NationStates Jolt Archive

We can easily admit our loss, as Democrats. We can easily say that Bush won Presidency. We can easily say that Bush fairly won his electoral votes and had reached 270, something that Kerry failed to achieve.

What we will NOT say is that Bush is a good President.
We will NEVER praise his invasion of Iraq
We will NEVER praise him for using God in office
We will NEVER sucumb to Republican rule.

November 3, 2004...a day that Democrats huddled together wherever they could. (See: Geographic coincidences of the way all the blue states are huddled together and on the coast, as if they want to leave the country)

You could always participate in the about 85 other threads saying the exact same thing...

We can easily admit our loss, as Democrats. We can easily say that Bush won Presidency. We can easily say that Bush fairly won his electoral votes and had reached 270, something that Kerry failed to achieve.

What we will NOT say is that Bush is a good President.
We will NEVER praise his invasion of Iraq
We will NEVER praise him for using God in office
We will NEVER sucumb to Republican rule.

November 3, 2004...a day that Democrats huddled together wherever they could. (See: Geographic coincidences of the way all the blue states are huddled together and on the coast, as if they want to leave the country)

You will have to "sucumb to Republican rule". Bush won. He's the president and he easily controls Congress. Whatever he does the next four years you may disagree with in any way you see fit, but there's nothing much you can do about it.

See: Geographic coincidences of the way all the blue states are huddled together and on the coast, as if they want to leave the country

Well if you'd have let us leave peaceably when we wanted to, we wouldn't have this problem, would we?

Well if you'd have let us leave peaceably when we wanted to, we wouldn't have this problem, would we?
Haha, that's a good one. :D

Your presidency, congress and house of representatives, and supreme court(though they'll deny it) are republican. No amount of political bitching will change anything. So come to Canada for four years!

Your presidency, congress and house of representatives, and supreme court(though they'll deny it) are republican. No amount of political bitching will change anything. So come to Canada for four years!
If Canada held any appeal whatsoever I am sure there would be many people already over there. Sure people talk about leaving, but I can guarantee you hardly any at all do.

The Democrats lost because;

a) You fielded a bland, indecisive, personality-less candidate who's sole election platform was "hey, at least I'm not Bush". An exciting candidate with strong, well-heard policies would have easily tempted moderate Republicans over to your cause - How many Republicans are against George Bush, but saw him as the stronger candidate (which he was) in terms of decisive policies? You're running scared of terrorism, you want a leader who says he can make the bad man go away. Kerry did nothing of the kind, relying solely on Bush's bad moves over the last 4 years as a campaign platform. You lost when you put Kerry on the ticket instead of Dean.

b) The terrorists have won, in that you're all running scared from terrorism and your wounded-animal instincts tell you to go with the leader who's willing to kill them the most. OK, so logically we can see that bombing Arab countries into the ground is only going to create more hatred, but most Americans aren't thinking logically about terror at the moment - they just want a cowboy who's going to scalp the indians.

Sorry, Democrats, I was rooting for you 'cos I feel physically ill at the thought of four more years of George Dubya, but you brought this loss on yourself.

You lost when you put Kerry on the ticket instead of Dean.

REEEYAH!

REEEYAH!
Yeah, Yeah, the 'Dean Scream'. At least he had emotion about the issues. He was entheusiastic. Maybe too much so - but would he really have been worse than "At Least I'm not That Guy" Kerry? I thought Howard Dean was much more likable than Kerry - I tried to like John Kerry, I really did, but there wasn't enough substance. George Bush might be bad, but someone trading solely on the fact they're not George Bush doesn't strike me as really a viable alternative for a country's leader.

In Dean I saw a politician with a vision for America, and the energy and entheusiasm to carry that vision through to the finish. In Kerry I just saw "not George Bush" - I wonder how many swing voters saw the same?

Yeah, Yeah, the 'Dean Scream'. At least he had emotion about the issues. He was entheusiastic. Maybe too much so - but would he really have been worse than "At Least I'm not That Guy" Kerry? I thought Howard Dean was much more likable than Kerry - I tried to like John Kerry, I really did, but there wasn't enough substance. George Bush might be bad, but someone trading solely on the fact they're not George Bush doesn't strike me as really a viable alternative for a country's leader.

In Dean I saw a politician with a vision for America, and the energy and entheusiasm to carry that vision through to the finish. In Kerry I just saw "not George Bush" - I wonder how many swing voters saw the same?
Yeah, if anything I liked Dean MORE because of his scream.

Yeah, if anything I liked Dean MORE because of his scream.
Hopefully the Democrats are sensible enough to call him up and beg him to be on their ticket in 2008 :p - The Republicans have got 3 possibles in John McCain, Colin Powell and Rudy Giuliani who will all look like absolute Gods to Republican-leaning swing voters after 4 more years of Bush, especially with Hillary Clinton running against them. Hell, even I could probably stomach a McCain, Powell or Giuliani run, while the only good thing I can think of that would come of a Hillary Clinton win would be getting Bill's influence back in the corridors of power.

As Democrats, you guys need Dean. I'm a Libertarian myself, and I like Michael Badnarik for the same reasons I like Howard Dean - their strong dedication to their vision for America and, like it or not, the world. In a media-run election, good politicians need personality. Kerry had none. Dean has it in bucketloads.

Hopefully the Democrats are sensible enough to call him up and beg him to be on their ticket in 2008 :p - The Republicans have got 3 possibles in John McCain, Colin Powell and Rudy Giuliani who will all look like absolute Gods to Republican-leaning swing voters after 4 more years of Bush, especially with Hillary Clinton running against them. Hell, even I could probably stomach a McCain, Powell or Giuliani run, while the only good thing I can think of that would come of a Hillary Clinton win would be getting Bill's influence back in the corridors of power.

As Democrats, you guys need Dean. I'm a Libertarian myself, and I like Michael Badnarik for the same reasons I like Howard Dean - their strong dedication to their vision for America and, like it or not, the world. In a media-run election, good politicians need personality. Kerry had none. Dean has it in bucketloads.
Powell has already refused to be considered for a presidential run since he doesn't want the responsibility nor wants to put the strain on his family.
McCain...meh, he's moderate enough to garner votes from both sides, but I don't know if he has enough appeal to win.
Giuliani...I dunno if he would be a good or bad president (or get elected for that matter) but I definitely consider him a possibility for a potential candidate in '08

I've wondered why Mario Cuomo doesn't run for the Democrats. Good man.

You will have to "sucumb to Republican rule". Bush won. He's the president and he easily controls Congress. Whatever he does the next four years you may disagree with in any way you see fit, but there's nothing much you can do about it.

Actually we can: The Repubs didn't get enough people to kill filabustering.

So when the shrub is talking about healing divisions, he means he doesn't want people pissed off calling their reps and telling them they are against issues that he wants.....

Schwarznegger would be a good president... moderate, compassionate, intelligent, charismatic, and quite demanding of attention... too bad about those pesky constitutional obstacles...

McCain would be my more realistic preference though.

I've wondered why Mario Cuomo doesn't run for the Democrats. Good man.

Well I heard stories that he basically has some rather bad skeltons in the closet....

McCain would be my more realistic preference though.

Yea but the conservative element probably won't back him.

I like the man. I would vote for him.

I have to say that I really hated what the Bush camp did to the Powell camp in their first term. First they had the night of the long knives to get rid of all the Powell people in the first six months, and then they gave Powell all of the groveling and lying to the UN jobs to discredit him as much as possible. Powell was one of the few Republicans that I really liked. And now he’s going to be completely shut out of the Gov for the second term for not being a Yes Man.

The Bruce

I have to say that I really hated what the Bush camp did to the Powell camp in their first term. First they had the night of the long knives to get rid of all the Powell people in the first six months, and then they gave Powell all of the groveling and lying to the UN jobs to discredit him as much as possible. Powell was one of the few Republicans that I really liked. And now he’s going to be completely shut out of the Gov for the second term for not being a Yes Man.

The Bruce

Oh come on. He's swallowed all the s**t for four years - he'll manage to go on doing it for another four. You think he has principles? No-one with principles can become Secretary of State - or do any other leading political job. All they need is an endless supply of money and an endless willingness to kiss ass. That's true not just for America but all over the world.

That's true not just for America but all over the world.

That doesn't that make it less wrong, anywhere...

I think what America needs to get rid of is the two-party system, and the enormous income barrier to campaigning.

1.) In any system where there are only 2 possible choices, it is usually a choice between bad and worse. Broaden the field, and the choices might include some good ones.

2.) Try running for president with less than $20 million at your disposal, and you'll see. Currently, only those who can afford it can successfully campaign - and what will a rich president do but continue to give benefits to the rich?

It's a vicious cycle where the power goes always to those who should least get it.

Powell has already refused to be considered for a presidential run since he doesn't want the responsibility nor wants to put the strain on his family.
McCain...meh, he's moderate enough to garner votes from both sides, but I don't know if he has enough appeal to win.
Giuliani...I dunno if he would be a good or bad president (or get elected for that matter) but I definitely consider him a possibility for a potential candidate in '08

Out of those three, you will only see Mccain possibly making any effort toward the presidency.
Giuliani is too ill, he has cancer....
Colin Powell's wife won't let him....
The Republican's will have too few options for a candidate with Bush's term at an end and Cheney being too ill.
Prepare for a glorious Democratic victory in 2008!