BUSH 2004 - It's Over !!!!!!!!

[kramadas]

Nostradamus - Now there is an argument you Libs can really get in to. LOL - No wonder you LOST BIG -

Its a joke you moron! haha

Guess Repubs can't see a joke when they see one!

[vicman]

I think Kerry ran a really bad campaign. He should never have been bragging about Vietnam so much in the beginning. People did not like his wife. He scared people with talk of tax increases. People were not sure he had the backbone to finish what we started in Iraq, so they were scared to change.

If Kerry would have focused more from the beginning on jobs and if he could have done a better job of convincing people he could fix Iraq he c ould have won.

John Edwards did not help Kerry at all. He seemed mad all the time. Women voters across the nation voted overwhelmingly for Bush.

i'm very interested to see what the breakdown of voters is when the statistics come out. what type of person voted for bush, and what type of person voted for kerry. men, women, youth, minorities, income, etc.

some stats that i am seeing are that only 17% (18-25 y/o)of youth in America voted, that is well bellow what was expected.

i'll go further on kerry not running a good campaign and say that the democratic party did not run a good campaign across the board either. i think that kerry should have worked more in reassuring the people that he would be an effective leader and that he meant business instead of almost entirely running on the "i can do whateever bush is doing better" ticket.

further, i reall don't see anyone in the democratic party who could pose a serious challange 4 years from now. obama is to young, plus it's clear that voters tend to prefer candidates that have some work experience at the local level (i.e. governor) vs. candidates who have spent a long time working in Washington.

[nootsy]

I found it funny when seeing exit polls; people were questioned in middle america on the economy and terrorism.

Bush always lost on the economy but won on terrorism.

In NY where there was a terrorist attack Kerry won in a landslide. John Stewart said it best last night "we are the city that never sleeps b'c we are scared shitless"

The people in middle america will never have to deal with terrorism no one is going to bomb Kansas or Kentucky but that's what decided their vote

Karl Rove is a genius

UMMMM _ oklahoma City? I guess that dosent count as terrorism? Keep getting your facts from John Stewart.

[nootsy]

intervention as opposed to traditional isolationism. Increased fiscal spending. More religious involvement in the role of government. THe big corporations bit I'm not sure about - not sure if its just a Bush thing or a general neo-con philosophy. A bunch of other shit that I don't know too much about so I won't comment on. My biggest beef is the foreign policy part - this administration does not know how to handle interventionism at all - they overestimate their resources & power to influence, and under-estimate simple human nature, and the different mindsets (read: cultures) of the "enemy".

Got news from a friend at Heritage that traditional (paleo) conservatives are getting increasinly pissed at the neo-cons. Don't be surprised if you see a lot of turmoil in the Republican party once the election is over. Same with the Democratic party (but this last bit I only got from the news last night).

See after reading this I wouldnt be so quick to call anyone Moron. I would debate it and tell you where your arguments fall short but since We won anyway I will let you live on in your ignorance.

[nootsy]

intervention as opposed to traditional isolationism. Increased fiscal spending. More religious involvement in the role of government. THe big corporations bit I'm not sure about - not sure if its just a Bush thing or a general neo-con philosophy. A bunch of other shit that I don't know too much about so I won't comment on. My biggest beef is the foreign policy part - this administration does not know how to handle interventionism at all - they overestimate their resources & power to influence, and under-estimate simple human nature, and the different mindsets (read: cultures) of the "enemy".

Got news from a friend at Heritage that traditional (paleo) conservatives are getting increasinly pissed at the neo-cons. Don't be surprised if you see a lot of turmoil in the Republican party once the election is over. Same with the Democratic party (but this last bit I only got from the news last night).

See after reading this I wouldnt be so quick to call anyone Moron. I would debate it and tell you where your arguments fall short but since We won anyway I will let you live on in your ignorance.

[vicman]

UMMMM _ oklahoma City? I guess that dosent count as terrorism? Keep getting your facts from John Stewart.

except that the responsible party were average americans, not middle easterners.

[amyscottsdale]

intervention as opposed to traditional isolationism. Increased fiscal spending. More religious involvement in the role of government. THe big corporations bit I'm not sure about - not sure if its just a Bush thing or a general neo-con philosophy. A bunch of other shit that I don't know too much about so I won't comment on. My biggest beef is the foreign policy part - this administration does not know how to handle interventionism at all - they overestimate their resources & power to influence, and under-estimate simple human nature, and the different mindsets (read: cultures) of the "enemy".

Got news from a friend at Heritage that traditional (paleo) conservatives are getting increasinly pissed at the neo-cons. Don't be surprised if you see a lot of turmoil in the Republican party once the election is over. Same with the Democratic party (but this last bit I only got from the news last night).

I'm not sure what all that means, but I don't want our government ignoring camps in places like Afganistan anymore where people are training to fly planes into our buildings. When we know there is a camp like that I want us to go in and get them.

[kramadas]

See after reading this I wouldnt be so quick to call anyone Moron. I would debate it and tell you where your arguments fall short but since We won anyway I will let you live on in your ignorance.

the typical cop-out...go ahead debate the fact that Iraq was a success.

[nootsy]

intervention as opposed to traditional isolationism. Increased fiscal spending. More religious involvement in the role of government. THe big corporations bit I'm not sure about - not sure if its just a Bush thing or a general neo-con philosophy. A bunch of other shit that I don't know too much about so I won't comment on. My biggest beef is the foreign policy part - this administration does not know how to handle interventionism at all - they overestimate their resources & power to influence, and under-estimate simple human nature, and the different mindsets (read: cultures) of the "enemy".

Got news from a friend at Heritage that traditional (paleo) conservatives are getting increasinly pissed at the neo-cons. Don't be surprised if you see a lot of turmoil in the Republican party once the election is over. Same with the Democratic party (but this last bit I only got from the news last night).

I would be more reserved about calling people Morons when you are spewing out information that is flawed. You admit that you dont know too much about certain issues yet you label the president. I am curious what year of college you are in? I would educate you on the policies of the President and try to inform you why we are doing what we are doing but as of yesterday it dosent matter anymore 4 more years

[somebitch]

it is sad that the american people are really that stupid.

[vicman]

I would be more reserved about calling people Morons when you are spewing out information that is flawed. You admit that you dont know too much about certain issues yet you label the president. I am curious what year of college you are in? I would educate you on the policies of the President and try to inform you why we are doing what we are doing but as of yesterday it dosent matter anymore 4 more years

ravermania has already given some of his background on posts on the board. working on his 2nd masters and works in the world bank. plus i know some of his closest freinds also happen to be republicans, he probably has a better perspective on things than the majority of people in his age bracket.

[amyscottsdale]

I found it funny when seeing exit polls; people were questioned in middle america on the economy and terrorism.

Bush always lost on the economy but won on terrorism.

In NY where there was a terrorist attack Kerry won in a landslide. John Stewart said it best last night "we are the city that never sleeps b'c we are scared shitless"

The people in middle america will never have to deal with terrorism no one is going to bomb Kansas or Kentucky but that's what decided their vote

Karl Rove is a genius

and Bush always lost in those exit polls on Iraq, but won on terrorism.

[sobeton]

i dont know if i should feel more sad that bush won or so mad in the pathetic showing the democrats had across the board yesterday losing seats in the house and senate. but the American people spoke last night and they elected Bush for another term and like it or not I think that everyone, while they should keep on fighting for the principles they believe in, they should rally behind him and finish the work started in Iraq.

I do feel concerned that in a lot of environmental, social and economic issues everyone will be paying for a long time for some of the bills that are likely to be passed in the next 4 years with GOP contol.

it's more than obvious that the leaders in the democrat party have totally lost touch with the rural vote and with their constituents back home once they reach office.

but in any case, i really dont see any shady stuff that went on and i really dont see the 150k to 250k provisional ballots will make any significant differences in Ohio.

i hope that people in general continue to show interest in politics as they shown in this election, because at the end i think that it is the healthiest thing that can happen.

~~> as for me i really hope to get more involved in public health policy issues in the next 4 years and hopefully make a difference for what i believe in.

I must agree, and very well stated as well. nothing but respect for your choice to become more involved in public health policy issues. as a whole ,we all need to become more active in issues which are important to us.

[kramadas]

I'm not sure what all that means, but I don't want our government ignoring camps in places like Afganistan anymore where people are training to fly planes into our buildings. When we know there is a camp like that I want us to go in and get them.

See if thats the case, first the intel has to be very very good (not like the pre-war intel). Second, I'd much rather have covert ops take them out rather than a full-scale war that cost millions, and thousands of lives on both sides.

And then finally, I'm tired of this double dealing shit...if a regime is a dictatorship then there should be no dealings with them AT ALL. You do realize that the US dealt with Saddam in the 80's, and in the present day still deals with Saudi Arabia and Pakistan (though Pakistan is a lot better than Saudi).

[nootsy]

the typical cop-out...go ahead debate the fact that Iraq was a success.

Iraq will be a sucess. Free elections in Afghanistan - Russia 10 years and many soilders dead - they withdraw similar with England. US - less then 3 years and free elections. Libiya Give us there WMDs and opens the country to free trade. Pakistan becomes a ally of US. Iraq Will have free elections. The extreme Muslim Factionalist are trying so desperatly to stop us in Iraq but it wont happen. Do you think those terrorist like Zakarwi (sp?) would be working a 9 - 5 job if we were not in Iraq? Or would he be using his resources to attack America and or its intrests? The front on the war on terror is now in Iraq - better then here. Over 72% of the Military polled said they were voting For Bush. Most importantly the most dangerous country Iran is now surrounded and cut off

[kramadas]

ravermania has already given some of his background on posts on the board. working on his 2nd masters and works in the world bank. plus i know some of his closest freinds also happen to be republicans, he probably has a better perspective on things than the majority of people in his age bracket.

hehe..thanks for the vote of confidence Vic!

[amyscottsdale]

See if thats the case, first the intel has to be very very good (not like the pre-war intel). Second, I'd much rather have covert ops take them out rather than a full-scale war that cost millions, and thousands of lives on both sides.

And then finally, I'm tired of this double dealing shit...if a regime is a dictatorship then there should be no dealings with them AT ALL. You do realize that the US dealt with Saddam in the 80's, and in the present day still deals with Saudi Arabia and Pakistan (though Pakistan is a lot better than Saudi).

Well, I just finished reading the 9/11 report and it seems the CIA did know they were up to something, they just didn't know what. So intel was good. If we had the balls to go in and get those fuckers the World Trade center would still be there and Osama Bin Laden would be dead.

[nootsy]

See if thats the case, first the intel has to be very very good (not like the pre-war intel). Second, I'd much rather have covert ops take them out rather than a full-scale war that cost millions, and thousands of lives on both sides.

And then finally, I'm tired of this double dealing shit...if a regime is a dictatorship then there should be no dealings with them AT ALL. You do realize that the US dealt with Saddam in the 80's, and in the present day still deals with Saudi Arabia and Pakistan (though Pakistan is a lot better than Saudi).

First we only recently deal with Pakistan thanks to Bush. You want Pakistan on out side. second Bush wants to Drill in Alaska which would GREATLY reduce our need for Saudi Oil. The Dems keep stopping him therefore one could assume that the DEMs are looking out for the intrests of Saudi Arabia. WHY did we deal with Saddam in the 1980s - Too much to write I will be brief. Carter screwed over the royal family of Iran by standing By and letting the Religious Muslims take over the country. Carter belived if we did not get involved we could open good relations after the take over - Well guess what - anyone remember the hostage crisis Regan had to get us out of? Iran became hostile toward the US So Regan supported there enemy (Saddam Hussein) any way alot more to it then that but noone will read it and I dont feel like writing it.

[kramadas]

Iraq will be a sucess. Free elections in Afghanistan - Russia 10 years and many soilders dead - they withdraw similar with England. US - less then 3 years and free elections. Libiya Give us there WMDs and opens the country to free trade. Pakistan becomes a ally of US. Iraq Will have free elections. The extreme Muslim Factionalist are trying so desperatly to stop us in Iraq but it wont happen. Do you think those terrorist like Zakarwi (sp?) would be working a 9 - 5 job if we were not in Iraq? Or would he be using his resources to attack America and or its intrests? The front on the war on terror is now in Iraq - better then here. Over 72% of the Military polled said they were voting For Bush. Most importantly the most dangerous country Iran is now surrounded and cut off

I wonder if thats what was said about Vietnam. Iraq might be on the verge of a civil war. Would you still consider it a success if the Iraqis vote in a hardline Muslim govt which is anti-US? Free elections in Aghanistan?? You do realize the power still lies with warlords, right? There has been an increase in kidnappings and attacks in Aghanistan. Pakistan is a dictatorship where Mushraff has a fragile hold on power. If extremists take over, trust me there is no "ally". And why is the US supporting another dictatorship in Saudi?? Iran is "cut off" for now, but they're going to go ahead with their uranium enrichment. And if Israel bombs them, they will react, making things very very bad for the US. Because, if the US is seen as supporting another attack on another soverign Muslim country, wonder how the Muslims in the world (and Afghanistan and Iraq) would feel. Gee...I'm sure they'll be backing Bush all the way huh! You might want to think twice before calling people ignorant. What is prevalent here is total lack of understanding of the ME(and Islamic) culture, and the way people over there think.

No, Bush created this mess, and I can only hope to God he learns from his mistakes and cleans it up properly. But I'm not going to hold my breath.

[nootsy]

and Bush always lost in those exit polls on Iraq, but won on terrorism.

The big thing with the Exit polls were that they were 59% women and 41% Men but the Media didnt tell you that. Women are more likely to vote Democrat. I guess Just cause the Media says its so dosent mean it really is.... HMMMM

[kramadas]

First we only recently deal with Pakistan thanks to Bush. You want Pakistan on out side. second Bush wants to Drill in Alaska which would GREATLY reduce our need for Saudi Oil. The Dems keep stopping him therefore one could assume that the DEMs are looking out for the intrests of Saudi Arabia. WHY did we deal with Saddam in the 1980s - Too much to write I will be brief. Carter screwed over the royal family of Iran by standing By and letting the Religious Muslims take over the country. Carter belived if we did not get involved we could open good relations after the take over - Well guess what - anyone remember the hostage crisis Regan had to get us out of? Iran became hostile toward the US So Regan supported there enemy (Saddam Hussein) any way alot more to it then that but noone will read it and I dont feel like writing it.

Fuck drilling oil. Its about time the government put more resources into alternative energy. What they think oil is going last forever??

Its these double dealings that has fucked the US in the past, and will continue to do so. Supporting Iraq in the 80's was wrong, period. Giving them "double use" bacterial cultures to make biological weapons was wrong. The policy of "supporting the lesser of two evils" is wrong.

[vicman]

when will drilling in Alaska start?

[pookie23]

hopefully soon

[vicman]

so sad.

[mrmatas2277]

Its about time the government put more resources into alternative energy.

i totally agree....100%