his speech and you hear things like this:

"We saw first hand how money from American taxes was used for a corrupt dictatorial regime. We saw that many people in this country had a one-sided idea of who was kept free by our flag, as blacks provided the highest percentage of casualties."

"We rationalized destroying villages in order to save them. We saw America lose her sense of morality as she accepted very coolly a My Lai and refused to give up the image of American soldiers who hand out chocolate bars and chewing gum."

"We learned the meaning of free fire zones, shooting anything that moves, and we watched while America placed a cheapness on the lives of orientals."

Does this sound like the work of 150 men? Sounds like a lot more were involved doesnt it? Sounds like he's talking more in a general sense and even attacking our own government.

"Each day to facilitate the process by which the United States washes her hands of Vietnam someone has to give up his life so that the United States doen'st have to admit something that the entire world already knows, so that we can't say they we have made a mistake. Someone has to die so that President Nixon won't be, and these are his words, "the first President to lose a war."

Sounds treasonous to me and you sure as hell cant tell me that that remark isnt said in a general sense.

John McCain's voting record was no where close to as anti-weapon as Kerry, not even close. As for Dick Cheney, he got the picture on that mistake, seems Kerry is still in the twilight zone, he wont even fund our troops.

"i voted for the 87 billion before i voted against it"

What the hell does that mean? Who cares if you voted for it in the beginning, in the end you still voted against it, that was by far the dunbest remark ive ever heard. People get on Bush's case for his speech when Kerry dishing crap like that out. He's a anti-war canidate this month....last month he was a pro-war canidate though wasnt he? Kerry must rock on multiple choice question tests.

A) you are pro-war
B) you are anti-war
C) None of the above
D) whatever the crowd wants you to be doesnt matter if you lie as long as your elected

*picks answer D*

Im reading this as i go and my point reaches here. He starts off good, talking about his investigation, makes sense its legit. Then he reaches the middle of his speech and you hear things like this:

"We saw first hand how money from American taxes was used for a corrupt dictatorial regime. We saw that many people in this country had a one-sided idea of who was kept free by our flag, as blacks provided the highest percentage of casualties."

"We rationalized destroying villages in order to save them. We saw America lose her sense of morality as she accepted very coolly a My Lai and refused to give up the image of American soldiers who hand out chocolate bars and chewing gum."

"We learned the meaning of free fire zones, shooting anything that moves, and we watched while America placed a cheapness on the lives of orientals."

Does this sound like the work of 150 men? Sounds like a lot more were involved doesnt it? Sounds like he's talking more in a general sense and even attacking our own government.
In cases like My Lai, he was certainly talking about limited numbers of people. When he was talking about free-fire zones where civilians were indirectly targeted, he was talking about the orders handed down from above, orders which he complied with and later came to view as acts of atrocity. Is that an attack on the government? Sure--it's a disagreement with an official policy. Isn't that allowed in the United States? It sure is in the part of it I'm from.

"Each day to facilitate the process by which the United States washes her hands of Vietnam someone has to give up his life so that the United States doen'st have to admit something that the entire world already knows, so that we can't say they we have made a mistake. Someone has to die so that President Nixon won't be, and these are his words, "the first President to lose a war."

Sounds treasonous to me and you sure as hell cant tell me that that remark isnt said in a general sense.
I don't know what sounds treasonous to you--it sounds like an indictment of Richard Nixon to me. Nixon expanded the war to supposedly protect the American psyche, even when his advisors were telling him that the war was unwinnable. Johnson was equally guilty of this, and Kerry may have been criticizing him as well, but Nixon was the President at the time, so he took the brunt of it. I don't see what's treasonous in that--if that's treason, then I'm guilty as well, because I think what Bush has done in Iraq is as bad, maybe worse, than what Nixon did in Vietnam. At least Nixon had the excuse that he'd inherited the mess. Bush made this mess all on his own.

John McCain's voting record was no where close to as anti-weapon as Kerry, not even close. As for Dick Cheney, he got the picture on that mistake, seems Kerry is still in the twilight zone, he wont even fund our troops.First things first. All of the criticism of Kerry's military funding comes down to one vote, and on that vote, Kerry voted with McCain and many other Republicans, and Cheney has no right to criticize Kerry for that vote if he's not going to admit to his part in the process as well.

"i voted for the 87 billion before i voted against it"

What the hell does that mean? Who cares if you voted for it in the beginning, in the end you still voted against it, that was by far the dunbest remark ive ever heard. People get on Bush's case for his speech when Kerry dishing crap like that out. This has been explained before, but what the hell--once more won't hurt. Kerry voted for a bill to fund the soldiers--a bill that the Republican Senate killed and that Bush threatened to veto. Tell me again who cares about the troops? Bush would have killed a bill that funded the troops over a set of tax cuts that the Democrats wanted rescinded--that's the story here, not Kerry's eventual vote.

He's a anti-war canidate this month....last month he was a pro-war canidate though wasnt he? Kerry must rock on multiple choice question tests.

A) you are pro-war
B) you are anti-war
C) None of the above
D) whatever the crowd wants you to be doesnt matter if you lie as long as your elected

*picks answer D*
He certainly wasn't a pro-war candidate last month--I'd like to see you back that claim up. Last year he was on the fence about it, but his stance has been pretty solid for the majority of this year, no matter what the right-wingers try to claim otherwise.

Last month, Kerry told the United States that even knowing what we know today, he would of voted to go to war in Iraq. This month he contradicts himself "again" by saying he wouldnt.

So your telling me that Kerry admitted he committed crimes against humanity? Why wasnt he convicted with the other 150 that he sold out? How did he get out of that? Did he receive immunity for selling out the other 150? Did he receive special treatment for being a rich boy? If he claimed he committed crimes against humanity both during his speech and on television and talk shows afterwards why isnt he facing charges for war crimes?

Thats definately a record of a "true hero"

I'm a brit and I find all governments depressing and useless.

They will all promise but never deliver. We vote out one useless party, and vote in a new useless party. The same thing happens in america. Screw politics, it screws up the world anyway. Accept your leader as a corrupt, money grabbing sell-out, and get on with your life.

The oil companies all sponsor you political leaders, then use them like puppets.

Where to campaign for Kerry?

How about somewhere extremely hot? He has about a snowballs chance in hell anyway. ;)

I want to campaign for Kerry, and I'd like to do it in a state that would actually make a difference, IE: a swing state, thats large enough to have a major impact on the election.

I looked at Ohio, which seemed both large enough and close-fought enough to be perfect, but then I've seen some other polls which has Ohio for Bush by quite a few points, outside the margin.

So, anyone with any ideas (and ideally some data to back it up) would be very welcome to make a suggestion here.

I would most definitely suggest Ohio for several reasons:

1. Ohio is perhaps the most important state in the upcoming election.

2. Pennsylvania and West Virginia are bordering Ohio and both are up for grabs as well.

3. Ohio has been hit seriously hard in job losses in the last 4 years and the industrial parts of the state are grumbling for a change.

4. If you move there, you can actually vote there in the upcoming election. Ohio's voting policies are surprisingly lenient in comparison to other states.

5. Good food.

Hey Spoffin, I didn't read the whole thread, but I would suggest to get a hold of the Kerry people. Sign up as a volunteer and they could let you know how best to help.

http://www.johnkerry.com/index.html

Last month, Kerry told the United States that even knowing what we know today, he would of voted to go to war in Iraq. This month he contradicts himself "again" by saying he wouldnt.
Wrong. Kerry said that he would have given the President the authority he did, because it was the stick necessary to get Hussien to open up for inspections. There's a difference between Kerry's statement and saying that he would have gone to war in Iraq.

So your telling me that Kerry admitted he committed crimes against humanity? Why wasnt he convicted with the other 150 that he sold out? How did he get out of that? Did he receive immunity for selling out the other 150? Did he receive special treatment for being a rich boy? If he claimed he committed crimes against humanity both during his speech and on television and talk shows afterwards why isnt he facing charges for war crimes?

Thats definately a record of a "true hero"First off, no one was convicted of anything. What Kerry argued was that the tactics they were directed to use--free fire zones most especially--were to his mind at the time, atrocities. He's since backed off from that statement, by the way, noting that he was young and perhaps overstating the case a bit. And you don't even want to get into the "special treatment for being a rich boy" argument if you're going to defend Bush.

I would most definitely suggest Ohio for several reasons:

1. Ohio is perhaps the most important state in the upcoming election.

2. Pennsylvania and West Virginia are bordering Ohio and both are up for grabs as well.

3. Ohio has been hit seriously hard in job losses in the last 4 years and the industrial parts of the state are grumbling for a change.

4. If you move there, you can actually vote there in the upcoming election. Ohio's voting policies are surprisingly lenient in comparison to other states.

5. Good food.

Bush is up double digits in Ohio.

Bush is up double digits in Ohio.According to who?

Hey lets not forget in 2000 at this point of the election Gore was predicted to win in a landslide. The debates haven't even happened yet, let's not take out our party hats just yet.. ;)

According to who?

Here you go...

polls (http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/news/special_packages/election2004/9721570.htm)

more polls (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/Presidential_04/oh_polls.html)

Hey lets not forget in 2000 at this point of the election Gore was predicted to win in a landslide. The debates haven't even happened yet, let's not take out our party hats just yet.. ;)

The debates will be rather meaningless as there aren't that many undecided voters out there. Most people have picked their candidate already and will stick with them. The only thing about the debates that could be bad is if one of them is really terrible. Most likely Kerry will come out looking too stiff, as he and Gore share the personality of a Weeping Willow.

Here you go...

polls (http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/news/special_packages/election2004/9721570.htm)
Thanks. I went to the website to look at the full report. (http://www.ipr.uc.edu/PDF/OhioPoll/2004_Election_092104.pdf) Bush only has a double digit lead among likely voters, but there's no description of their likely voter model, or of historical turnout trends and party breakdown in the party sampling. Because of that, I tend to lean toward the registered voter numbers, which are still favoring Bush--just not by double digits.

Since you updated, let me update as well. The spread seems to be about where I expected it to be. Rasmussen is probably a bit low and the Ohio Poll and Strategic Visions are probably a bit high. There's no question Bush has a lead--just how big a lead.

The debates will be rather meaningless as there aren't that many undecided voters out there. Most people have picked their candidate already and will stick with them. The only thing about the debates that could be bad is if one of them is really terrible. Most likely Kerry will come out looking too stiff, as he and Gore share the personality of a Weeping Willow.
Wrong on the Daily show ans other junctures and shows he has shown he can be unstiff.
He goes skiing and jet skiing (, i think thats the water one), so he is able to cut loose. He also can ride a motocycle.
Name one thing Gore rode or was on tv with while running?
Bush could look like he is avoiding issues at a debate but we will have to watch to find out.

Wrong on the Daily show ans other junctures and shows he has shown he can be unstiff.
He goes skiing and jet skiing (, i think thats the water one), so he is able to cut loose. He also can ride a motocycle.
Name one thing Gore rode or was on tv with while running?
Bush could look like he is avoiding issues at a debate but we will have to watch to find out.

Come on, comparing a comedy show with a debate is kind of being illogical esp as it seems Stewart likes Kerry a bit more then Bush. He goes skiing but hates it when those SOB SS agents knock him down, he rides his bike and makes fun of Bush for falling off of his, but doesn't thinks it's funny when he falls off his own as John Kerry doesn't fall down. Cutting loose and skiing are two different things my friend. Gore was a robot from the get-go.

Bush has a more likable personality and that goes a long way. As long as Bush doesn't look too obvious when he avoids questions, he'll come out of the debates the winner. All candidates in Presidential debates do avoid questions indirectly, usually drifting away from the topic to some other subject.

If you're referring to Bush's favoritism in the national guard i do hope you have something better then Dan Rather's bullshit story to back that up. Kerry proclaimed he committed crimes against humanity, if i had a choice for a president and i had to choose between a man who lied about not taking a medical exam (which cant be proven but was surely disproven) and a man who openly admits committing atrocities and crimes against humanity, exaggerated or not, i would pick the one with the lesser crime. Guaranteed missing a medical exam is no where near as severe as burning down villages and decapitating Vietnamnese.

I would recommend Ohio. I am here, and many of the polls show Bush with only minor leads here. No Republican has ever won the White House without Ohio. I am convinced that HERE is where George W. Bush can be broken in November.

And Hickdumb, Kerry HIMSELF did not commit war crimes. He testified about them, however.

I want to campaign for Kerry, and I'd like to do it in a state that would actually make a difference,
Try France

Texas!

<snip>
Don't hijack my threads, especially with that kind of BS.

I'd recommend Missouri. The cities of St. Louis and Kansas City will vote Kerry, but the county is full of Bush supporters. Four years ago, many blacks from poor communities were disenfranchised, in part because of efforts by Republican Senator Kit Bond, so that they could not go to the polls and vote for Gore. These people who were not allowed into the polls cost Gore the election. If they get to the polls this time, Kerry may just have a chance of winning Missouri.
My problem is though, will winning Missouri win him the election? It seems to me that, even taking Missouri and a number of the smaller states, he's still gonna be too far behind without at least 2 of Pennsylvania, Florida and Ohio in the bag.

Try France
AHAHAHAHA

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

You're not funny.

Where to campaign for Kerry?
<not gonna repeat this one cos its so bad>
AHAHAHA
<snip>
You're not funny either

My problem is though, will winning Missouri win him the election? It seems to me that, even taking Missouri and a number of the smaller states, he's still gonna be too far behind without at least 2 of Pennsylvania, Florida and Ohio in the bag.
Florida is the biggest prize, and Ohio is the least likely of the three you mentioned. I'll be a bit surprised if Pennsylvania is in play come November 2, to be quite frank. If it is, Kerry's in bad shape, so my efforts would bend toward Florida.

Hey Spoffin, I didn't read the whole thread, but I would suggest to get a hold of the Kerry people. Sign up as a volunteer and they could let you know how best to help.

http://www.johnkerry.com/index.html
Yes, I have looked there, but... well, it doesn't have the best website design. You have to submit info (like what state you want to campaign in) before you can get details about the states, campaign HQs, etc etc.

Florida is the biggest prize, and Ohio is the least likely of the three you mentioned. I'll be a bit surprised if Pennsylvania is in play come November 2, to be quite frank. If it is, Kerry's in bad shape, so my efforts would bend toward Florida.
Florida is the one I'm least keen on, heat and hurricanes not appealing to my British-climate adjusted body. I also expect dirty tricks to be going on down there. But I might just go for it anyway.

Florida is the one I'm least keen on, heat and hurricanes not appealing to my British-climate adjusted body. I also expect dirty tricks to be going on down there. But I might just go for it anyway.
Ah. I see. But they do have beauties in bikinis and tasty, fruity drinks to make up for it. :D

Pennsylvania is actually a battleground state. Kerry has been pulling a Dukakis in this race until rather recently. While Kerry has begun to attack President Bush more frequently, he's doing it in areas where Bush is considered by many many polls to be his strongest points in the views of the American government. Had Kerry attacked Bush more vocally back in June and July then things might be different. But Kerry's own silence will be the only reason he fails to get elected this November.

At least Gore talked.

AHAHAHAHA

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

You're not funny.

On a more serious note, The French are pacifists, and Kerry's against Iraq. So why not, at least he'll have some supporters
------------------------------------------
The next person that tells me that pacifism is stupid, I am gonna punch them in the face -Anon. Democrat

I want to campaign for Kerry, and I'd like to do it in a state that would actually make a difference, IE: a swing state, thats large enough to have a major impact on the election.

I looked at Ohio, which seemed both large enough and close-fought enough to be perfect, but then I've seen some other polls which has Ohio for Bush by quite a few points, outside the margin.

So, anyone with any ideas (and ideally some data to back it up) would be very welcome to make a suggestion here.

TEXAS!!! because you will be promptly shot! enjoy :sniper:

TEXAS!!! because you will be promptly shot! enjoy :sniper:
Actually I would like to see that.

Actually I would like to see that.

so would I. :-) :p :D

Kerry's probably audacious enough to try it too

I want to campaign for Kerry, and I'd like to do it in a state that would actually make a difference, IE: a swing state, thats large enough to have a major impact on the election.

I looked at Ohio, which seemed both large enough and close-fought enough to be perfect, but then I've seen some other polls which has Ohio for Bush by quite a few points, outside the margin.

So, anyone with any ideas (and ideally some data to back it up) would be very welcome to make a suggestion here.

Pennsylvania (my state) or a huge battle ground Florida.

... a huge battle ground Florida.
There's an idea, after all that next hurricane is coming up soon maybe it can take care of him.