|By Link12 (Link12) on Wednesday, September 01, 2004 - 11:19 pm: Edit|
While I am strictly Republican in my beliefs (Ex: economic ways, cultural ways), I really feel that Bush and his cabinet are extremely low in morals and honesty. I feel the war in Iraq was nothing more than a retaliation for Hussein's assasination attempt on Bush's father, to earn money in oil, and for personal connections of Bush to increase their wealth through ties with companies doing business on Iraq. In my opinion, the war in Afganistan, however, was not conducted as thouroughly as it should have been because of Bush's connections to the Bin Laden family (Carlyle group). Again, personal interests conflict with presidential responsibilities, showing Bush (and his Cabinet) to be immoral. Since they lied about their intentions in the war on terror, they are being dishonest, as well. This makes the Bush administration very unappealing to me. If I was voting, I would not vote for Bush.
I strongly disagree with the Democrats on nearly all of their issues. I am strongly agianst welfare programs, for instance, or helping the environment at the expense of business. In addition, Kerry seems to wishy-washy and will probably prove to be a weak leader. Therefore, I would not vote for Kerry, either.
Nader is okay to me, I guess. But since he'll just help Bush win, I just can't vote for him.
I said before, already, I am a strong Republican- score of very conservative:2/30 (1 being most conservative, 30 being very liberal). But, I just can't agree with Bush in the recent wars, and question his morals and honesty. Therefore, I'd rather not even cast a ballot, and wait til a better Republican candidate comes in 2008. Just my 2 cents.
|By Vancat (Vancat) on Wednesday, September 01, 2004 - 11:24 pm: Edit|
where did you get your conservativeness score?? I want to see how conservative I am!.
Another thing, why don't you vote for Badnarick? Support now could mean bigger and better things in the future.
|By Link12 (Link12) on Thursday, September 02, 2004 - 09:09 pm: Edit|
I got the score on a classroom test I took from this textbook. I just don't think that the 2-party system will ever change; that's why I wouldn't vote for Badnarick.
|By Jlq3d3 (Jlq3d3) on Thursday, September 02, 2004 - 09:15 pm: Edit|
Hey, I support Bush, but if you are not going to vote for him, at least vote for the libertarian. It wont change the 2 party system, which I like, but it will send a message.
|By Dovaan05 (Dovaan05) on Friday, September 03, 2004 - 02:30 am: Edit|
*waiting for an overambitious Democrat to say "but you know that being conservative doesn't make you a republican at all...in fact republicans aren't conservative because of this, that, and another generic lie"*
|By Seleucus26 (Seleucus26) on Friday, September 03, 2004 - 10:32 am: Edit|
|By Scubasteve (Scubasteve) on Friday, September 03, 2004 - 10:46 am: Edit|
I have a question for all you Republicans. Is Bush honestly the man you want representing your party? Or if possible, would you choice someone else like Giuliani or whoever? I mean honestly, is Bush your #1 choice?
|By Nlkrueger (Nlkrueger) on Friday, September 03, 2004 - 04:09 pm: Edit|
Haha, of course Bush isn't my number one choice.
But surely you Dems wish that you could go back in time and choose someone other than Kerry.
|By Fundingfather (Fundingfather) on Friday, September 03, 2004 - 05:04 pm: Edit|
I'm sort of an ABK (Anybody But Kerry) person. I see a horrible future for this country from a national security perspective if Kerry becomes president. (Like Zel Miller, Ed Koch, the mayor of St. Paul, the mayor of Youngstown, Ron Silver, etc.) There will be a lot of people who have never cast a vote for a Republican before pulling the Bush lever this year.
I'm less worried about what Kerry might do to the economy because issues like that must be done jointly with Congress and there will hopefully be enough impedance there to keep things a bit more rational.
|By Mom101 (Mom101) on Friday, September 03, 2004 - 05:07 pm: Edit|
Bush is no where close to my number 1 choice. And yes, Rudy would be. He did a heck of a great job for NY. Has anyone else heard the Saudi Government commercial I heard on my popular music radio station? They obviously want to keep Bush in the White House.
|By Megofou (Megofou) on Friday, September 03, 2004 - 05:10 pm: Edit|
"There will be a lot of people who have never cast a vote for a Republican before pulling the Bush lever this year."
Interesting. I've come across several people (in Ohio) who are registering to vote who've never done so before. To vote against Bush.
|By Shortcakefairy (Shortcakefairy) on Friday, September 03, 2004 - 05:16 pm: Edit|
yeah evn though i want bush to win with all my heart...i must admit that the michael moore, MTV crowd, and Anti-Bush forces are pretty strong in riling up the people who've never voted.
|By Fundingfather (Fundingfather) on Friday, September 03, 2004 - 05:18 pm: Edit|
who are registering to vote who've never done so before
Well, there's a real endorsement for a well educated electorate. It does scare me that there will be such people who get their news and opinions about politics from such sources as newspaper headlines, 30 second sound bites, Jay Leno, Comedy Central, etc. That the future of this country may be in their hands is a frightening prospect.
|By Hunter1985 (Hunter1985) on Friday, September 03, 2004 - 05:19 pm: Edit|
Reposted from the Dubya speech thread:
I think the election, barring any big national events (terroism, etc.) was clinched today. Bush dusted his cuffs off hit Kerry with the knockout punch. Kerry's post-convnetion speech was merely him staggering around the ring dazed an confused. He wants people to stop talking about his service in Vietnam, but he had Edwards introduce him as a war hero, he wants people to stop questioning his patriotism, yet he/Edwards (forget who) talked about Cheney's defferments, and he says he has a vision for America, yet he countered with "Well...Bush is wrong so that means I'm right no matter what I have in mind, and btw Bush is wrong."
I know anything can happen, and I may be proven wrong, but I cannot see any legitimate scenario in which Kerry organizes the troops and pulls this thing off. Kerry from the beginning was nothing more than a compromise between the anti-establishment Dean people and the populist Edwards supporters. Until Iowa, he was almost nobody's first choice, hell, he couldn't even run as the "war hero" candidate with Clark in the race. The only reason he got the nomination was because the different campaigns decided to run on the "anybody but Bush" mantra and picked the vanilla, unexciting Kerry. He literally lives up to the phrase, "jack of all trades, master of none." He does not have enough vigor, personality, or the campaign management(remember the unbeatable Carville/Begala team) to win this election on his own- he needs Bush to beat himself- which could happen depending on the focus- domestic or foreign.
The fact is, today, the Republicans are so much better at playing the political game than the democrats. Like I said, in the 90's, you couldn't touch Carville and Begala, they ran some of the best campaigns in history. But now, it's the Republicans that know how to win an election. This became obvious last night in ironically enough, the baloon drop- which worked to (almost) perfection and put the cherry on top, whereas I think we all remember the DNC production manager screaming for the baloons that never came.
So that's my 2 cents, I think Bush wins this in an election that won't be as close as people think. But again, I could be wrong, in that case, keep the 2 cents.
|By Scubasteve (Scubasteve) on Friday, September 03, 2004 - 06:46 pm: Edit|
"Has anyone else heard the Saudi Government commercial I heard on my popular music radio station? They obviously want to keep Bush in the White House. "
Lol. Yes and I wonder why?? haha
Hunter I responded to your post in the other thread. But just to sum up what I said, historically conventions only shift the polls short term. Most americans do not even watch the conventions.
And a big problem that Bush has that many of you forget... when they poll and you get numbers 48% to 46% in favor of Bush... or whatever... most of you are forgeting the undecided vote is not accounted for. And the vast majority of the dumbass vote is going to swing Kerry (as it is traditional for them to swing democratic)
|By Socalnick (Socalnick) on Friday, September 03, 2004 - 07:03 pm: Edit|
"Most americans do not even watch the conventions."
your probably right that most people dont watch the conventions, but bush's speach was on all the major networks. Most voteing americans probably watch part of the conventions, hear the hilights of them on the evening news, or read about it in the newspaper. I dont disagree with what you said scubasteve, but im just putting my opinion on that issue.
|By Riflesforwatie (Riflesforwatie) on Friday, September 03, 2004 - 07:20 pm: Edit|
The ratings for both conventions were, at most, around 20-25 million viewers.
|By Scubasteve (Scubasteve) on Friday, September 03, 2004 - 08:08 pm: Edit|
"And the vast majority of the dumbass vote is going to swing Kerry (as it is traditional for them to swing democratic) "
Wow that was real mature of the moderator (whoever it was)
I originally said "And the vast majority of the undecided vote is going to swing Kerry (as it is traditonal for them to swing democratic)"
Some moderator found it appropriate to edit my post and change "undecided" to "dumbass"
|By Vancat (Vancat) on Friday, September 03, 2004 - 08:30 pm: Edit|
Haha. Maybe they are pissed because you still haven't admitted you were wrong about Team USA basketball.
Or....it's yet another example of the VAST RIGHT-WING CONSPIRACY TO TAKE OVER THE WORLD. BWAHAHA.
Report an offensive message on this page E-mail this page to a friend
|Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.|
|Administrator's Control Panel -- Board Moderators Only|