Presidential Election

[PeregrineFalcon]

I decided to start this post after a Word Association Game post made in the General Forum.

Some people will probably decide to not say who they plan to vote for or may be undecided (i dont know how that can be possible at this pt). If you arent of age nor a US citizen just say who you WOULD vote for if you could. Let the battle begin hehe.

Also, if you feel like it say some reason why you want to vote FOR your candidate...please refrain from saying negatives about others....most of us know the negs, hence the reason we have made the decision and posted on the poll. If you chose undecided say why you are not sure about potential candidates. Lets keep this clean :-D

The reason i posted so many candidates is to be fair. The forum poll system restricted me to a certain amount so not all got in. I got the link here (http://www.politics1.com/p2004.htm).

[Uthor]

I'm waiting for just before election to decide, then prob voting for the craziest guy out there who has a chance to make a showing (not win, but threaten the other two parties).

[unrequited]

I'm waiting for just before election to decide, then prob voting for the craziest guy out there who has a chance to make a showing (not win, but threaten the other two parties).

Why waste your vote? Or this is a vote of, "I could care who wins between Bush and Kerry, I just want to be known as a person who voted for neither."?

[Canon]

Wait... I voted, but I screwed up... I was confused by the poll options.

... I'm from florida, btw...

[stormFury]

I'll probably vote for Bush since he seems the lesser of two evils at this point. Everything Kerry has said or done I've disagreed with or he's contradicted himself and changed his mind when it was politically popular, which to me shows a lack of character. (I know you said don't post negatives of others but screw you.) Also, I figure we should let Bush try and finish what he started in Iraq, whether you agree with us being there or not. Hopefully another 4 years is enough time... :roll:

[nOOB]

Kerry is a communist. The North vietnamese honor kerry daily. For those who dont remember North vietnamese are the communists. So like Storm said, picking the lesser of two evils sucks but at the moment Bush seems to be the better one.

[Uthor]

I'm waiting for just before election to decide, then prob voting for the craziest guy out there who has a chance to make a showing (not win, but threaten the other two parties).

Why waste your vote? Or this is a vote of, "I could care who wins between Bush and Kerry, I just want to be known as a person who voted for neither."?

I'd like to see a third party get support, but seeing as none will win the election this year, I'm just gonna go with the nuttiest third party.

As for Bush v. Kerry, well, I used to be a republican, and still hold many more conservative thoughts, and was happy to see Bush win 4 years ago. In that time, however, I have become more liberal and, for reasons other than becoming more liberal, I have become disgusted with Bush and the current administration.

I, however, hold little respect for the Democratic party (could be all my years of being a Rep speaking in that regard) and little respenct for Kerry as an individual, thus I wouldn't vote for him.

I personally believe that it matters little what a presidents political views are outside a few hot topics (abortion, gay right, etc.) where s/he may veto a bill going against their beliefs. This is because most anyone elected will be middle-of-the-road when dealing with most issues involving more traditional issues (the economy, the military, etc). I believe a president's most important role is presenting this country in a good light to the rest of the world. This requires a strong personallity, a willingness to put oneself on the line/take risks (not "let's invade Europe" type risks, more "sure, I'll talk one-on-one to the leader of a group who wants to see me dead" type risks) and carisma.

Seeing as how nobody with these traits wants to be president anymore, I have to go with the crazy guy.

[Nefarious]

if you look into, you can see that Bush has created more jobs than Clinton did when he was in office. You may not like Bush or how he runs things, but the truth is, he is helping the country despite going to war. And, now that he has been there for 4 years, he has more experience than Kerry.


plus, on a side note, i get to go the D.C. to meet him if he is reelected.

[wtf]

they all suck

[PeregrineFalcon]

Actually if u look at the beginning of his term he was actually causing job employment to plumet to its lowest in 8 years. It wasnt until recently that he has tried to increase jobs and this is all so that he can have something to show come election time.

[nOOB]

Actually if u look at the beginning of his term he was actually causing job employment to plumet to its lowest in 8 years. It wasnt until recently that he has tried to increase jobs and this is all so that he can have something to show come election time.

Thats because 9/11 happen his first year in office witch started the job loss.

[PeregrineFalcon]

You have to remember he was in office for about 8months and going on vacation more then staying and doing work. The job loss started early on in his term before 9/11.

[Thordic]

I don't like Bush, but I can't stand Kerry. Its a catch 22.

I already know what things will be like with Bush as president though, and I'm afraid to see what'd happen under Kerry, so I'm going to vote Bush.

[nOOB]

well said, and totally agree.

[PeregrineFalcon]

Well my biggest gripe with the Bush Administration is that they are reducing our rights and putting a damper on free speech. This is america and the Patriot Act has gone against all things american, it makes me sick. The people to blame for this are those hired by Pres. George Bush himself.

[nOOB]

ok but congress put that bill through. Granted, Bush could have veto'ed it but at the time it was pass wouldnt have made any senese. 9/11 was used to put the patriot act and the DMCA through congress... well not so much the DMCA but...

[Nefarious]

they are doing that to protect the country. quite frankly, i am willing to give up a tiny slice of free speech and some other rights for better protection

[ferret]

they are doing that to protect the country. quite frankly, i am willing to give up a tiny slice of free speech and some other rights for better protection

What protection? Nothing has really improved. We haven't caught those that did it or stopped any new plots. Word is all the folks held down in Cuba actually had 0 useful information and didn't stop a single attack.

We don't need laws to protect the country. We need agencies that actually do their job, that they're already legally capable of doing before all of this.

[PeregrineFalcon]

they are doing that to protect the country. quite frankly, i am willing to give up a tiny slice of free speech and some other rights for better protection

Thats sad. So what u are saying is that it is alright for the govt to watch and monitor everythng you are doing just because they have a hunch you may be a terrorist. That means that federal agents can spy on all info coming in and out of your ports without a warrant and use what they find against you in almost any court of law. If they find u are transferring music illegally in the process of their investigation u can have charges pressed against you for copyright law breaking. In the past this was an intrusion on the rights we have as american citizen to know about all allegations being made upon us; i personally like the idea that I was innocent until proven guilty. I could go on and on, but ill stop for now.

The patriot act goes against the reason this country was founded. Check the constitution and check up on your history because the US broke away from these ideals over 200years ago in hopes of creating a more equal and free country. What this patriot act is doing is saying those men who fought for these ideas during our countries foundation were a waste.

[PeregrineFalcon]

they are doing that to protect the country. quite frankly, i am willing to give up a tiny slice of free speech and some other rights for better protection

What protection? Nothing has really improved. We haven't caught those that did it or stopped any new plots. Word is all the folks held down in Cuba actually had 0 useful information and didn't stop a single attack.

We don't need laws to protect the country. We need agencies that actually do their job, that they're already legally capable of doing before all of this.

Glad some of us here realize what is truly going on. If the dept which have been in operation just did their jobs correctly we wouldnt have to lose our priveledges as americans.

[Nefarious]

they are doing that to protect the country. quite frankly, i am willing to give up a tiny slice of free speech and some other rights for better protection

Thats sad. So what u are saying is that it is alright for the govt to watch and monitor everythng you are doing just because they have a hunch you may be a terrorist. That means that federal agents can spy on all info coming in and out of your ports without a warrant and use what they find against you in almost any court of law. If they find u are transferring music illegally in the process of their investigation u can have charges pressed against you for copyright law breaking. In the past this was an intrusion on the rights we have as american citizen to know about all allegations being made upon us; i personally like the idea that I was innocent until proven guilty. I could go on and on, but ill stop for now.

The patriot act goes against the reason this country was founded. Check the constitution and check up on your history because the US broke away from these ideals over 200years ago in hopes of creating a more equal and free country. What this patriot act is doing is saying those men who fought for these ideas during our countries foundation were a waste.

thats not what i said. I said a slice of. I would NEVER let them go that far

[ferret]

They pretty much did.

[PeregrineFalcon]

exactly...they did what they wanted, u may think giving a slice is fine, but they thought taking 5 slices was more sufficent.

[steaLer]

bush lies and cheats the public everyday. the whole goddamn administration is a lie. anyone but bush is fine with me.

i have not seen a more corrupt administration in recent history. i'm ashamed of being called an american because of this jackass. i hate him.

[stormFury]

Yeah, lying under oath and being impeached doesn't scream corruption or anything. stfu, stop getting your information from Fox News or Michael Moore.

[[gh]Spurty]

bush lies and cheats the public everyday. the whole goddamn administration is a lie.

well, you are almost right...

POLITICIANS lie and cheat the public everyday. the whole goddamn administration is a lie.

Politics isn't the art of telling people the truth. People can't handle the truth, they are collectively DUMB. Individually, you are all clever, but collectively, you panic and knee jerk react to things.

Politics is deciding what is best for the people they represent. That might mean concealment and downright dirty tactics. Now thats clever.

Think about how you win in Counter-Strike. Do you shout your ever move to the rest of the world ? Do you stand in the open so people are clear of your intentions? Or do you play the game another way inorder to win?

Oh yes, I almost forgot. Gorvernment is a bit of a game. You scratch my bnack, I'll scratch yours.

What is interesting is things like Homo-marriage. Which one of you voted that in ? I don't mind if you did, you at least played a part in it. But, somehow, I don't think you got a say in the matter because the law makers use the following logic: People are collectively DUMB and can't be trusted to take the path which the lawmakers have already taken for you.

Excuse me picking up on Homo-marriage, I personnally don't care which way this kind of thing goes, but I do know that the general public in Massaschusetts voted 7/3 against it in opinion polls.

ok, that was all an example, please don't start drifting off topic.

Big brother, 1984, all that scarey stuff really does only bother those that have something to hide;however when people CONTROL your life, that I say, is totally different and beyond any reality where it is or could be conceived as being acceptable. :idea:

[ferret]

StormFury]Yeah, lying under oath and being impeached doesn't scream corruption or anything. stfu, stop getting your information from Fox News or Michael Moore.

This statement makes no sense. Fox News is fairly right winged, and Moore is so hard left it isn't funny.

The whole Clinton thing was bullshit. It shouldn't have happened. For several months we as a nation were transfixed on the fact that our president, like MANY MANY men before him in power, got a little favor from someone who worked for him. Because he tried to avoid the fact (As many many many men before him), the Republicans jumped on the chance to try to get rid of him.

The whole situation never should have existed, and if everyone hadn't made a big stink of it, his popularity wouldn't have dropped as low as it did towards the end. Believe what you will, it pretty much was Republicans vs Clinton, and nothing more to it. They had an opening and took it.

Monica had no impact on his job as a president or his policies.. Unless you consider the fact he had to waste months of his time dealing with it because people couldn't just let it go.

[Thordic]

Ferret, I think he was saying in general people shouldn't get their info from biased sources on either side.

[stormFury]

Yeah.

[ferret]

Apache]Ferret, I think he was saying in general people shouldn't get their info from biased sources on either side.

There's no such thing as unbiased media.

[Thordic]

You are still missing the point.

If you watch Michael Moore, and take everything he says at face value, then you have only been informed by a biased source.

But if you listened to two biased sources, then in the end you may be a little closer to the "truth".

All he was trying to say is don't be a lemming. Which, unfortunately, most people are.

[ferret]

Well he worded it badly, since he said to STOP watching two sources that have opposing biases :P

[stormFury]

Actually I just said that because I hate Michael Moore and that Bill O'reilly guy who is on Fox news. I dont know what I'm talking about most of the time, but apache made it sound better so I went with it.

/me walks away.

[unrequited]

Wow, anybody notice that we're at a 49%/49% split just like in the polls?

[PeregrineFalcon]

Its all about the swing voters hehe.

[Dissman]

Well my biggest gripe with the Bush Administration is that they are reducing our rights and putting a damper on free speech. This is america and the Patriot Act has gone against all things american, it makes me sick. The people to blame for this are those hired by Pres. George Bush himself.

The Patriot Act passed with a semi-unanimous vote so it wouldnt have mattered WHO was in office, it still would have passed, a lot of what was in the Patriot act, i agree with... such as being able to get a court order to tap a person's phone, and it applies to any phone that they use and any new phones that they get in the future... There are also a lot of parts that I DON'T agree with, such as secret searches, and the gag provisions when records are subpoenaed.

The whole Clinton thing was ****. It shouldn't have happened. For several months we as a nation were transfixed on the fact that our president, like MANY MANY men before him in power, got a little favor from someone who worked for him. Because he tried to avoid the fact (As many many many men before him), the Republicans jumped on the chance to try to get rid of him.

As far as the whole Clinton thing, i think that he was corrupt as hell... there were slated to be NINE Starr reports, we ever only saw one "the lewensky report"... the others were from such scandals as White Water, Travelgate, illegal stock trades in the futures market, documents that were under subpoena appearing the day AFTER the statute of limitations expired. The entire spin machine made all of the Clinton's wrongdoing to be "about sex." It was just not about sex... if it were "just sex" then i wouldnt have cared. I dont know why Ken Starr led with this, but it was very stupid for him to have.

But we really shouldnt be going here anyway.

they are doing that to protect the country. quite frankly, i am willing to give up a tiny slice of free speech and some other rights for better protection

"He who trades liberty for security, gets neither." - Ben Franklin

Actually if u look at the beginning of his term he was actually causing job employment to plumet to its lowest in 8 years. It wasnt until recently that he has tried to increase jobs and this is all so that he can have something to show come election time.

The official start of the recession was before the election, but we wont go there... there's the fact that in a lot of ways, George W. Bush was kind of a lame duck president until 9/11 happened... he had no mandate, and probably a third of the country is going around saying that he "stole" the election... There wasnt too much he could DO for those nine months... and the presidents of the past frequently go on vacation... George Bush was no diffrent before 9/11... Clinton, Bush 1, Reagan on and on, frequently went to Camp David... just the fact that Bush decides to go his ranch (where he did do work, when he was there, and he always does) in Crawford, TX is immaterial.

What protection? Nothing has really improved. We haven't caught those that did it or stopped any new plots. Word is all the folks held down in Cuba actually had 0 useful information and didn't stop a single attack.

We don't need laws to protect the country. We need agencies that actually do their job, that they're already legally capable of doing before all of this.

A lot of where we went wrong before 9/11 was the agencies were prevented from talking to eachother by both rules and law... in fact, one of the members of the 9/11 panel was the one to build the wall between the CIA and FBI. Yes, we need agencies that can do the job... i think that one of the dumbest things that they did was to create the TSA the way they did... it's still the same people running security NOW as it was before... in fact the director of Boston Logan Airport on 9/11 (where the attacks were launched from) is now in a position of HIGHER athority with the TSA. In fact, a recent study indicates that the TSA is just as bad as private screeners. If they wanted to create a new federal service for airline security... they should have created it from scratch, hiring new and qualified people and training them like they train federal agents.

As for a lot of the new laws, some were needed, some were not... some provisions of the Patriot Act were good... a lot were not... a lot of the other things being done to provide "better security" are not even directed twords larger aircraft, a lot of them target smaller aircraft... the ones if they were driven into a building would bounce off or break a window... not "weapons of terror."

As for preventing terror, maybe we should try some of the tried and true methods that were used in Isreal to stop terror attacks... scrutenizing passangers closer, border security, concealed carry of firearms by licensed civilians... as well as better human intelligence.

[JDogg]

My only comment is,

On Election Day everyone Old Enough To Vote Better

Cause if you don't then anything and everything you feel or say about a person is irrelevant. So unless you plan on voting you shouldn't take part in this pole or debate.

[ferret]

bump

[stormFury]

Interesting how my stance has changed in the last few months. Bush's desire to change the constitution based on his own personal beliefs really bothers me, but I still dont like Kerry...

I'm thinking about not voting.

[babyseal]

**** the patriot act.
and, uh, i swung the vote in favor of kerry. harharhar.

[shawmutt]

stormfury, check out the site I mentioned before ( www.selectsmart.com/president/ ). It will help you wade through the major issues and make an informed decision.

[Uthor]

Today's Get Fuzzy. Funny!
http://www.comics.com/comics/getfuzzy/archive/images/getfuzzy2732240041025.gif

[Doc Wattson]

ROFL

[Canon]

Nader.

I say screw these two mainstream-party guys and all their BS.

Neither one can manage to land a commercial-spot without harrassing his opponent. In YOUR ad I want to hear about YOU, not your opponent.

It's friggin' bs and I want to gouge my eyeballs out with my thumbs everytime I watch a commercial that goes something like this:

<candidateA> said he'd <somthing>. But <candidateA> has done <-1/something>. How can he say he'll do <something> if he does <-1/something>? <candidateA> <will/has> take(n) the country in the wrong direction. <candidateB> for a strong America.
I'm <candidateB> and I approve this load of shit.

A mojority of this crap is taking a shot at his opponent... and does nothing but say, "I'm not the best guy, obviously, or I'd just spend my time talking about how awesome I am and why... So, I'll rely on making you realize how much worse he is!"

[SavaThePriest]

Why is there no "None of the above" in the poll?

[Nub-Shtrike]

i see no communist candidate. everyone loves equality dont they!?

[Uthor]

Wooo!
http://www.somethingawful.com/articles.php?a=2463

[Nefarious]

bush ahead in the electoral count so far... 39 - 3

[Nefarious]

oh wow, now 66-74 kerry...

with in what, 3 min?

popular vote: 57-42 Bush

[Uthor]

oh wow, now 66-74 kerry...

with in what, 3 min?

popular vote: 57-42 Bush

Yeah, up until a 3 minutes ago, CNN was reporting as Kerry in the lead with Bush having more popular votes. I thought it was really funny; was thinking "Oh no, four more years of people telling me it's not their fault if the guy who won isn't president."

[Nefarious]

155 - 112

[cr0nick]

i dont have a tv

[Uthor]

www.cnn.com
www.msnbc.com
www.foxnews.com
www.bbc.com

All have (had) live updates on thier websites.