Who might win in '04?

[Extollat Sanders]

If it's all right with you, Neb, I'd like to start this thread to see peoples' opinions and predictions/reasons of who may win the 2004 election. If we [me, swearing by my media layout] keep the impoliteness to nill, than may we continue this thread? If so....

____________________________________________________________________


Who do you think may win the presidential election of 2004 and why?


[I'm honestly curious - not searching for a fight - I know what happened last time]

[neb1211]

Go for it but if it starts to get out of control and turns into a flame war I won't hesitate to start kicking some butt    

[acemaverick1381]

Everyone knows who I would vote for. For once, I am going to sit this political conversation out, and let you all talk about it. If stuff starts to get out of hand, don't worry, I'll offer a few comments to put ya back on track. =P

[Extollat Sanders]

Go for it but if it starts to get out of control and turns into a flame war I won't hesitate to start kicking some butt  

You got it -


You heard him, folks. Go for it!

[mipadi]

Everyone knows who I will vote for. For once, I am going to sit this political conversation out, and let you all talk about it. If stuff starts to get out of hand, don't worry, I'll offer a few comments to put ya back on track. =P

Are you old enough to vote in the election?

[acemaverick1381]

I mean would. <--- goes to edit his last post.

[Extollat Sanders]

Not to follow Ace or anything.... but, half the people here should my [hypothetical] vote as well. I'm praying Bush all the way.

[mipadi]

Judging by polls, I'd project a win by Kerry, but it looks like it's going to be a real squeaker again.

[Extollat Sanders]

I don't think Kerry has anything going for him. I don't mean that people who want the democratic platform won't vote for him, but he himself... there's nothing there.

[mipadi]

I don't think that's a fair assessment. Kerry has some good thoughts on how to improve things in America (at least in my opinion). I haven't felt the leadership of the Bush administration has been productive in the past four years, for several key reasons (listed in order of personal importance):[ol type='1'][li]Bush turned the largest budget surplus in American history into the largest budget deficit in American history, increase the national debt so much that by October, Congress will have to authorize the Treasury to borrow more money. His massive tax cuts, which were more beneficial to the richest 1% of America and corporations, contributed to this deficit.[/li][li]Under Bush, one of the most prosperous economic period in American history has turned into a recession, albeit a somewhat mild one.[/li][li]Several corporate scandals resulted in the bankruptcy of several large American corporations, including MCI Worldcom and Enron. It's interesting to note that Ken Lay, the CEO of Enron and perhaps one of the most crooked of American businessmen, is one of Bush's largest single campaign contributors.[/li][li]Under Bush, we were involved in two foreign wars, costing the lives of thousands of men. I fully agree with the war in Aghanistan, but as the brother of a soldier who has a high likelihood of getting shipped to Iraq, I feel Iraq was misguided, hasty, and largely unplanned. It also marks the first time that the US was the aggressor nation, and that's a horrible precedent for us to set.[/li][li]Bush insisted upon a "No Child Left Behind" education plan, but did not give public schools the funds or resources to meet his impossible guidelines.[/li][li]Bush, by lack of action, condoned a group that attacked Kerry's war record, even though Kerry was wounded three times in Vietnam. Bush, of course, has a wonderful war record, too -- as a Texas Air National Guard pilot, he did a wonderful job of keeping the Viet Cong out of Dallas -- until he went AWOL, that is.[/li][li]Bush's campaign is funded largely by immoral corporations, which have nothing but their own interests at heart. While Kerry is likewise funded by immoral groups as well, his groups are slightly less evil.[/li][/ol]

[Extollat Sanders]

I must admit that since I'm not fully politically aware, I'm not to sure of the first few items in your list.

... I feel Iraq was misguided, hasty, and largely unplanned. It also marks the first time that the US was the aggressor nation, and that's a horrible precedent for us to set.

We were hardly the agressor nation. 9/11. The war is on terror, not Iraq. Early in the morning on the eleventh of September in 2001, we, the United States, were attacked by a, later to be found terrorist, organization. George Bush struck back against the terrorist groups that were presumably [if not certainly known] located in Iraq. In the process, Bush has begun an attempt at transofrming Iraq into a demoracy. It was not misguided. It may have been hasty, but only if imediate defense is hasty. The apparent dangers of the terrorists attacking once again had to be resolved. We were not the agressors, we came with an answer to their call for war.

Bush insisted upon a "No Child Left Behind" education plan, but did not give public schools the funds or resources to meet his impossible guidelines.

Heh, I don't really know anything about it. =\

Bush, by lack of action, condoned a group that attacked Kerry's war record

There is still no evidence that bush himself has funded, nor compelled the veteran group to call Kerry's record into question. And by the by, this is the group of people who fought with Kerry for crying out loud. All Kerry has for his 'war record' is a bunch of information that he, himself took part in creating. Those men are all eye witnesses that poll against Kerry and his war record. Bush has said nothing of Kerry's record other than it is 'honorable.' Bush is keeping his hands dry on this situation. And as for the 'wounded three times,' just as much as it is speculated the Bush has supported the veterans, it is also controversial that Kerry's wounds are legit. That based upon the fact that for all three of his purple hearts, he never spent a week in the hospital. As opposed to Bob Dole [former candidate], who stayed in the hospital and in rehab long after his war efforts and modernly has minimal to no use of his hand because of his wounds. There are even rumors that go so far as to say that some of Kerry's wounds were self inflicted.

Kerry's entire campain, aside from his platform, is solely based on his four months in vietnam. During which, he claims he and his companions took part is horrid tormented killings and torture. He continued later to assist the enemy, by supporting a comunist peace proposal, which stated for the US to recall all its troops and encampments and pay repremends for the war casualties and financial sufferings that came upon the nation in the time of war. John Kerry is represented in a comunist nation [in a museum or some such thing] in recognition for his 'services.' He followed his 'vallant fight' in 'nam by coming home and condemning his comrades for their 'atrocious' feats and claiming the war a fallacy. This is Kerry's war record. In his time in vietnam, he succeed in the areas of cowardice and accusal.

Bush's campaign is funded largely by immoral corporations, which have nothing but their own interests at heart. While Kerry is likewise funded by immoral groups as well, his groups are slightly less evil.

As for this, I don't know about the first part [it is questionable to me], but the second is utter bullshit. "slightly less evil......."

[/REPLY]

[acemaverick1381]

1 and 2.)Its insane to think the economy is going to get better month after month. Some months are better than others obviously. You don't see all the home owned bussiness that are getting started because of tax cuts. And it doesn't only effect the rich. When poeple have more money, they buy things and more jobs are created. And, the rich can play a big role. Most rich people invest in bussiness, and therefore create more jobs. The more money the rich have, the more investments can be made.

3.)I wouldn't be blamimg all this bankruptcy on Bush. Politics play a major role but its people like John Edwards that are so anti-big bussiness that drive them down. I don't see how any of that is Bush's fault.

4.)Okay, but John Kerry supports both wars. He said (at the Democrat Convention) that if he was the president, he would be in both wars, only he would "fight a more senistive" war. Whatever the hell that means. He is so hypocritical. During his time spent in the Senate he voted against almost every war bill there was, even one to provide more comfort and protection to our troops. (Only 12 members voted against it, Kerry and Edwards voted against)

5.)Thats funny, because schools all around the nation are going back to school early. Perhaps the teachers union should stop bitching for more money and these teaching classes. The teachers spend so much time learning about child pyschologly, that they don't know the subject enough. The schools have way more then enough funds. Have you ever seen the stock rooms?! There is an unbelieveable amount of stuff. My kinedgarden class had a stove! Who needs a stove in a classrom? That is money that should be spent for learning, not on things the teachers union suggests.

7.)Immoral groups, and funding? What? Bush hasn't gotten a whole lot of money, but John Kerry has gotten over 15 million dollars from George Soros who is an outward communist, and lets not even start on moveon.org And, he helped create the 527. There was orignally a law passed that would stop negative campaining, but the Dems found a way around, and created the 527. Now there is no control on what is said or done by groups.

6.)Bush did not condone them. Earlier today he downed all orginaztions that are like the Swiftboat vets. Kerry brought this upon himself. He is focusing his campaign on 4 months on Vietnam, and not his horrible and disgusting 19 years in the Senate. You also have to wonder about his micky mouse wounds that he got. And you can't blame the SwiftBoats for being Bush freaks. They don't like Bush, and have said that they would vote for Edwards if he was running for president.

[Extollat Sanders]

Plain and simple, Kerry is a bullshitter. He is running for president to fulfill some sort of misplaced dream to be president. He's married to ketchup woman and that's not enough for him? Just a few weeks ago, Kerry was going on about his normal crap, "bring back our troops!" - "fund our schools!" - "screw funding the military!" But the moment that Bush decided to recall some of our boys, Kerry leads up and says, "hold on, that's too soon, too hasty. You shouldn't bring them back at such an inopportune time!" Well, guess what, folks, Kerry has spouted off whatever is anti-Bush, whatever is anti-conserv ative, whatever the people want to hear since the beginning. Sure, he was quiet in the beginning, but simply paying attention to the current events tells you that he lies his ass off for exercise and swallows it for breakfast the next morning.

[acemaverick1381]

Its typical liberal high politic stuff. They base stuff off their own agenda. They do what the people want. It doesn't matter if its the right thing to do, he just wants to be seen as good in the eyes of the American public. He's just another Clinton. Whatever the Republicans do is evil, they must go against them. Even if it means that he has to switch his views a 1000 times over.

[mipadi]

We were hardly the agressor nation. 9/11. The war is on terror, not Iraq. Early in the morning on the eleventh of September in 2001, we, the United States, were attacked by a, later to be found terrorist, organization. George Bush struck back against the terrorist groups that were presumably [if not certainly known] located in Iraq.

It has been shown by several Congressional and independent inquiries that Iraq had nothing to do with September 11. (I would expand on this statement, but I think that one sentence makes the facts clear enough. All one needs to do is follow the recent testimonies before several inquiry councils to understand the truth of that statement.) Furthermore, the current climate in Iraq shows that, aside from the war, there was little planning done on how to handle Iraq after it had been occupied.

There is still no evidence that bush himself has funded, nor compelled the veteran group to call Kerry's record into question.

That was not my accusation. All Bush needs to do is what Senator McCain (a fellow Republican) suggested: make a definitive statement specifically denouncing the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. He has not yet done that.

And as for the 'wounded three times,' just as much as it is speculated the Bush has supported the veterans, it is also controversial that Kerry's wounds are legit.

I find it deplorable that you would question his service to his country in this manner. Hospital x-rays show that Kerry has shrapnel in his leg; I don't know how you can possibly argue that this does not constitute a "legitimate wound." It's despicable that you would challenge a wounded veteran's service to his nation.

As for this, I don't know about the first part [it is questionable to me], but the second is utter bullshit.

Questionable? All one has to do is check the donation records to see where the money comes from.

Its insane to think the economy is going to get better month after month. Some months are better than others obviously.

I clearly never based my statement on a month-by-month comparison. The general trend in the last four years has been towards recession.

And, the rich can play a big role. Most rich people invest in bussiness, and therefore create more jobs. The more money the rich have, the more investments can be made.

The 1980s showed that "trickle-down economics" was a complete failure.

I  wouldn't be blamimg all this bankruptcy on Bush. Politics play a major role but its people like John Edwards that are so anti-big bussiness that drive them down. I don't see how any of that is Bush's fault.

I don't know who you think sets the federal budget, but businesses have nothing to do with it; it's all politics.

even one to provide more comfort and protection to our troops.

Right, and if you actually read that bill, you'll see that it contains a number of amendments allocating funds to services and resources that Kerry and Edwards did not see fit to fund.

The schools have way more then enough funds. Have you ever seen the stock rooms?! There is an unbelieveable amount of stuff. My kinedgarden class had a stove! Who needs a stove in a classrom? That is money that should be spent for learning, not on things the teachers union suggests.

Perhaps you should step out of your isolated world and check out the inner-city schools, and schools in low-income areas.

Bush hasn't gotten a whole lot of money

You are misinformed. Bush has received more campaign contributions than any other candidate in history.

but simply paying attention to the current events tells you that he lies his ass off for exercise and swallows it for breakfast the next morning.

As if Bush doesn't. Does "Iraq possesses weapons of mass destruction" ring a bell?

He's married to ketchup woman and that's not enough for him?

How eloquent. Can we keep the disparaging remarks to a minimum, please?

[waxon]

I want kerry.

[acemaverick1381]

That was not my accusation. All Bush needs to do is what Senator McCain (a fellow Republican) suggested: make a definitive statement specifically denouncing the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. He has not yet done that.

I would think saying he disaproved of all of them would be enough. Not only the ones that supported him, but Kerry as well.

I find it deplorable that you would question his service to his country in this manner. Hospital x-rays show that Kerry has shrapnel in his leg; I don't know how you can possibly argue that this does not constitute a "legitimate wound." It's despicable that you would challenge a wounded veteran's service to his nation.

Its not that, its the fact that its only shrapnel in his leg. It takes away from the people that have gotten seriously hurt. The people who have lost a limb, or have serious injurys. Something like shrapnel in a leg is not deserving of a purple heart. The test of time has shown that.

The 1980s showed that "trickle-down economics" was a complete failure.

That was not what it was all based off of. Have you ever looked at Reagens plan? It worked beatifuly, and it was the main reason that Clinton was credited for lowering the taxes. The biggest issue with the Republican way is that it can take years for it to work, but once it does, it works wonders. Did you ever think the reason that we may be in bad shape now is because that Clinton did nothing? He was living it up off of Bush Sr. and Reagen. Even though I'm not a JFK fan, the rising tide will effect all the boats.

We were hardly the agressor nation. 9/11. The war is on terror, not Iraq. Early in the morning on the eleventh of September in 2001, we, the United States, were attacked by a, later to be found terrorist, organization. George Bush struck back against the terrorist groups that were presumably [if not certainly known] located in Iraq.

Is it just me that thinks that Hussien is a terrorist? He massacred his own people, did horrible things to nations. The war was on terror, and he is a terrorist.

I don't know who you think sets the federal budget, but businesses have nothing to do with it; it's all politics.

And its also the companies responsiblity to do what works. Companies like Citi are raking in huge amounts of money. thanks to Bush.

Right, and if you actually read that bill, you'll see that it contains a number of amendments allocating funds to services and resources that Kerry and Edwards did not see fit to fund.

Right, and I'm sure providing for your troops is a horrible thing to do. Even if you don't approve of the war, you should provide for your troops. There are interviews with soldiers who are sick of the left wing war bashing. They know they are doing the justified thing.

As if Bush doesn't. Does "Iraq possesses weapons of mass destruction" ring a bell?

Do I need to teach you a geography lesson? Iraq is the size of California. Saddam had about 10 years to find the perfcet hiding spot for those weapons, and about 7 months to execute it. If I had 10 years to find a hiding spot in a place the size of California, I'd do a pretty damn good job as well. To make matters even more complicated, there were weapons found in nieighboring countries who aren't even capable of producing weapons. Hmm, I wonder where they came from? Of course, you'll never hear about that thanks to the left wing mainstrea media. (Unless you like Rush)

Perhaps you should step out of your isolated world and check out the inner-city schools, and schools in low-income areas.

Hmm, minority filled places that the kids don't even want to learn or anything. They are there because they are required to. To have a succesfull school system you have to have kids who are willing to learn on some level, not some people who could care less.

You are misinformed. Bush has received more campaign contributions than any other candidate in history.

I'm talking about the 527s and such, not all the contributors.

[Extollat Sanders]

It has been shown by several Congressional and independent inquiries that Iraq had nothing to do with September 11.

They may not be connected, but september eleventh lead to the 'discoveries, assumptions,' whatever you want to call them, which brought upon the invasion of Iraq.

That was not my accusation. All Bush needs to do is what Senator McCain (a fellow Republican) suggested: make a definitive statement specifically denouncing the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. He has not yet done that.

Bush has already denied any ascociation with the veteran organization and has called them on their 'inapropriate conduct.' [I am all for it]

I find it deplorable that you would question his service to his country in this manner. Hospital x-rays show that Kerry has shrapnel in his leg; I don't know how you can possibly argue that this does not constitute a "legitimate wound." It's despicable that you would challenge a wounded veteran's service to his nation.

His service? I have already stated the wonderous entalements of his service. Shrapnel in his leg, huzaa, that makes him no hero. And still the fact that he attained three purple hearts and never spent a week in the hospital for rehab or anything of the like is disgusting the the men who fought hard and strong through the war or at least fought longer than four months. And that shrapnel is not the collective review of his wounds, that is simply what he likes to focus on - it sounds more heroic.

Questionable? All one has to do is check the donation records to see where the money comes from.

I simply meant that I knew nothing of it, and of course, as a Bush supporter, would think it otherwise.

I clearly never based my statement on a month-by-month comparison. The general trend in the last four years has been towards recession.

I suppose he has been to busy trying to end the war in Iraq. [honestly]

As if Bush doesn't. Does "Iraq possesses weapons of mass destruction" ring a bell?

Yes, it does. As does, "I protected my country during my time at war, and I will defend it as commander in chief." [I've said the great job he did protecting us] Everyone makes mistakes, even presidents, all of them made bad choices, but that didn't stop Bush from capturing an inhumane dictator and bringing him to justice. Nor did it stop him from righting a horrible wrong being done to the Iraqi people.

How eloquent. Can we keep the disparaging remarks to a minimum, please?

I love that. He's married to 'Mrs. Heins.' He's rich, why must he be our president with nothing more that a platform and a four month [controversial] war record?

[waxon]

Way to many words and posts to read.

[Extollat Sanders]

Way to many words and posts to read.

You mean "too."

[Extollat Sanders]

I want kerry.

Um... read our posts and tell me why.

[mipadi]

Something like shrapnel in a leg is not deserving of a purple heart.

Since you clearly do not understand the reason why the Purple Heart is given out, nor do you understand how damaging even a simple war wound can be, I don't see fit to go to lengths to refute this point.

Have you ever looked at Reagens plan? It worked beatifuly

Reagan's plan resulted in a horrible recession in the late 80s. If you disagree, provide data to back up your claims, instead of just making statements with no supporting evidence. All you need to do is study recent history to see the failure of Reagan's economic plan.

And its also the companies responsiblity to do what works. Companies like Citi are raking in huge amounts of money. thanks to Bush.

What does that have to do with federal budget and the national debt?

Right, and I'm sure providing for your troops is a horrible thing to do. Even if you don't approve of the war, you should provide for your troops.

You clearly do not understand the way laws are written in Congress and passed. Laws often contain amendents that supply funds to Congressmen's pet projects and have nothing to do with the bill itself. If you check the Senate voting records (which I doubt you have) you'll note that the bills you brought up contained several such amendments supporting these "pork-barrel spending" projects. Considering that our government is in fact operating on a deficit, declining to support such useless projects that were unconnected with the war effort does not seem to be a bad thing at all. Money doesn't grow on trees.

Do I need to teach you a geography lesson? Iraq is the size of California. Saddam had about 10 years to find the perfcet hiding spot for those weapons, and about 7 months to execute it. If I had 10 years to find a hiding spot in a place the size of California, I'd do a pretty damn good job as well.

The UN said he didn't have them. Several government agencies have confirmed the lack of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. None have been found. Why should I believe you over them?

Hmm, minority filled places that the kids don't even want to learn or anything. They are there because they are required to. To have a succesfull school system you have to have kids who are willing to learn on some level, not some people who could care less.

So you suggest we just abandom them? Well, you're right -- they're just poor Black kids, who needs them anyway?

why must he be our president with nothing more that a platform and a four month [controversial] war record?

So you'd rather have a president who is also rich, but whose war record consists of flying jets around Texas -- until he disappeared from his post, of course.

[Extollat Sanders]

Since you clearly do not understand the reason why the Purple Heart is given out, nor do you understand how damaging even a simple war wound can be, I don't see fit to go to lengths to refute this point.

It's not that shrapnel isn't a wound, it's the fact that he goes about flaunting the presence of clusters of metal that didn't pose enough of a problem to have them removed, in his leg. The point is - It's not big or a deal, noris it out of the ordinary. As Ace said, thousands of soldiers have been wounded in battle. Many of them with serious wounds deserve a purple heart [just as much as Kerry], but they don't go about saying I'm a hero because I got shot all up and down my arm, or because I lost my foot.

The UN said he didn't have them. Several government agencies have confirmed the lack of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. None have been found. Why should I believe you over them?

So? It still does not mean they do not exist. Iraq is immense, how knows how long it would take to search the entire nation? Going looking for sometihng and not finding it yet, does not mean that you won't find it if you keep looking. I'm simply saying, a search status does not rule the outcome of that search.

So you suggest we just abandom them? Well, you're right -- they're just poor Black kids, who needs them anyway?

Who said they had to be black? Sounds like someone's being racist. =P

So you'd rather have a president who is also rich, but whose war record consists of flying jets around Texas -- until he disappeared from his post, of course.

Look, all of this 'war record' malarchy began with Kerry's campain. And because of that, Bush's matters somehow. I don't care what Kerry did in vietnam, but because we know, it makes me want to shoot him myself. Bush doesn't go compaining with his war efforts/failures, does he? I do not think that that is what matters, which might be why Bush doesn't focus on it.... hm.

[acemaverick1381]

What does that have to do with federal budget and the national debt?

You tell me. You were the one who said that compaines were becoming bankrupted. I am saying that others are flourishing.

Money doesn't grow on trees.

And neither do human lives. For a war that is justified protection for troops should be. Also, if it was so bad, how come only 12 congressmen voted agaisnt it?

The UN said he didn't have them. Several government agencies have confirmed the lack of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. None have been found. Why should I believe you over them?

You don't have to believe me if you don't want to but thats the fact. I don't see how the UN could have possibly covered all of a land mass the size of California in this time. The place is huge with underground silos.

So you'd rather have a president who is also rich, but whose war record consists of flying jets around Texas -- until he disappeared from his post, of course.

You forgot that he has a cabinet of people who have served in wars. Colon Powell ring a bell?

So you suggest we just abandom them? Well, you're right -- they're just poor Black kids, who needs them anyway?

No, I'm saying that you can't teach a bunch of kids that don't want to learn in the first place. Its not possible.

Reagan's plan resulted in a horrible recession in the late 80s. If you disagree, provide data to back up your claims, instead of just making statements with no supporting evidence. All you need to do is study recent history to see the failure of Reagan's economic plan.

Of course, there is a clear political lesson in all this, not just for George W. Bush, but for Republicans running for office everywhere. Conservative principles succeed at the ballot box. Conservative principles also succeed in the real world when they are put into practice. For every Republican candidate out there, every time he or she reads a negative poll, or fears a tough legislative confrontation, or worries about making the next politically astute move, perhaps they will pause a moment and ponder Reagan's wisdom. Conservative principles win. Stick to them.

 Reagen Legacy

Please remember that we also have to deal with social security. Remember that thing that Roosevelt (D) created? Over 1 trillion dollars in debt now, and quickly growing. And as I said before, it takes awhile for the Republican enconmy works, and the proper president doesn't get credited for it since he is out of office. And if Republican values don't, why do people support Republicans? I have seen what people think of his ecnomics. There was a lot of problems back in the 80's. AIDS, Drugs, all kinds of stuff that required federal spending. People say it doesn't work, the trickle down doesn't work but yet, after Bush Sr. did something like it, and Clinton did nothing and the economy improved. I am convinced that the conservative way works in time, but then Democrats get in and screw it up. To make it seem that the economy is perfect you have to almost guess and pray. You have to hope that no new issues arise (like 9/11) that require a lot of money to be spent.

Since you clearly do not understand the reason why the Purple Heart is given out, nor do you understand how damaging even a simple war wound can be, I don't see fit to go to lengths to refute this point.

I fully understand the requirements. You can get a purple heart in any combat situation. But when you compare shrapnel in a leg, that doesn't even require immedidate medial attention to someone who has lost their limbs, brain damage, etc, who is more deserving? It should be obvious.

[mipadi]

Well, we've certainly shown why Kerry is not qualified to be president. Perhaps we can get away from the negative side of things and show why Bush is qualified to be president?