PDA

View Full Version : The election in the USA



Sang-drax
11-03-2004, 04:36 AM
Will it really take eleven days before the results?

Anyway, my news source reports 254 Bush, 252 Kerry with Bush leading in Ohio, so it looks like Bush gets another four years. :(

FillYourBrain
11-03-2004, 07:12 AM
it shouldn't take more than today. Even after the psychotic episode that we went through in 2000 it has to be clear to even the democrats that this isn't an issue of miscount.

I for one am very pleased with this.

(awaits the bulls*** catch phrases such as "war for oil" and "tax cuts for the rich")

Govtcheez
11-03-2004, 07:16 AM
> (awaits the bulls*** catch phrases such as "war for oil" and "tax cuts for the rich")

:rolleyes:

Sentaku senshi
11-03-2004, 07:18 AM
Well the world now must really hate us, with Bush getting 51% of the populer vote. 3.5 Million more the Kerry.

Bush has a lead of 134,019 votes in ohio. It's highly doubtful that Kerry can get enough provisonal ballots to change the election results. Even if you use the democratic estemate of the provisonal ballots of 200,000 he needs slightly more then 2/3 of them.



135,000 provisional ballots

FillYourBrain
11-03-2004, 07:22 AM
Well the world now must really hate us...
yup, cause as we all know Bush is just an evil guy. :D

FillYourBrain
11-03-2004, 07:25 AM
:rolleyes:
You roll your eyes, but that's why kerry lost. Catch phrases and criticism don't make you someone worth voting for. That was his whole campaign.

Govtcheez
11-03-2004, 07:30 AM
You roll your eyes, but that's why kerry lost. Catch phrases and criticism don't make you someone worth voting for. That was his whole campaign.
"You're with us or against us"
"Wrong war wrong place wrong time"
"Flip flop!"
"Unfit for command"
"Kerry is the most liberal member of the Senate!"

This election is proof that if you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes true. But hey, you keep on living in fantasy land where your candidate doesn't rely on ridiculous rhetoric just as much as anyone else.

FillYourBrain
11-03-2004, 07:37 AM
"unfit for command" was a title of a book. Not recited by bush during the campaign. "Wrong war, wrong place, wrong time" was Ted Kennedy's phrase! It was mocked by Bush.

But I'm not saying that catch phrases aren't usable. Just that they can't be the meat of your campaign. They were all Kerry had.

Govtcheez
11-03-2004, 07:39 AM
> It was mocked by Bush.

And twisted into something most people thought Kerry said.

> Not recited by bush during the campaign.

No, but I sure heard a lot of his supporters saying it.

> They were all Kerry had.

Wow, you didn't pay attention to this election at all, did you?

FillYourBrain
11-03-2004, 07:44 AM
> It was mocked by Bush.

And twisted into something most people thought Kerry said.
Actually Kerry did say it repeatedly. He thought Kennedy was clever on that one I suppose.


Wow, you didn't pay attention to this election at all, did you?I suppose I wasn't paying attention when during the debate (which kerry supposedly won) Kerry answered every question with:

"I have a plan for (insert the issue here). That is that this president has failed to act on (insert the issue here). He's done everything wrong on (insert the issue here), and the American people deserve better."

Now I must not have been paying attention because I didn't hear a plan in there anywhere!

Thantos
11-03-2004, 07:46 AM
Will it really take eleven days before the results?

Anyway, my news source reports 254 Bush, 252 Kerry with Bush leading in Ohio, so it looks like Bush gets another four years. :(
If you want to get technical about it, the results won't be known till Jan 6 when the electorial votes will be counted.

Govtcheez
11-03-2004, 07:54 AM
Actually Kerry did say it repeatedly. He thought Kennedy was clever on that one I suppose.Link to a speech where he did, please


I suppose I wasn't paying attention when during the debate (which bush got his ass handed to him in) Bush answered every question with:

"Look, if you don't vote for me gays will be humping in the street and terrorists will bomb the crap out of you because they're petrified of me!"

Now I must not have been paying attention because I didn't hear a plan in there anywhere!
I'm done with you.

GanglyLamb
11-03-2004, 08:12 AM
Yeah Yeah lets flaaaaaaame ...::twisted evil::

:) I like the stars on the flag of the USA...they are nice... :)

FillYourBrain
11-03-2004, 08:15 AM
here ya go cheez:
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/politics/9590989.htm?1c

done with me? I would have expected as much

Thantos
11-03-2004, 08:26 AM
Except your link wants us to sign up for some newspaper

FillYourBrain
11-03-2004, 08:29 AM
The link didn't work?

ok here's the text:

Posted on Mon, Sep. 06, 2004

Kerry Slams 'Wrong War in the Wrong Place'

CALVIN WOODWARD

Associated Press

WASHINGTON - Democrat John Kerry accused President Bush on Monday of sending U.S. troops to the "wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time" and said he'd try to bring them all home in four years. Bush rebuked him for taking "yet another new position" on the war.

Iraq overshadowed the traditional Labor Day kickoff of the fall campaign and its time-honored emphasis on jobs, as Kerry delivered some of his harshest rhetoric against Bush's handling of the war and highlighted its economic costs. The Democrat set, for the first time, a tentative time frame for completing a withdrawal that Republican opponents say is too soon even to begin.

"We want those troops home, and my goal would be to try to get them home in my first term," Kerry said, speaking to a fellow Vietnam War veteran at a campaign stop in Pennsylvania who had asked about a timetable for withdrawal.

Bush, campaigning in southeast Missouri, described Kerry's attack as the product of chronic equivocation combined with a shake up of his advisers.

"After voting for the war, but against funding it, after saying he would have voted for the war even knowing everything we know today, my opponent woke up this morning with new campaign advisers and yet another new position," Bush said in prepared remarks.

Kerry spoke with former President Clinton in a lengthy phone call during the weekend, hearing advice that he go hard after Bush's record. Clinton White House aides are taking a larger role in the campaign, and Kerry moved longtime adviser John Sasso into a top spot.

On Iraq, "suddenly he's against it again," Bush said. "No matter how many times Senator Kerry changes his mind, it was right for America and it's right for America now that Saddam Hussein is no longer in power."

Both sides sparred over employment, too, in tours of the heartland by the presidential candidates and their running mates covering eight states in all.

Speaking at the Minnesota State Fair, Vice President Dick Cheney declared low taxes are the key to robust employment. Kerry asserted that an employment surge over the last year has been driven by jobs that pay poorly and offer worse benefits and less security than jobs of old.

The Labor Department put out a rosy report on employment, declaring "prospects for job creation remain bright," and noting gains in most sectors in recent months.

Bush is struggling to escape the distinction of being the first president since the Depression-era Herbert Hoover to finish a term with job losses. With 1.7 million jobs created over the last year, the economy is still down 913,000 jobs overall since he took office.

With the quantity of jobs rising, Kerry turned to their quality. "If you want four more years of your wages falling ... if you want four more years of losing jobs overseas and replacing them with jobs that pay $9,000 less than the jobs you had before, then you should go vote for George Bush," Kerry said in Pennsylvania.

Kerry cited a study by the liberal Economic Policy Institute from January indicating jobs in growing industries pay $8,848 less on average than jobs in fading industries. One-third of the new jobs are for janitors, fast-food workers and temporary employees, and they are less likely to offer health insurance than other work, his campaign said.

Polls indicate Bush and Kerry are running evenly in four of the states the candidates were visiting Monday - Minnesota, Iowa, Pennsylvania and Ohio. The four offer a combined 58 electoral votes, more than 20 percent of the total needed to win.

Nationally, Bush led Kerry by 7 points - 52 percent to 45 percent - while independent Ralph Nader had 1 percent in a CNN-USA Today-Gallup poll taken over the weekend and released Monday. Bush had 11-point leads in two polls taken last week during and right after the GOP convention.

Kerry stopped in Racine, W.Va., to make common cause with coal miners and to answer, in blistering tones, a visit by Bush on Sunday, when the president said the Democrat's plan to raise taxes on the richest Americans would stifle job growth.

"It all comes down to one letter - W," Kerry said, meaning the initial in George W. Bush. "And the W stands for wrong," he said. "The W stands for wrong choices, wrong judgment, wrong priorities, wrong direction for our country."

Kerry said last month he would try to begin withdrawing troops from Iraq within his first six months in office, conditioning that goal on getting more assistance from other countries. But he's avoided until now laying out a possible end game.

He called the president's coalition in Iraq "the phoniest thing I ever heard" and played up the money spent on Iraq that could have gone to domestic needs.

"This president rushed to war without a plan to win the peace, and he's cost all of you $200 billion that could have gone to schools, could have gone to health care, could have gone to prescription drugs, could have gone to our Social Security," he said.

Cheney, moving on to Iowa, took issue with Kerry's remark about a phony coalition. "Demeaning our allies is an interesting approach for someone seeking the presidency," the vice president told about 500 supporters at a barbecue along the shores of Clear Lake. "They deserve our respect, not insults."

Govtcheez
11-03-2004, 08:37 AM
> here ya go cheez:

Alright, I stand corrected there. Regardless, my point still stands that it was a catchphrase and the meaning was twisted to make it sound like Kerry was against the troops.

> done with me? I would have expected as much

Don't flatter yourself. I can only take arguing with a brick wall for so long.

FillYourBrain
11-03-2004, 08:40 AM
I love you too.


..... So when are you going to make a point besides complaints about me?

oh that sounds familiar.

Govtcheez
11-03-2004, 08:56 AM
> ..... So when are you going to make a point besides complaints about me?

You haven't given me anything to argue against, big guy. So far, the only "points" you've made were just complaining about some bizarre liberal stereotype you've got in your head. You certainly haven't said any reasons to actually vote for Bush.

whackaxe
11-03-2004, 10:46 AM
meh, Kerry or Bush, America is still up to its ears in a steaming pile of I am sillyI am sillyI am sillyI am silly, and thats not going to change for a while, although i would have voted for kerry because his chin is rather amusing

FillYourBrain
11-03-2004, 11:11 AM
You haven't given me anything to argue against, big guy. So far, the only "points" you've made were just complaining about some bizarre liberal stereotype you've got in your head. You certainly haven't said any reasons to actually vote for Bush.
Interesting. Because you were arguing against this:

You roll your eyes, but that's why kerry lost. Catch phrases and criticism don't make you someone worth voting for. That was his whole campaign.
Which you still have not answered with anything other than criticism.

Govtcheez
11-03-2004, 11:20 AM
I said that all Bush had was catchphrases and criticism, too. He made every effort to divert attention away from his record and attack Kerry.

FillYourBrain
11-03-2004, 11:34 AM
So you suggest that you indirectly conceded my point as your answer?

Interesting that you would have fought so violently just to concede :)

Scribbler
11-03-2004, 11:50 AM
I said that all Bush had was catchphrases and criticism, too. He made every effort to divert attention away from his record and attack Kerry.
Actually, Bush was the only candidate to actually lay out on the table what he planned to do. How much money he planned to spend on his plans. Where he would get the money from. And explained in simple terms why he believed as he did. I think that's substantially more than catchphrases and criticism.

In the debates where the media tried to make it appear Kerry had the upperhand, I saw Kerry constantly trying to backtrack to questions already closed when it was obvious he was beat on the question and really didn't want to tackle the current question. Further, he couldn't say anything more than "I have a plan" when he couldn't even describe the plan.

The whole democratic campaign platform was to make it appear as if there was no other choice. That the American people have decided so and anybody would be a fool to think otherwise. The American people on the other hand, demonstrated that we are perfectly capable of making our own decisions thank you very much.

FillYourBrain
11-03-2004, 12:12 PM
exactly my point. "I have a plan" was never followed by the plan. Even in the campaign ads. It was bush bashing alone. That's not a plan!

ober
11-03-2004, 12:14 PM
For anyone that hasn't heard, Kerry conceded. :(

FillYourBrain
11-03-2004, 12:18 PM
That gives me respect for John Kerry. It is better to get past this sillyness that Gore went through. The news media kept trying to push the lawsuit angle over the past couple weeks. I'm glad Kerry has more self respect than that. Bravo.

Zach L.
11-03-2004, 12:20 PM
Actually, Bush was the only candidate to actually lay out on the table what he planned to do. How much money he planned to spend on his plans. Where he would get the money from. And explained in simple terms why he believed as he did. I think that's substantially more than catchphrases and criticism.
Uh huh... The only candidate to have a plan (which never really seemed to appear in any detail anyway)? Are you aware that there were in fact, more than two candidates running?



The whole democratic campaign platform was to make it appear as if there was no other choice. That the American people have decided so and anybody would be a fool to think otherwise. The American people on the other hand, demonstrated that we are perfectly capable of making our own decisions thank you very much.
Well, between the two parties, they did a pretty good job convincing the people that there was no other choice.

Bush was certainly full of fun buzz-words himself, though neither he nor Kerry ever actually addressed substantive questions, and really seemed to differ primarily on the "implementation details."

B0bDole
11-03-2004, 12:24 PM
WE ARE ALL I am sillyI am sillyI am sillyI am sillyED, KISS YOUR I am sillyI am sillyI am sillyI am sillyING ASS GOODBYE.

ok maybe it's not that bad, I'm just ........ed my vote lost :(

Govtcheez
11-03-2004, 12:25 PM
> So you suggest that you indirectly conceded my point as your answer?

Your point appeared to be that Kerry just used attacks and catchphrases. I've pointed out Bush did the same. I don't recall me conceding anywhere in that.

If you guys would have gone to his website or, y'know, done any research, Kerry's plans were pretty clearly defined. Just because you're lazy doesn't make him a weak candidate.

FillYourBrain
11-03-2004, 12:28 PM
If you're talking about the war (I assume you are) both candidates realize that we didn't start the war. And yes, Iraq as part of the Arab-world-full-of-dictators-that-attacked-us-first is part of the war no matter how you look at it. WMD was never the issue. A staging ground for fighting the Arab-world-full-of-dictators-that-attacked-us-first is.

I was actually comfortable that Kerry would have continued the war against terrorism. This is why he never laid down any "plans". He was always planning on the same thing as Bush. This is why he was seen as a flip flopper. He claimed to be against the things that he was for during election time. He will go back to supporting the war effort now.

Zach L.
11-03-2004, 12:29 PM
That gives me respect for John Kerry. It is better to get past this sillyness that Gore went through. The news media kept trying to push the lawsuit angle over the past couple weeks. I'm glad Kerry has more self respect than that. Bravo.
Gore not conceding was appropriate in 2000. It was not clear what had happened in Florida then. Kerry, however, had no leg to stand on having lost both electoral and popular, and with no "irregularities" in Ohio.

I must say, I have respect for the Secretary of State of Ohio. The way he handled the medias stupid questions last night made it pretty clear that he fully intended to do his job and do it professionally.

Govtcheez
11-03-2004, 12:30 PM
You appear to be either completely lost or just ignoring me.

Zach L.
11-03-2004, 12:32 PM
If you're talking about the war (I assume you are) both candidates realize that we didn't start the war. And yes, Iraq as part of the Arab-world-full-of-dictators-that-attacked-us-first is part of the war no matter how you look at it. WMD was never the issue. A staging ground for fighting the Arab-world-full-of-dictators-that-attacked-us-first is.

I was actually comfortable that Kerry would have continued the war against terrorism. This is why he never laid down any "plans". He was always planning on the same thing as Bush. This is why he was seen as a flip flopper. He claimed to be against the things that he was for during election time. He will go back to supporting the war effort now.
Yeah, I never quite understood the support Kerry had from the anti-war voters as he is not anti-war, nor did he intend (at least in any meaningful way) to pull us out of the Middle East or the rest of the world.

FillYourBrain
11-03-2004, 12:42 PM
You appear to be either completely lost or just ignoring me.My response was to Zach L. Perhaps I should have quoted him. Oh well. Quite honestly, my conversation with him is already far more interesting than the one with you.

That doesn't change my love for you.

FillYourBrain
11-03-2004, 12:44 PM
Yeah, I never quite understood the support Kerry had from the anti-war voters as he is not anti-war, nor did he intend (at least in any meaningful way) to pull us out of the Middle East or the rest of the world.It's because he was once anti-war. I think he knows enough about things now to be above that.

Zach L.
11-03-2004, 12:53 PM
Ahh... Suppose its in my court to respond, then. :)


If you're talking about the war (I assume you are) both candidates realize that we didn't start the war. And yes, Iraq as part of the Arab-world-full-of-dictators-that-attacked-us-first is part of the war no matter how you look at it. WMD was never the issue. A staging ground for fighting the Arab-world-full-of-dictators-that-attacked-us-first is.

I was actually comfortable that Kerry would have continued the war against terrorism. This is why he never laid down any "plans". He was always planning on the same thing as Bush. This is why he was seen as a flip flopper. He claimed to be against the things that he was for during election time. He will go back to supporting the war effort now.
That war is part of it, but is too specific an instance of what I'm getting at. For example, the US foreign policy as it is now is a bit imperialistic (to say the least -- we've got troops all over the place for no apparent reason). Neither one of these candidates is particularly against this imperialist attitude, though. Instead, the argue about how to go about finishing off the Iraq war, and take the imperialist leaning attitude as a given.

This crops up in many places. The issue of gay marriage for example. The Republicans are (generally) against it, and the Democrats are (generally) for it. Neither party, however, takes on the issue of whether it is the proper function of the government even to have any say at all in what marriage is, or how people choose to live out there lives. It is just taken as given that it does.

One which is particularly interesting is the Department of Homeland Security. The purpose of said organization is supposedly to, as the name implies, provide for the safety of the US. This, however, seems like the proper function of the military (which is busy in foreign entanglements).

Clyde
11-03-2004, 03:03 PM
Iraq as part of the Arab-world-full-of-dictators-that-attacked-us-first is part of the war no matter how you look at


How utterly ridiculous.

Micko
11-07-2004, 12:52 PM
Well the world now must really hate us, with Bush getting 51% of the populer vote. 3.5 Million more the Kerry.

If I may comment this issue I must say I think USA is a great country although I've never been in US. And USA is great for only one reason. Number of relatives of mine who surived genocide and Concentration Camps in Bosnia US goverment gave visa and opportunity to have new life, and many of them now have families ot their own. That is sure great thing about America. I think that they have laws that permit people who survived camps to became US citizients.

Although If I had to choose between Republicans or Democrats I would choose democrats and have selfish reasons. Democrats and persident Clinton stopped war on the Balkans!