Election USA 2004 - HL2.net community Vote

[CptStern]

we've had many polls asking you to vote for either bush or kerry, but they've never been representative of how we would vote based on location. Vote according to what catagory best describes you. Discuss your choice


I'm not american but would vote for: Kerry

[Gunner]

I'm not american but I'd vote for Bush! and I'm dead serious :)

[CptStern]

poll in place: vote Para, thanks :)

[DiSTuRbEd]

Vote Bush.

[Neutrino]

Nice poll.

American and voting for Kerry.

[The Monkey]

Swede and voting Kerry.

[HunterSeeker]

What if you are both too young and non american to vote?

Anyway I am from sweden and would vote for Ralph Nader, but in reallity I would probubly vote for kerry just to prevent bush from winning (infernal 2 party system). But I still say I vote for other.

[CptStern]

What if you are both too young and non american to vote?

Anyway I am from sweden and would vote for Ralph Nader, but in reallity I would probubly vote for kerry just to prevent bush from winning (infernal 2 party system). But I still say I vote for other.


ya I didnt have enough space to include that: the polls only allows 10 choices. Just vote in the underage section

[blahblahblah]

Undecided. The more research I do, the more serious flaws I uncover about each political candidate/party.

[Letters]

I'm American and will be voting for Kerry...

[qckbeam]

I'm voting for the duck

[Dedalus]

not american, and probably don't know enough about the 'other' candidates, but based off what i know, i'd vote for kerry.

[CrazyHarij]

I'm not american but I'd vote for Kerry.

[Bad^Hat]

I'm not american but I'd vote for Kerry.

What the crazy Swede said.

[moppe]

I'm not american but I'd vote for Kerry.

[affen]

I'm not american but I'd vote for Kerry.

Idem dito.

[Sprafa]

(check location) Kerry.

[Korgoth]

American, and voting for John Kerry.

(btw, nice idea for a poll stern)

[RoyaleWithCheese]

Dutch and Kerry

[CptStern]

bush is getting slaughtered in the HL2.net community poll, but school hasnt let out yet for most american HL2.net members ...I'm sure the numbers will equalize a bit by nightfall

edit: thanks innervision, Neutrino :)

[The Mullinator]

Canadian, Kerry.

However there is really only one policy that truly makes me want Bush to lose and its this one:
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6232686/site/newsweek/

I had my opinions of this issue long before that article but this puts it nicely together for me.

[CptStern]

Canadian, Kerry.

However there is really only one policy that truly makes me want Bush to lose and its this one:
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6232686/site/newsweek/

I had my opinions of this issue long before that article but this puts it nicely together for me.


nice find

[Phraxtion]

At times its been kind of a toss up for me but... in the end im an American voting for Bush.

[Loke]

Not an American, but would vote for Kerry.

[Lil' Timmy]

American: Kerry

[DiSTuRbEd]

Funny enough, the non-american's want kerry... *doesn't say what he wants too*

[Jakeic]

why is that funny?

[KidRock]

wow do we really need another one of these threads?

[DiSTuRbEd]

why is that funny?

Because I had a talk with several non-american's on this topic, I laughed at what they had to say. WillH was there, me and him were talking to them, so was several other people that don't post on here :P

[Mechagodzilla]

I'm not american but would vote for: Kerry

Same here.

(Well, duh! :P)

[Fat Tony!]

Not american + too young to vote however I voted for non american and for kerry

[Vigilante]

I'd vote for Bush if I were old enough.

[DiSTuRbEd]

wow do we really need another one of these threads?

I throughly agree, if you're not american, then why discuss who you would vote for, because its not like you can vote anyways :P I just think this will cause flaming soon, cause it always does.

[Jakeic]

most of the world has a vested stake in who the next president of the united states is.

[DiSTuRbEd]

Uh why? Just because Bush did what he did to Iraq doesn't mean we are going crazy and sending troops everywhere.

[Vigilante]

Uh why? Just because Bush did what he did to Iraq doesn't mean we are going crazy and sending troops everywhere.
uhh...do you drive a honda civic or prelude or something? THe VTEC and 9,300 RPM gave me a hint. Come race my 'new' 94 supra turbo!

[KidRock]

most of the world has a vested stake in who the next president of the united states is.


I have no idea what you just said..


anyway.. no the rest of the world doesnt have a say in who the next president will be.

[Fender357]

I must say, very well put together poll.

American - Kerry

(he ownd Bush in the debates...even if it was repetitive crap)

[DiSTuRbEd]

uhh...do you drive a honda civic or prelude or something? THe VTEC and 9,300 RPM gave me a hint. Come race my 'new' 94 supra turbo!

I'll race you when I'm boosted ;) I am not a moron, I know those things can roll, used to have a friend with a 700hp 95 Supra. :imu:

Edit: Yes Civic Si

[Vigilante]

I must say, very well put together poll.

American - Kerry

(he ownd Bush in the debates...even if it was repetitive crap)
the first debate

[DiSTuRbEd]

Oh, S Hannity had a nice clip of the "I have a plan" speeches put together. Its quite comical he uses that over and over again.

[Jakeic]

sean hannity is a genius

[Mechagodzilla]

I have no idea what you just said..

Well, his point is that the president's importance is such that he has international influence, from such small things as trade laws, to combatting international terrorism.

Since I firmly believe that Bush's 'strategy' in his war on terror is actually increasing the risk of terrorists attacking the US or it's allies, I think, as an ally, that he should get the boot.


Also, some of us wouldn't want to see our pals down south get saddled with another four years of nonsense. Out of sympathy, you see.

[DiSTuRbEd]

Also, some of us wouldn't want to see our pals down south get saddled with another four years of nonsense. Out of sympathy, you see.

You think we wouldn't have the same with Kerry? Cause if you don't you are DEAD wrong. :rolleyes:

[Vigilante]

I'll race you when I'm boosted ;) I am not a moron, I know those things can roll, used to have a friend with a 700hp 95 Supra. :imu:

Edit: Yes Civic Si
700 hp? damn. Mine only makes around 290 to the wheels...I got it for cheap, too. I work at a dealership and someone traded it in on a new z06 vette. Got it for around $7k.

[CptStern]

Well, his point is that the president's importance is such that he has international influence, from such small things as trade laws, to combatting international terrorism.

Since I firmly believe that Bush's 'strategy' in his war on terror is actually increasing the risk of terrorists attacking the US or it's allies, I think, as an ally, that he should get the boot.


Also, some of us wouldn't want to see our pals down south get saddled with another four years of nonsense. Out of sympathy, you see.

hmmm I think you lost Kidrock at the word "Well.." :E

[DiSTuRbEd]

Yeah it was a pretty damn quick supra :P I wish he still had it to race my friend Garrett with his T04S FD RX-7, 400RWHP I've riden in the 7, and omg you get sucked into the back of the seat so fast if you don't pay attention.

[Jakeic]

if you're saying that we will go to war for haliburton under a kerry administration, i think you're right!

or that we will divert attention from the real terriorists in afganistan, all the while letting iran and north korea continue nuclear proliferation, i think you're right again!

or that we see tax cuts for upper class, and a roll back of environmental policies, i think you couldn't be more right.

[lans]

I'm not an American, but I vote Kerry.

Kerry will suffice for now, but mind you - neither political candidate is actually worthy, IMO.

[Erestheux]

Finally someone made one of these threads right! Thanks Stern!

I'm too young to vote (by about 3 months :(), but I would vote for Nader.

And yes, I realize that would "be a vote for Bush." He is my second choice. (Sorry, Sprafa :()

[Gorgon]

I'm not an American, but I vote Kerry.

KERY KERY KERY..............etc

[Mechagodzilla]

You think we wouldn't have the same with Kerry? Cause if you don't you are DEAD wrong. :rolleyes:

Well, let's see... Why do I find Bush to be shitty on the international scale?

1) Bush limits stem cell research.
If american scientists could do whatever they needed to in order to search for cures, their findings could help save the lives of people around the world, including Canada.

Kerry seeks to reduce those limitations, no?

2) Bush's administration is directly responsible for the Iraq war fiasco, which is fueling anti-western philosophy for no good reason, while simultaneously removing emphasis from the fight against Al-Queda. More terrorists = bad for everyone, including Canada.

Although he will have a huge amount of trouble cleaning up the Iraq mess that the previous administration had started, Kerry was not responsible for starting this misguided and dangerous war in the first place, and openly admits to it being a huge failure.

Also, his focus on finding allies in the war on terror might bring a better understanding between Canada and the US when terrorism is concerned, rather than the division created over Iraq. (We were right, by the way. :P)

3) Bush wants to ammend the constitution in order to ban gay marriage. this one is leaning more towards the "empathy" motivation. As some might remember from the "gay marriage" thread from a while back, there is absolutely no good reason why this unique form of discrimination should be made into constitutional law. (And I promise to give 140$ to anyone who can prove otherwise.)

Which leads to the obvious question: Why are you guys letting Canada beat you again?
We had the underground railroad way back when, and now we've got the marriages legal. :P
And our society is fine, by the way. Last time I checked, moral decay hasn't caused parliament hill to unfix itself from it's noble roost and plummet into the waters of the river nearby.

I mean, I don't want to be ashamed of being allied to America, but the fact that the president of the united states can even attempt to pass this law makes me cry on the inside.

While Kerry's not much better on this point (by letting any state ammend it's state constitution to do the same thing) , he's at least slightly better by allowing the equality to exist somewhere. Which is obviously more than I can say for Bush.

Despite those points, I guess I'm DEAD wrong because you said so. -----> :x

[DiSTuRbEd]

All I have to say is "I have a plan"...kthx.

[Neutrino]

All I have to say is "I have a plan"...kthx.

Why don't you go read his plan?

I mean what exactly do you expect? He can't outline his entire plans in a debate or interview or other similar circumstances. It's just not possible. But even so he has given brief outlines of most of his plans anyway if you listen to what he says.

Do you know the details of Bush's plans? He hasn't said anything more about his plans than Kerry has said about his own. In fact, from what I've seen Kerry has talked more about planning than Bush has. So again, what exactly is the problem?

[Tr0n]

I'm american...and I could give a rats ass...so I vote for no one.I'm to young to vote anyways.... :P

[=)PoLo(=]

http://www.kontrabandcontent.co.uk/1/graphics/movies/gopconstrm_movie.mov

Are we scared yet?

[<RJMC>]

Nader Rulez

[Wraith]

badnarik all the way

[Lil' Timmy]

http://www.kontrabandcontent.co.uk/1/graphics/movies/gopconstrm_movie.mov

Are we scared yet?ahhahahah one of the funniest things i've seen in a while.. the "saddam" and "terrorist" cuts had made me :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:


:thumbs:

[P-Lo]

http://www.kontrabandcontent.co.uk/1/graphics/movies/gopconstrm_movie.mov

Are we scared yet?

Roflmao, classic

[Neutrino]

ahhahahah one of the funniest things i've seen in a while.. the "saddam" and "terrorist" cuts had made me :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:


:thumbs:

It was more of a :laugh: ;( :laugh: ;( :laugh: thing for me.

[CptStern]

It was more of a :laugh: ;( :laugh: ;( :laugh: thing for me.


lol :laugh:

[Mechagodzilla]

It was more of a :laugh: ;( :laugh: ;( :laugh: thing for me.

Same here. :P

It's :laugh: because it's totally ridiculous, but it's ;( because it's completely true.

[Edge]

Undecided. The more research I do, the more serious flaws I uncover about each political candidate/party.

I have always been against Bush but after seeing the debates and researching more about Kerry I am undecided as well. If I were forced to decide right now I would vote for Bush. I can't see that he could screw it up any worse than Kerry would in the next 4 years.

[Javert]

I'm an American, and I will be voting for Kerry/Edwards.

[blahblahblah]

I have always been against Bush but after seeing the debates and researching more about Kerry I am undecided as well. If I were forced to decide right now I would vote for Bush. I can't see that he could screw it up any worse than Kerry would in the next 4 years.

It must be the water in Phoenix then. :P

(Phoenix, Arizona also).

[h00dlum]

Not american...vote Kerry...

[Jakeic]

I have always been against Bush but after seeing the debates and researching more about Kerry I am undecided as well. If I were forced to decide right now I would vote for Bush. I can't see that he could screw it up any worse than Kerry would in the next 4 years.

i'm not sure i understand, you saw the debates and felt Bush came across as someone you'd want for president?

and as far as your research goes, maybe you could enlighten some of us.

[f|uke]

Kerry will be getting my vote.

[Dr. Freeman]

im not American but i'd vote for Kerry.

[RRunner]

Im not American but i am allowed to vote, as fare as i can remember... have to check it though.
If i actually got myself together and fetched the pappers, then Kerry.

[CptStern]

Im not American but i am allowed to vote, as fare as i can remember... have to check it though.
If i actually got myself together and fetched the pappers, then Kerry.

how is that possible? you're not a citizen yet you can vote?

[RRunner]

how is that possible? you're not a citizen yet you can vote?

Yes and no, my fathers is a member of the polish/US veterans (cant recall the name), and im a auxillar member (have the reg papers somewhere). But i cant recall if its only my father that is able to vote (seem to recall my father getting my older brother voting pappers some years back).

[CptStern]

Yes and no, my fathers is a member of the polish/US veterans (cant recall the name), and im a auxillar member (have the reg papers somewhere). But i cant recall if its only my father that is able to vote (seem to recall my father getting my older brother voting pappers some years back).


so does that make you a citizen? You should find out and vote for Kerry :E

[RRunner]

Dont think im a citizen. I did fill in alot of pappers, swore an oath and all that (but im legally a danish citizen, living in sweden), all though i have to "trying to remember"...always will obey an officer of the United States etc etc..
Yeah i thought about it, methinks Bushy boy is really bad for the world (all though ketchup king, cant be that much better).
But i think its to late now anyways..

[Vigilante]

Well, this site is somewhat biased, as younger people tend to vote liberal, and older people tend to vote conservative. I believe it was Winston Churchill that said something like "If you dont vote liberal when you are young, you have no heart. If you don't vote conservative when you are older, you have no brains."

And you people dont need to worry, Kerry will probably win. If he does hopefully he can un-alienate the USA.

[Jakeic]

but i like being alone in the world.

[Shakermaker]

I'm not American but would vote for Kerry. I even got the T-shirt.

[Shadowlands5325]

I'm not American but would vote for: Kerry 46 35.94%

I wonder why

[Apos]

How can you all not be American? What is wrong with you? Do you.... HATE.... America?

[SLaY3r07]

Too young... Bush...

[CptStern]

this should be made a sticky at least till the election

[Korgoth]

yeah i'm with you stern, sticky icky this.
(oh and look whos winnin' at home and abroad :) )
hehehehe

[othello]

im american and voting for bush and gosh durn proud of it! :)

[othello]

Well, this site is somewhat biased, as younger people tend to vote liberal, and older people tend to vote conservative. I believe it was Winston Churchill that said something like "If you dont vote liberal when you are young, you have no heart. If you don't vote conservative when you are older, you have no brains."

And you people dont need to worry, Kerry will probably win. If he does hopefully he can un-alienate the USA.

thats because you get smarter as you get older :P

[Mechagodzilla]

thats because you get smarter as you get older :P

Actually, I think it has more to do with getting wealthier.

[othello]

Actually, I think it has more to do with getting wealthier.

im sure thats why john and teresa are voting for bush.

[CptStern]

im sure thats why john and teresa are voting for bush.


bush is no po boy, actually iraq made him much richer

[dream431ca]

As long as bush stays president the world will get more anti-american. It already is.

[othello]

bush is no po boy, actually iraq made him much richer

how so?

[dream431ca]

how so?

3 words...O-I-L

[Mechagodzilla]

im sure thats why john and teresa are voting for bush.

They're old too. Maybe they just didn't lose their hearts.

[oldagerocker]

not american and i'd vote kerry

[CptStern]

how so?

why

Operation
Iraqi
Liberation

of course ;)

[dream431ca]

why

Operation
Iraqi
Liberation

of course ;)

Operation
Iraq
Losing lots of american soldiers

Oh and Iraqi liberation is a coverup for OIL... American soldiers are protecting the Oil fields more than their own bases.

[CptStern]

Operation
I'm
Lost, help me papa bush!

[Mechagodzilla]

hehe

Obviously
It's
Losing

Oops,
I
Lied.

American soldiers are protecting the Oil fields more than their own bases.
Well, uh, maybe they are keeping the fuel away from Al Queda so that Osama won't be able to unleash his fleet of robo-tanks?

[othello]

3 words...O-I-L

and how does that benefit bush?

[othello]

why

Operation
Iraqi
Liberation

of course ;)

how does that benefit bush?

[Mechagodzilla]

how does that benefit bush?

I am also at a loss as to how controlling some of the largest oil fields in the world could be beneficial to Bush. Maybe he puts it on his salads?

[Tr0n]

I am also at a loss as to how controlling some of the largest oil fields in the world could be beneficial to Bush. Maybe he puts it on his salads? :laugh: mmmmmm....Salad oil could sell...

[othello]

I am also at a loss as to how controlling some of the largest oil fields in the world could be beneficial to Bush. Maybe he puts it on his salads?

so bush has direct control over these oil fields? he has his own oil company with a monopoly over these oil fields, and thus, he is reaping in billions, right? ok i see... its all too clear now. beneficial to our country? yes. beneficial to bush directly? prove it.

[Letters]

Whoa, that's closer than I thought it'd be for the voting Americans... usually polls on this site are heavily Kerry... must be all you... other people... :P

[Asus]

Now this poll shows that either:
1)The older you get the more likely you will be more conservative
or
2)As time goes on our population is becoming more liberal

Wonder which it is? Perhaps a little of both.

By the way, nice poll. It's a good one. ;)

[Phisionary]

Now this poll shows that either:
1)The older you get the more likely you will be more conservative
or
2)As time goes on our population is becoming more liberal

Wonder which it is? Perhaps a little of both.

By the way, nice poll. It's a good one. ;)I agree with those last sentiments. great poll. v. interesting.

I think it is both.

And, historically speaking, many of the positions held by the liberals of generations past is seen as the mainstream today. I'm no historian but I have seen some example which were fairly convincing of this. (subtext: liberal means progress ;) )


American. voting kerry.

I am rather surprised by the number of non-americans here. I knew there were quite a few, but had assmed at least? 50 percent were American. And unless this poll also demonstrates Americas' youth's disinterest in things political, that's not so. Hmm. :/

BTW, I watched a very interesting program on Bush + Kerry's histories (respectively), on PBS. Frontline, ran all week I guess. Good show.

[Raziaar]

My vote counts and I will be voting for Bush.

[SpuD]

bump

So people stop making new threads

[el Chi]

Vote Bush.
Yes indeed! His administration has only screwed up your economy and the rest of the world's opinion of your country (which is important, no matter how deep many Americans stick their heads in the sand in the hazardous belief that it's not) and consigned your amred forces to an incredibly hostile situation that was based on one of the most severe political lies to come from your country in decades. What more could you want from a President? An ounce of intelligence maybe? Oh dear.

Honestly, I really hope Kerry wins - he's not ideal, but at least he's not Bush and that's a start. Well it's like my sig says...

[ZEROarmy]

LOL, most of people who know how bad Bush is aren't American.

[SFLUFAN]

I'm an American who is a registered Republican and I'll be voting for Kerry.

[Icarusintel]

I'm American and voted Bush by absentee ballot and damn proud of it, thank goodness those foreigners don;t get votes, else the commies would win...

[blahblahblah]

I'm an American who is a registered Republican and I'll be voting for Kerry.

ditto, except I voted through mail-in ballot.

[CptStern]

I'm American and voted Bush by absentee ballot and damn proud of it, thank goodness those foreigners don;t get votes, else the commies would win...

huh? commies? didnt the paranoia about commies ready to take over the bastion of freedom that is america die with McCarthey?

[Icarusintel]

huh? commies? didnt the paranoia about commies ready to take over the bastion of freedom that is america die with McCarthey?

No, they're still there, lurking in the shadows, I feel it, we gotta kill them all... or something

[CptStern]

No, they're still there, lurking in the shadows, I feel it, we gotta kill them all... or something


how would you know one if you saw one? do they all wear funny hats or chant anti democracy slogans? I sometimes wear red ..am I a commie? should I be concerned?

[RabidMeatloaf]

Kerry, even though I can't vote until the next election.

[Raziaar]

how would you know one if you saw one? do they all wear funny hats or chant anti democracy slogans? I sometimes wear red ..am I a commie? should I be concerned?

What world do you come from? Commies wear drab clothing... oh, and french berets! Heheh, just kidding on that latter part =)

[CptStern]

What world do you come from? Commies wear drab clothing... oh, and french berets! Heheh, just kidding on that latter part =)

pfffft all the fashionable ones wear red (http://www.samizdata.net/blog/archives/mad_commie_sml.jpg)

[fizzlephox]

Vote for me you sons of bitc... I mean good people. For I shall lead us to victory against the musli.. I mean terrorists and take over the wo... I mean unify the world!

[Hazar]

too young, bush.

[othello]

Yes indeed! His administration has only screwed up your economy

completely wrong.

and consigned your amred forces to an incredibly hostile situation that was based on one of the most severe political lies to come from your country in decades.

completely wrong.

What more could you want from a President? An ounce of intelligence maybe? Oh dear.

Honestly, I really hope Kerry wins - he's not ideal, but at least he's not Bush and that's a start. Well it's like my sig says...

what would be a 'start' is some research into the erroneous claims you are making.

[TriggerHappy]

American, already voted Kerry by absentee.

Bush's administration has got an awful environmental record, and Kerry was endorsed by the League of Conservation Voters, an environmental watchdog group.

Also, just getting a new face in the White House is the first step towards repairing our relationships with the rest of the free world.

One more thing. Calling Kerry a flipflopper is such a stupid criticism. Part of being the President is taking new information and adapting to it. That's why we gather intelligence, have debates, etc. The President says we have to be "consistent" in a dig at Kerry, but I'd much rather have an intelligent, adaptable man at the helm of this country than someone who refuses to admit mistakes and won't abandon a losing strategy.

Enough of that. Vote Kerry!

:bounce:

[bliink]

Part of being the President is taking new information and adapting to it.

As opposed to someone else who didnt quite adapt to new information

[othello]

Bush's administration has got an awful environmental record

hmmm... considering nearly every environmental proposal was backed by democratic (as in, NOT repulican) members of congress, you should really re-think where your loyalty lies.

One more thing. Calling Kerry a flipflopper is such a stupid criticism. Part of being the President is taking new information and adapting to it. That's why we gather intelligence, have debates, etc. The President says we have to be "consistent" in a dig at Kerry, but I'd much rather have an intelligent, adaptable man at the helm of this country than someone who refuses to admit mistakes and won't abandon a losing strategy.

Enough of that. Vote Kerry!

:bounce:

its kinda sad that you've already voted, but oh well... thats the beauty of america. just for future reference, however, changing your view based off new intelligence and information (read: bush) is one thing... changing your view based off what audience your speaking to (read: kerry), is another.

john kerry, the only man with enough courage to take every side, to every issue. (http://www.wabcradio.com/listingsentryheadline.asp?ID=259078&PT=WABC+News)

to everyone else, whats imperative in this election, is that you make an informed decision, as so many cleary have not.

[Korgoth]

yes an informed decision... When your best defense not to vote for a candidate is because he goes with the popular public opinion (meaning majority rules, which in fact is what democracy is all about) then you don't have much of a defense at all.

But of course when your candidate cleary runs from a surplus into a deficet, loses the most jobs of any president in over 70 years, has an enviromental policy dictated by big buisness, gives tax cuts to the rich while the middle class and lower suffer the burden of an illegal war, and while he flip flops claiming to be a uniter and not a divide when in fact he has managed to split the country nearly 50/50, and also claims no child left behind the cuts education spending... Well, when thats the candidate your defending, you will of course pull whatever you can out of your hat eh?

[TriggerHappy]

hmmm... considering nearly every environmental proposal was backed by democratic (as in, NOT repulican) members of congress, you should really re-think where your loyalty lies.

I don't know if that's true, but anyway I voted for Kerry, not for Democrats in congress. And unless the League of Conservation
Voters are liars, he has a very good environmental record, unlike Bush.



its kinda sad that you've already voted, but oh well... thats the beauty of america. just for future reference, however, changing your view based off new intelligence and information (read: bush) is one thing... changing your view based off what audience your speaking to (read: kerry), is another.

john kerry, the only man with enough courage to take every side, to every issue. (http://www.wabcradio.com/listingsentryheadline.asp?ID=259078&PT=WABC+News)


I don't know if I fully believe him, I do suspect that Kerry was unsure of what position to take on the Iraq war until recently, but that ad isn't so convincing. Most of those statements aren't contradictory, although they sound like it. You hear him saying that he supported "disarming Saddam Hussein," because he, along with others, thought Iraq had WMDs because of faulty intelligence. But, he usually attacks the way the war was conducted. About the $87 billion.. what he voted for was a measure that would have repealed some of the Bush tax cut, but since that was defeated he didn't vote for the final version of the bill.

Anyway, I don't claim to know exactly what Kerry is thinking or thought, but I don't appreciate you calling me "uninformed" when I spend far more time keeping up with the news then most people I know. If I'm uninformed, you're setting the bar way too high, and I doubt you're any more informed than I am, especially since your using biased Republican propaganda for your evidence instead of an impartial source.

[WillH]

Too young to vote, would vote Kerry.

[sublidieminal]

Kerry wins in every category!
Im hoping it turns out like that in real life :/

[othello]

But of course when your candidate cleary runs from a surplus into a deficet

well... duh! thats what happens when you inherit a failing economy, multiplied by a horrific terrorist attack, and then have to retaliate. change costs money... :O

loses the most jobs of any president in over 70 years,

and that's directly his fault... how, exactly? like i mentioned, there were obviously circumstances beyond his control that this can be attributed to him. not that he's completely free of blame, but to rest it solely on his shoulders is intellectually dishonest, to say the least. we have one of the lowest unemployment rates in 30 years, lower than the average of the 70s, 80s, and 90s. we are also exponentially creating more jobs every month. we also have the fastest growing economy in 20 years, and a higher GDP rate over the last 4 quarters then we ever did under clinton.

has an enviromental policy dictated by big buisness,

so now democrats = big busines... ya i can concede that one.

gives tax cuts to the rich while the middle class and lower suffer the burden of an illegal war

yeah, not true even in the slightest. especially when the rich are carrying more of the burden now, then ever... and the war coincides with standing U.S. policy. in 1998 clinton signed the iraqi liberation act into law, which made it our policy to remove/disarm saddam and liberate the iraqi people. anyway, back to the tax cuts for a sec... bush ran on a tax-cut platform in 2000, he won the election fair & square, thus we now have tax cuts. should he have left the wealthy out? then you'd be all over him for financial discrimination lol.

alan greenspan endorses them (http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/24-07212004-335078.html)

again (http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/040721/greenspan_12.html)

and again (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5474477/)

and again. (http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/7/21/123336.shtml)

facts about taxes from the census (http://www.census.gov/hhes/income/histinc/h01ar.html)

http://www.taxfoundation.org/images/cbo-chart1.jpg
http://www.taxfoundation.org/images/cbo-chart2.jpg

and while he flip flops claiming to be a uniter and not a divide when in fact he has managed to split the country nearly 50/50,

the ignorant are quick to dissent. and who can blame them when the majority of that 'other' 50% rely solely on our blatantly liberal media for their 'news'. no wonder fox is considered so far from the norm, when you got something as far left as cbs, cnn, and nbc... even the middle seems too far to the right lol.

Well, when thats the candidate your defending, you will of course pull whatever you can out of your hat eh?

better than pulling it out of my ass. :)

[othello]

I don't know if that's true, but anyway I voted for Kerry, not for Democrats in congress. And unless the League of Conservation
Voters are liars, he has a very good environmental record, unlike Bush.

well kerry is a democrat and a senator... so...

I don't know if I fully believe him, I do suspect that Kerry was unsure of what position to take on the Iraq war until recently, but that ad isn't so convincing. Most of those statements aren't contradictory, although they sound like it. You hear him saying that he supported "disarming Saddam Hussein," because he, along with others, thought Iraq had WMDs because of faulty intelligence. But, he usually attacks the way the war was conducted. About the $87 billion.. what he voted for was a measure that would have repealed some of the Bush tax cut, but since that was defeated he didn't vote for the final version of the bill.

so what? it doesnt matter if you agree with the war or not, it doesnt matter if you like bush or not. you dont NOT vote to fund our troops. thats almost as bad as stabbing your fellow comrades in the back with a dishonest and exaggerated senate testimony! or forging a purple heart or two!

btw, repealing the bush tax cuts would cost billions more money than it woul allegedly 'save'. besides the tax cuts are working and are beneficial to everyone, mostly the less fortunate, and are partially responsible for us having the fastest growing economy in 20 years.

Anyway, I don't claim to know exactly what Kerry is thinking or thought, but I don't appreciate you calling me "uninformed" when I spend far more time keeping up with the news then most people I know. If I'm uninformed, you're setting the bar way too high, and I doubt you're any more informed than I am, especially since your using biased Republican propaganda for your evidence instead of an impartial source.[/QUOTE]

[CptStern]

the election is tommorrow vote while you still can :) ..in other words: bump

[Korgoth]

btw interesting fact, since the packers won, according to the last 17 years, kerry will win the election if that stat holds true tommorow. :)

(the legend is if the redskins lose their last home game before the election the incumbent will also lose and they say its been %100 accurate for the last 17 years or whatever so I guess we will see :) )

[Korgoth]

well... duh! thats what happens when you inherit a failing economy, multiplied by a horrific terrorist attack, and then have to retaliate. change costs money... :O



and that's directly his fault... how, exactly? like i mentioned, there were obviously circumstances beyond his control that this can be attributed to him. not that he's completely free of blame, but to rest it solely on his shoulders is intellectually dishonest, to say the least. we have one of the lowest unemployment rates in 30 years, lower than the average of the 70s, 80s, and 90s. we are also exponentially creating more jobs every month. we also have the fastest growing economy in 20 years, and a higher GDP rate over the last 4 quarters then we ever did under clinton.



so now democrats = big busines... ya i can concede that one.



yeah, not true even in the slightest. especially when the rich are carrying more of the burden now, then ever... and the war coincides with standing U.S. policy. in 1998 clinton signed the iraqi liberation act into law, which made it our policy to remove/disarm saddam and liberate the iraqi people. anyway, back to the tax cuts for a sec... bush ran on a tax-cut platform in 2000, he won the election fair & square, thus we now have tax cuts. should he have left the wealthy out? then you'd be all over him for financial discrimination lol.

alan greenspan endorses them (http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/24-07212004-335078.html)

again (http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/040721/greenspan_12.html)

and again (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5474477/)

and again. (http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/7/21/123336.shtml)

facts about taxes from the census (http://www.census.gov/hhes/income/histinc/h01ar.html)

http://www.taxfoundation.org/images/cbo-chart1.jpg
http://www.taxfoundation.org/images/cbo-chart2.jpg



the ignorant are quick to dissent. and who can blame them when the majority of that 'other' 50% rely solely on our blatantly liberal media for their 'news'. no wonder fox is considered so far from the norm, when you got something as far left as cbs, cnn, and nbc... even the middle seems too far to the right lol.



better than pulling it out of my ass. :)

Oh and btw you contradict yourself when you say nbc is liberal media and then sight an article on msnbc to back up another one of your claims... So uh, why don't you try again kthnx

[Javert]

so what? it doesnt matter if you agree with the war or not, it doesnt matter if you like bush or not. you dont NOT vote to fund our troops. thats almost as bad as stabbing your fellow comrades in the back with a dishonest and exaggerated senate testimony! or forging a purple heart or two!

Awww...someone needs a hug...or a chill pill.

Clarification, Bush didn't properly fund and equip our troops the first time, which was bad enough and reason why we needed that $87 Billion. Furthermore, half of that money was going to a no-contest contract to Halliburton. It also contained a bunch of uselessness such as funds to create an Iraqi postal service with zip codes.

Kerry voted against the $87 Billion to contest the no-contest contracts to Halliburton. No-contest creates higher prices and lower quality. He voted against not giving our coalition and allies a chance for their own businesses to go into Iraq. Do you honestly think Kerry wouldn't protect our soldiers? Do you honestly think anyone would deny our troops body armor?

And with shows like "Hannity and Colmes" and "Scarborough County", don't even start with MSNBC being a liberal junket.

[UmbrellaMaster]

Neither deserves my vote IMHO. I figure we've given one idiot 4 years to screw our country up, why not give a different idiot the next 4?

We're at war, our economy has been floundering, jobs are being lost, politics have turned to "He got botox!", "He can't even make a comprehensible speech!" instead of actually arguing the issues. In my opinion, this whole election has made me sick.

I'm neither a registered Republican nor a Democrat. I consider myself tied to no party. I look for the better candidate, and he doesnt exist.

I'm voting Kerry only because Bush scares me with his, "Aggressively hunt down all semblences of terrorism" campaign. Sure we need to find terrorism networks and kill them, but the half cocked way we went into Iraq and the fact that it seems to me that any other country is now fair game to Bush to invade if he believes they "might" be a threat scares the bejezus out of me.

"None but a coward dares to boast he has never known fear."

[seinfeldrules]

Oh and btw you contradict yourself when you say nbc is liberal media and then sight an article on msnbc to back up another one of your claims... So uh, why don't you try again kthnx

Wow, you really did a great job sidestepping all the issues with this one. Bravo.

[CptStern]

Wow, you really did a great job sidestepping all the issues with this one. Bravo.

kinda like the pot calling the kettle black, eh seinfeld?

[seinfeldrules]

Clarification, Bush didn't properly fund and equip our troops the first time,

I think Congress might just have something to do with this. Bush cant just wave the magic wand and have equipment appear, especially after the 90s when our military was cut drastically.

And with shows like "Hannity and Colmes" and "Scarborough County", don't even start with MSNBC being a liberal junket.
Hannity and Colmes is FOX bud.

kinda like the pot calling the kettle black, eh seinfeld?
Sorry, I dont respond to articles from progressiveliberal.com

[Element Alpha]

I would just like to participate by saying to all Americans who get to vote tomorrow:

IF YOU ENJOY LIFE AND CAN LIVE WITH THE FACT THAT THE REST OF THE WORLD WOULD LIKE TO ENJOY LIFE ALSO, DON'T VOTE BUSH

Please, please, please. :(

[SubKamran]

Kerry's winning :bounce:

It means sane people do exist! :thumbs:

Personally, I don't like him much, but not as much as I dislike Bush ("hate" is too strong a word). If I could vote, it'd go to Kerry. Since MN is a swing state, I wouldn't vote for Naider. If we were not a swing state, I'd vote Naider.

Isn't it surprising that the people who live in foreign countries can see how Bush really is and some/a lot Americans cannot? ;( I blame it on the media.

[seinfeldrules]

I would just like to participate by saying to all Americans who get to vote tomorrow:

IF YOU ENJOY LIFE AND CAN LIVE WITH THE FACT THAT THE REST OF THE WORLD WOULD LIKE TO ENJOY LIFE ALSO, DON'T VOTE BUSH

Please, please, please. :(

I would just like to say to all Americans out there:

VOTE FOR WHO YOU WANT, DONT LET SOMEBODY LIVING IN FRANCE 3000 MILES AWAY DO IT FOR YOU. VOTE BUSH IF YOU WANT TO

[Baal]

I can't take anymore of this....just do the damn vote!

[genocide604]

One is no better than the other, but if i had too... kerry.. bush is a terrorist..



Not american... its odd how if you look at the stats of the poll so far.. there are still a larger number voting for bush in america vs the larger number who "would" vote for kerry outside of america.. interesting..

[Vigilante]

Vote Bush Cheney 04!!

[SidewinderX]

I know this is completley out of context, but I just posted this up on another forum, and it's fairly well organized, thought I'd share.

---------------------------
Some people are trying to argue that voting for Kerry just because he isn't GW Bush is bad. Why? Like someone said, better to vote for an unknown, rather than a known.

A few reasons why I wouldn't vote for Bush (If I could vote :( )

1) Gay Marriage Amendment
-The Constitution is a fairly important document. Gay marriage is a non-issue. Amending the Constitiution to ban gay marrige would be devaluing the Constitution.
-I have -still- yet to hear a logically valid argument against gay marriage. If "Jesus" or "the Bible" is mentioned in the argument.. well != vaild.
-Why shouldn't same sex couple have the right to apply for morgages, recive widow/er benifits, etc?
-The Gay Marriage Amendment (well, and the Defense of Marriage Act), is really a devolution to the early 1950s. In essence, they say "It's ok to discriminate against people who are differnt than you."

2)Domestic Issues
-No matter what stats you rattle off, what reasons you provide, there are fewer jobs now.
-Bush says that he's increasing. That is true, jobs are slowly on the rise. What he's not saying is thatalot of the jobs that have been lost (partially to outsourcing) are $50,000+ salaried jobs, and the jobs we're gaining are near minimum wage jobs at Wal-Mart.
-Bush says "You lost your job? We'll give you money to get an education". Back to the previous point; many of these people who have lkost jobs already have a college education.

3)Enviroment
-Again, no matter what you say, you can't argue that Bush has been helping the enviroment. And his "logic" for allowing abuses to continue amount to "Big buisiness tells me they need to deforest this area, and have plants with emission leverls of xxxx. I like buisiness"

4)War on Terror
-Detour into Iraq. That turned out to be a brilliant idea.
-"We freed the people from a dictator" Very good idea. But there were other targets where we could have similarly saved the people from a dictator, as well as accomplished more on the war on terror, not encourage it.
-Loosing OBL. I think Jon Stewart and The Daily Show put it well with thier video about Bush and Words. Osama != Saddam. We had opportunities to get Osama, and we let him slip through our fingers.
-And, of course, WMDs. Republicans argue that all signs said that there were WMDs in Iraq, everyone thought it was true. Wrong. The UN, who was physically there, said that there were no WMDs. So you can't argue that.

[seinfeldrules]

-And, of course, WMDs. Republicans argue that all signs said that there were WMDs in Iraq, everyone thought it was true. Wrong. The UN, who was physically there, said that there were no WMDs. So you can't argue that.
Not true.

Economy....
He inherited a recession and 9/11, what do you expect in that situation?

Loosing OBL. I think Jon Stewart and The Daily Show put it well with thier video about Bush and Words. Osama != Saddam. We had opportunities to get Osama, and we let him slip through our fingers.
General. Tommy Franks (the commander) said we had the right amount of men for the job, the intel was just bad.

[SidewinderX]

not true? The UN weapons inspectors said that there were not WMDs in Iraq. Do you remember that? Before we invaded?

Re: Economy
Anything. Something. An effort to better the situation. FDR inherited the Great Depression!

[Shakermaker]

Not true.

/sigh

for the last time:

Iraq did not have Weapons of Mass Destruction, nor did it have the capability to make WMD's.

This is really getting old.

[SubKamran]

Not true.


He inherited a recession and 9/11, what do you expect in that situation?

And the fact that there isn't WMDs now? And now Bush is all, "Um... well... you know, THEY WERE TAKEN BEFORE WE GOT THERE. ... America. September the 11th. The Economy Is Strong(tm). Terrorists."

Stupid. :rolleyes:

[seinfeldrules]

not true? The UN weapons inspectors said that there were not WMDs in Iraq. Do you remember that? Before we invaded?


They were allowed in for what, 1 or 2 months before we invaded? They inspected a country the size of Cali. in that amount of time?

Who would you believe, the Russian Intelligence Agency, the CIA, and MI5 or a few inspectors on the ground for a few months?

And the fact that there isn't WMDs now? And now Bush is all, "Um... well... you know, THEY WERE TAKEN BEFORE WE GOT THERE. ... America. September the 11th. The Economy Is Strong(tm). Terrorists."
Refer to above. He made the right decision based on the information he had.
Re: Economy FDR...
Remind me again how long it took him to even come close to fixing it? We were still under the Depression's spell as WWII began. It was also borderline unConstitutional what he did. He actually suggested the removal of the Supreme Court.

[Shakermaker]

They were allowed in for what, 1 or 2 months before we invaded? They inspected a country the size of Cali. in that amount of time?

Who would you believe, the Russian Intelligence Agency, the CIA, and MI5 or a few inspectors on the ground for a few months?

I believe the CIA. It stated, before the war, that Iraq did not have WMD's. And after the war, they didn't find any trace either.

THERE WERE NO WMD'S

[SubKamran]

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?sf=2813&art_id=qw1097103961409U262&click_id=2813&set_id=1
http://newsfromrussia.com/world/2004/10/07/56461.html

And what more do you want than: http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/world/iraq/20041007-1451-us-iraq-weapons.html Bush, Cheney concede Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction

They spell it out for you.

Pwned.

[Neutrino]

Well those weapons inspectors were right and those intelligence agencies were wrong.

Additionally, as I've said in the past the evidence for WMD's was not nearly as conclusive as Bush made it out to be.

Iraq quickly agreed to "deal with" the U.N. resolution and to allow inspectors into the country, even while criticizing the resolution's "iniquitous contents" and the "bad faith" of the United States and Britain in seeking it. Iraq did not explicitly say it would grant inspectors full access, and indicated that it would supervise inspectors' conduct to ensure that it would be "lawful and professional." It then submitted a 12,000-page declaration on December 7, and allowed weapons inspectors back into the country for the first time since 1998.

The Bush administration immediately cast doubt on Iraq's cooperation and on the ability of weapons inspectors to prove compliance with disarmament obligations. Even as weapons inspectors began their work and gave reports indicating some cooperation and indicated that their work could prove successful with time, the Bush administration continued to make its case for war and gathered its forces in the Middle East.

Bush outlined a case for war with Iraq in his 2003 State of the Union address, in which he said Hussein had shown "utter contempt" for the United Nations in terms of his cooperation with weapons inspectors and that the United States would take action to disarm Saddam Hussein if he did not fully do so.

Secretary of State Colin Powell then made a presentation on February 5, 2003 to the United Nations about what Powell called clear signs of Iraq's non-compliance and non-cooperation with inspectors. "My colleagues, we have an obligation to our citizens. We have an obligation to this body to see that our resolutions are complied with. We wrote 1441 not in order to go to war. We wrote 1441 to try to preserve the peace. We wrote 1441 to give Iraq one last chance. Iraq is not, so far, taking that one last chance," he said.

Such efforts did not manage to sway over some longtime allies in the Security Council, such as France, Germany and Russia, which announced on March 5 that they would oppose any new Security Council resolution authorizing the use of force against Iraq. Such efforts also did not stop worldwide protests against the impending war.

Weapons inspectors reported for what would be the last time on March 7 that Iraq had been cooperating more fully, that even immediate cooperation would take months to verify, and that they had found no indication that Iraq had revived its nuclear weapons program or had attempted to import uranium.

In apparent recognition that Resolution 1441 had not authorized the use of force, the United States and United Kingdom pushed for a new Security Council resolution that would authorize the use of force against Iraq. But given the clear opposition by other Security Council members, Bush decided to withdraw the resolution from the United Nations and issued an ultimatum on March 17, 2003, calling for Hussein to step down as leader or face military action.

"Should Saddam Hussein choose confrontation, the American people can know that every measure has been taken to avoid war, and every measure will be taken to win it," Bush said.

Two days later, the United States initiated military action against Iraq with a massive bombing attack.

[SubKamran]

And if you need more evidence: http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&ie=UTF-8&q=Iraq+WMDs&btnG=Search+News

[seinfeldrules]

I believe the CIA. It stated, before the war, that Iraq did not have WMD's. And after the war, they didn't find any trace either.

Tenet, the Director of the CIA, told Bush the WMD case was "Slam Dunk". Dont just pull that large of a 'lie' (i know it was unintentional) out of you know where.

And what more do you want than: http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/...aq-weapons.html Bush, Cheney concede Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction

They spell it out for you.

Pwned.
We obviously now know they probably didnt have weapons, it is what they thought before hand that I am talking about.

Pwned? Are we in 3rd grade here?

Additionally, as I've said in the past the evidence for WMD's was not nearly as conclusive as Bush made it out to be.
Slam Dunk?

[SidewinderX]

They were allowed in for what, 1 or 2 months before we invaded? They inspected a country the size of Cali. in that amount of time?

Who would you believe, the Russian Intelligence Agency, the CIA, and MI5 or a few inspectors on the ground for a few months?


Refer to above. He made the right decision based on the information he had.

A few inspectors who had been involved with the country for more than a decade. Contrary to popular belief, you can hide a centrifuge under your mattress. The UN inspectors knew what to look for, where to look for it, and they didn't find it.

Remind me again how long it took him to even come close to fixing it? We were still under the Depression's spell as WWII began. It was also borderline unConstitutional what he did. He actually suggested the removal of the Supreme Court.

Ah, your ignorance shows here.
1) He never suggested the removal of the SC. He threatened to add more justices to tip the balence in his favor, yes. But never to remove them.

And the recession/ 9/11 was harley the great depression. The world economy wasn't in shambles when Bush took office...

[Vigilante]

They were allowed in for what, 1 or 2 months before we invaded? They inspected a country the size of Cali. in that amount of time?

Who would you believe, the Russian Intelligence Agency, the CIA, and MI5 or a few inspectors on the ground for a few months?


Refer to above. He made the right decision based on the information he had.

Remind me again how long it took him to even come close to fixing it? We were still under the Depression's spell as WWII began. It was also borderline unConstitutional what he did. He actually suggested the removal of the Supreme Court.
you kick ass...vig likes seinfeld rules, even though he doesn't really like seinfeld!

[SubKamran]

Tenet, the Director of the CIA, told Bush the WMD case was "Slam Dunk". Dont just pull that large of a 'lie' (i know it was unintentional) out of you know where.


We obviously now know they probably didnt have weapons, it is what they thought before hand that I am talking about.

Pwned? Are we in 3rd grade here?


Slam Dunk?

omfg j00 r teh l4m0r lololololololz :rolling:

And what they thought beforehand was wrong anyways. So what exactly is your point again?

The UN, who was physically there, said that there were no WMDs. So you can't argue that.

Not true.

They did not find any WMDs, there were no WMDs, there is no WMDs.

But anyways, I'm tired of this thread, it's why HL2.net is going down the drain.

[seinfeldrules]

A few inspectors who had been involved with the country for more than a decade. Contrary to popular belief, you can hide a centrifuge under your mattress. The UN inspectors knew what to look for, where to look for it, and they didn't find it.

Involved with in what manner? Why do you think Saddam kicked them out for nearly a decade?

And what they thought beforehand was wrong anyways. So what exactly is your point again?

Based on the intel they gave Bush, it was the right move. Even Kerry agrees with that.

omfg j00 r teh l4m0r lololololololz
This is why HL2.net is going down the drain.

[Neutrino]

Slam Dunk?


You really like that quote don't you? Sorry, I prefer the actual intelligence reports at the time over one comment. That comment does not reflect the opinion of the intelligence community at the time so it is mostly irrelavant.

[seinfeldrules]

You really like that quote don't you? Sorry, I prefer the actual intelligence reports at the time over one comment. That comment does not reflect the opinion of the intelligence community at the time so it is mostly irrelavant.
He is the director of that intelligence community, how does it not reflect their views again? Who should he listen to, PFC Shaw over Tenet?

[SidewinderX]

Involved with in what manner? Why do you think Saddam kicked them out for nearly a decade?
A decade? I belive they were there in '97....

And it's not as if they were kicked out, and then said "ok, we'll completley ignore them."
No matter what you say, there was evidence that Saddam had NO WMDs. Besides, Bush has changed his reasoning on invading Iraq a few times already.

Edit: Eh, you've only addressed 2 of my point (kinda)

[seinfeldrules]

No matter what you say, there was evidence that Saddam had NO WMDs. Besides, Bush has changed his reasoning on invading Iraq a few times already.

Just because he points out the positive results of the invasion doesnt mean he is changing his reasoning.

[SidewinderX]

Just because he points out the positive results of the invasion doesnt mean he is changing his reasoning.


positive results?

"They were involved with 9/11" - not true
"They have wmds"- not true
"They have oil and halli...." - left unsaid
"We're freeing the people" - kinda true. We control less than half of the country now, and more Iraqis are afraid of thier saftey more now than with saddam. AND there were better targets if our goal was the free people from a dictatorship.

[Neutrino]

Just because he points out the positive results of the invasion doesnt mean he is changing his reasoning.

Yes he is. The reasons we went to war turned out to be not true. But he still says he made the right decision. In effect he changed the reasons for going to war after the fact.

[seinfeldrules]

"They were involved with 9/11" - not true
"They have wmds"- not true
"They have oil and halli...." - left unsaid
"We're freeing the people" - kinda true. We control less than half of the country now, and more Iraqis are afraid of thier saftey more now than with saddam. AND there were better targets if our goal was the free people from a dictatorship.

"They were involved with 9/11"- Bush never said that. He said they were involved with Al Qaeda, and some links have been discovered.

"They have wmds"- He said it based on the Intel he had at the time.

"We're freeing the people"- We control less than half? Not true. The pocket of resistance is getting smaller and smaller. It is focused in a few areas of Iraq and thats it.

[seinfeldrules]

Yes he is. The reasons we went to war turned out to be not true. But he still says he made the right decision. In effect he changed the reasons for going to war after the fact.

I dont see how that is changing his position. He went in saying "Iraq has WMD and is a threat". That is what his intel told him. Now he is saying "I was told Iraq had WMD based on the intel I had". They are the same reason, he is just explaining it currently.

[SidewinderX]

"They were involved with 9/11"- Bush never said that. He said they were involved with Al Qaeda, and some links have been discovered.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2003/09/16/cheney_link_of_iraq_911_challenged/


"We're freeing the people"- We control less than half? Not true. The pocket of resistance is getting smaller and smaller. It is focused in a few areas of Iraq and thats it.
Is that why we can't cross the country right now? Why more and more people are being captured? Why forces are refusing to go through areas that are too dangerous to contemplate corssing?

[Neutrino]

I dont see how that is changing his position. He went in saying "Iraq has WMD and is a threat". That is what his intel told him. Now he is saying "I was told Iraq had WMD based on the intel I had". They are the same reason, he is just explaining it currently.

No, he's saying that we did not make a mistake.

We went to war for very specific reasons. Those reasons turned out not to be true. But the fact that Bush maintains that we didn't make a mistake means that he is changing the reasons that we went to war.

Now if that doesn't bother you fine, but I have a big problem with the President justifying wars in hindsight. It's an incredibly dangerous precident.

[Steve]

so apparently, people outside the US don't like bush... when did that happen? :laugh:

[MadHatter]

so apparently, people outside the US don't like bush... when did that happen? :laugh:


What? Naaawwwwwwwwwwwwww. Who told you that? Psshhhh, that's absurd.

[Tr0n]

What? Naaawwwwwwwwwwwwww. Who told you that? Psshhhh, that's absurd.Yea...just stereotypes man. :thumbs:

Edit:You have the same sig as me steve... :O Southern representin.

[Steve]

What? Naaawwwwwwwwwwwwww. Who told you that? Psshhhh, that's absurd.
heh heh...guess i should think twice before i believe the polls, ya? damn it, i don't get tomorrow off from classes! how stupid is THAT? luckily, i don't have to be in class until 10:30...

[Steve]

Edit:You have the same sig as me steve... :O
yeah, we were both involved in that, dude. remember? i was gonna drive...

[Tr0n]

yeah, we were both involved in that, dude. remember? i was gonna drive...Damn straight and ya got the grill bloody to...I had to clean it... :|

[Steve]

Damn straight and ya got the grill bloody to...I had to clean it... :|
but dude, you KNOW it was worth it...

[MadHatter]

Seriously though, thank god internationals can't partake in our elections. Bush, or any republican party member, would be fawked.... Prison b¡tch style.

[seinfeldrules]

No, he's saying that we did not make a mistake.

We went to war for very specific reasons. Those reasons turned out not to be true. But the fact that Bush maintains that we didn't make a mistake means that he is changing the reasons that we went to war.

Now if that doesn't bother you fine, but I have a big problem with the President justifying wars in hindsight. It's an incredibly dangerous precident.

In a post 9/11 world where we ignored evidence too late i would rather be safe than sorry. The intel told him it had to be done, I think it is better than the alternative scenario.

[jaguar_987]

Im a mix! lol Well Anglo American (Dual Nationality English/American) if you wanted to be politically correct and would vote for Kerry but I can't be bothered to register. There both as bad as each other anyway.

[Korgoth]

In a post 9/11 world where we ignored evidence too late i would rather be safe than sorry. The intel told him it had to be done, I think it is better than the alternative scenario.


Well if you remember pre 9/11 bush also ignored some intellegence (bin laden determined to strike within the united states I believe was the name of the report.)

Thats the one thing I can't understand for the life of me. If Bush is so strong on national security, how the hell did 9/11 ever happen?

[seinfeldrules]

Well if you remember pre 9/11 bush also ignored some intellegence (bin laden determined to strike within the united states I believe was the name of the report.)

Thats the one thing I can't understand for the life of me. If Bush is so strong on national security, how the hell did 9/11 ever happen?
He was only in office for like 8 months.

[othello]

Oh and btw you contradict yourself when you say nbc is liberal media and then sight an article on msnbc to back up another one of your claims... So uh, why don't you try again kthnx

uhhh... not at all. if anything it strengthens my argument with proof from a liberal media source. my bet is that you didnt even read the article, just saw the 'msnbc' in the url and thought you'd make a completely invalid 'point'. gg on that one.

[othello]

Awww...someone needs a hug...or a chill pill.

no thanks, a little dose of reality would serve you well though :P

Clarification, Bush didn't properly fund and equip our troops the first time, which was bad enough and reason why we needed that $87 Billion. Furthermore, half of that money was going to a no-contest contract to Halliburton. It also contained a bunch of uselessness such as funds to create an Iraqi postal service with zip codes.

Kerry voted against the $87 Billion to contest the no-contest contracts to Halliburton. No-contest creates higher prices and lower quality. He voted against not giving our coalition and allies a chance for their own businesses to go into Iraq. Do you honestly think Kerry wouldn't protect our soldiers? Do you honestly think anyone would deny our troops body armor?

yes of course i do... he DID vote against their funding. it doesnt matter what was in the bill that he didnt agree with, the main factor of that proposal was to 'fund the troops'. and he voted against it. plain and simple. you cant possibly defend that (although i see you are attempting to). halliburton has been our country's largest contractor for over 30 years, they would've received a no-bid contract in iraq no matter who was in office, just as they did in bosnia under the clinton administration.

your defense of kerry is fairly weak.

And with shows like "Hannity and Colmes" and "Scarborough County", don't even start with MSNBC being a liberal junket.

well, not as weak as this. citing foxnews as an attmept to dismiss the notion that the media is liberal? what is that... 2 shows v. 147,203??? ya... you're right, 'fair and balanced'. :dozey:

[othello]

I know this is completley out of context, but I just posted this up on another forum, and it's fairly well organized, thought I'd share.

---------------------------
Some people are trying to argue that voting for Kerry just because he isn't GW Bush is bad. Why? Like someone said, better to vote for an unknown, rather than a known.

A few reasons why I wouldn't vote for Bush (If I could vote :( )

1) Gay Marriage Amendment
-The Constitution is a fairly important document. Gay marriage is a non-issue. Amending the Constitiution to ban gay marrige would be devaluing the Constitution.
-I have -still- yet to hear a logically valid argument against gay marriage. If "Jesus" or "the Bible" is mentioned in the argument.. well != vaild.
-Why shouldn't same sex couple have the right to apply for morgages, recive widow/er benifits, etc?
-The Gay Marriage Amendment (well, and the Defense of Marriage Act), is really a devolution to the early 1950s. In essence, they say "It's ok to discriminate against people who are differnt than you."

the majority of the american public are against legalizing gay marriages. if you are in favor of it, vote for kerry. more power to you.

2)Domestic Issues
-No matter what stats you rattle off, what reasons you provide, there are fewer jobs now.

and that's bush's fault how? im sure clinton's failing economy, the dot.com bubble burst, 9/11, etc... none of those could've possibly been contributing factors.

-Bush says that he's increasing. That is true, jobs are slowly on the rise. What he's not saying is thatalot of the jobs that have been lost (partially to outsourcing) are $50,000+ salaried jobs, and the jobs we're gaining are near minimum wage jobs at Wal-Mart.
-Bush says "You lost your job? We'll give you money to get an education". Back to the previous point; many of these people who have lkost jobs already have a college education.

i agree, to an extent. we are exponentially creating more jobs every month. we have a lower unemployment rate then the average rate of the 70s, 80s, and 90s. we have the fastest growing economy in 20 years, and a higher GDP rate over the last 4 quarters, then the average every year under clinton.

3)Enviroment
-Again, no matter what you say, you can't argue that Bush has been helping the enviroment. And his "logic" for allowing abuses to continue amount to "Big buisiness tells me they need to deforest this area, and have plants with emission leverls of xxxx. I like buisiness"

the vast majority of environmental proposals have been democratically (as in, NOT republican) backed and supported. so, dems = big business? ya i can concede that.

4)War on Terror
-Detour into Iraq. That turned out to be a brilliant idea.
-"We freed the people from a dictator" Very good idea. But there were other targets where we could have similarly saved the people from a dictator, as well as accomplished more on the war on terror, not encourage it.
-Loosing OBL. I think Jon Stewart and The Daily Show put it well with thier video about Bush and Words. Osama != Saddam. We had opportunities to get Osama, and we let him slip through our fingers.
-And, of course, WMDs. Republicans argue that all signs said that there were WMDs in Iraq, everyone thought it was true. Wrong. The UN, who was physically there, said that there were no WMDs. So you can't argue that.

sure i can, saddam refused to comply with 17 UN resolutions over the last 12 years. when he did allow inspectors in, they were denied access to various facilities and parts of the countries. so, of course they didnt see any WMDs. every respectable intelligence agency claimed saddam had WMDs and planned to use them. the simple fact is, WMDs have been found, just not to the extent we were told. but you can hardly blame bush for that.

[othello]

not true? The UN weapons inspectors said that there were not WMDs in Iraq. Do you remember that? Before we invaded?

yeah... the ones who weren't allowed into various facilities and parts of the countries. :rolleyes:

Re: Economy
Anything. Something. An effort to better the situation. FDR inherited the Great Depression!

ok. we have the fastest growing economy in 20 years, in the face of clinton's economic failures and 9/11. hows that?

[Lil' Timmy]

double posting just retarded.. but triple posting takes a special gift!!!

quad-posting is retared again though :(

[othello]

/sigh

for the last time:

Iraq did not have Weapons of Mass Destruction, nor did it have the capability to make WMD's.

This is really getting old.

it sure is... you are just not correct by any stretch of the imagination. whats getting really old is all this ill-founded ,blind hatred of bush.

new news story: nearly 400 tons of explosives are missing in iraq. 400 tons of explosives = WMDs. but wait, saddam had no WMDs! and thats just the most recently reported case. :rolleyes:

[othello]

double posting just retarded.. but triple posting takes a special gift!!!

quad-posting is retared again though :(

don't be such an asshat, im responding to everyones post individually.

[=)PoLo(=]

What are the 2 most favorite words of Bill O'Reilly...

[Lil' Timmy]

thank god i broke up the sextuple post!!

[Kschreck]

Remember Boys And Girls, vote Kerry for president or you will be sent away to fight Bush's next war when he starts the draft up if you vote for him.

[othello]

Well if you remember pre 9/11 bush also ignored some intellegence (bin laden determined to strike within the united states I believe was the name of the report.)

Thats the one thing I can't understand for the life of me. If Bush is so strong on national security, how the hell did 9/11 ever happen?

ask your precious clinton. the majority of the blame for 9/11 falls on his soldiers. not to mention bin laden in general, saddam hussein, the economy, health care, etc... i agree, bush deserves 8 months of blame, 9/11 happened under his watch. however, clinton deserves 8 years of blame.

[othello]

Remember Boys And Girls, vote Kerry for president or you will be sent away to fight Bush's next war when he starts the draft up if you vote for him.

bush has adamently protested a draft. it is the democrats who are pushing for it. so your post = :thumbs:

[Kschreck]

LOL, yeah right. Your just one of those Bush Boys. Bush is the one sending everyone to war whereas Kerry wants to stop all this war so why would he start the draft?

[Lil' Timmy]

i wish there were a draft so that it wasn't 95% the disenfranchised that died for our politicians.

[Neutrino]

ask your precious clinton. the majority of the blame for 9/11 falls on his soldiers. not to mention bin laden in general, saddam hussein, the economy, health care, etc... i agree, bush deserves 8 months of blame, 9/11 happened under his watch. however, clinton deserves 8 years of blame.

You seem to be really stuck on clinton.

News flash: Clinton isn't in the election.

[Lil' Timmy]

Clinton isn't in the election.don't remind me ;(

[Neutrino]

don't remind me ;(

Heh, sorry.

Would be interesting to see what would happen if he ran against Bush though.

[h4vvok]

wuss liberals, Bush pwns you

[Element Alpha]

I would just like to say to all Americans out there:

VOTE FOR WHO YOU WANT, DONT LET SOMEBODY LIVING IN FRANCE 3000 MILES AWAY DO IT FOR YOU. VOTE BUSH IF YOU WANT TO

1) I don't live in France

2) Stop watching FOX, they show it around here, and it's more propaganda than you would get to see in old Sovjet Russia or in China, or even in the only newspaper sold in Cuba.

3) You are disgusting. You don't know the first thing about war.

4) Iraq never attacked your country. You attacked them for the wrong reasons, and being to proud (read: stupid) to admit you were fooled by your governament, you continue to believe lies upon lies to prove yourself right.

5) What the rest of the world thinks matters, yes even what the french think matters. Stop acting superior. Why would you assume that non-americans opinions are biased, distorted, or less intelligent? Everyone around here (I'm in Belgium) seems smart and educated. We all try to live a peacefull life, to prosper in health surrounded by friends and family. Why can't you agree with this view of life? Why should some people be deprived of these options because "America feels threatened".

5) Seinfeld is funny, I mean the show. You're not. But I understand there are more people who think like you, and it makes me wonder what and how they brain-feed you over there.

[Neutrino]

wuss liberals, Bush pwns you

Such fascinating arguments you bring to the table. You almost got me to change my mind there for a moment.

[Lil' Timmy]

5) Seinfeld is funny, I mean the show. You're not. But I understand there are more people who think like you, and it makes me wonder what and how they brain-feed you over there.propaganda works in every country alpha, where are you living? are you immune to its effects? be careful, high horses make for long falls.

[RRunner]

propaganda works in every country alpha, where are you living? are you immune to its effects? be careful, high horses make for long falls.

Yes every media is more or less biased these days, i try to read more then 1 view of a story, then add up. (yeah this isent foolproof either). But after i watched the doc on Fox, me and my wife was chocked.. I found it hard to belive that people actually watched this (agreed, fox could be fun smoking a spliff+laughing my ass off or eating rohypnol+drink alcohol+cruss some sculls), but thats all i would want it for. I find it so hard to belive that there actually are people who think this is a media trying their best not to be non biased?
Me and the longhaired couldent stop to see the resseamblence <--spelling?, of the fox news and göbbels 2ww shows. Cmon just switch the US flag for a swastica and there you go. It is an easy way to make money, i agree. But that way deserves NO respect what so ever.
And that old anchor guy, talking crap to that young man who had lost his father in the towers...MY GOD that made me angry (yeah fox is good at getting the hate up and going), because that shit made me mad as hell. I had a dream where i held that old guy down to the ground, and with my wooden heeled Lloyd shoes, i broke every singel bone in his face (and it made me feel really good). Im glad that we dont have that kind of media over here, because i think i would be a much more angry person.

just my 2 öre of worthless knowledge.

[Homer]

I'm American and I'm voting for bush. I'll be sure to remember to, because for some reason people from other countries think their opinion matters and insist on talking about it to no end online. Its a good reminder.

[Lil' Timmy]

Its a good reminder.of what? your brilliant reasoning skills?

[RRunner]

I'm American and I'm voting for bush. I'll be sure to remember to, because for some reason people from other countries think their opinion matters and insist on talking about it to no end online. Its a good reminder.

Our opinions should matter. Yes, you live in the US, but you also live in the WORLD (HELLO, HELLO, WAKE UP), you know that little blue round thing floating in space the world?
My god what do learn in school over there?
Do you really belive that US politics have no effect on the rest of the world? And when it has its effect, dont you think that it will at some point bounce back?

[Lil' Timmy]

My god what do learn in school over there?i learned that columbus was a pretty nice guy..

[RRunner]

i learned that columbus was a pretty nice guy..

yeah me too, just blast that syphilis he brought home with him.... :laugh:

[downthesun]

Our opinions should matter. Yes, you live in the US, but you also live in the WORLD (HELLO, HELLO, WAKE UP), you know that little blue round thing floating in space the world?
My god what do learn in school over there?
Do you really belive that US politics have no effect on the rest of the world? And when it has its effect, dont you think that it will at some point bounce back?

You do not pay our taxes, though, and you're not a citizen of the United States. Technically, your opinion DOES NOT matter in this election.

[Raziaar]

1) 5) What the rest of the world thinks matters, yes even what the french think matters. Stop acting superior. Why would you assume that non-americans opinions are biased, distorted, or less intelligent? Everyone around here (I'm in Belgium) seems smart and educated. We all try to live a peacefull life, to prosper in health surrounded by friends and family. Why can't you agree with this view of life? Why should some people be deprived of these options because "America feels threatened".


Well obviously the united states *IS* superior. Not the individuals in it, but the country itself. I mean, how often do you hear world wide opinions on who will be the next prisident, or prime minister, or whatever of britain/france/portugal... etc etc etc.

It doesn't matter WHO runs the country... we are still *THE* superpower! rawr!

[RRunner]

You do not pay our taxes, though, and you're not a citizen of the United States. Technically, your opinion DOES NOT matter in this election.

I rest my case.

[Raziaar]

I think what he's trying to say is. Yes, you are allowed to have an opinion, but no, that opinion will have no bearing on the actual outcome of the election, as you cannot vote.

[Element Alpha]

propaganda works in every country alpha, where are you living? are you immune to its effects? be careful, high horses make for long falls.

Don't worry about me, I manage just fine. I don't trusth any news I read that tries to tell me what I should be thinking, or coming from a "trend-setter" or "opinion-building" source. I don't watch tv because I just can't stand the level of idiocy and I don't listen to the radio because I can't cope with all the commercials. I get my info from Belgian, English, Dutch, French and international websites (I have the luxury of being able to surf at work), or occasionaly from newspapers (never the same one). It always strikes me how each country tries to put their own agenda's in the spotlights by pushing positive news (in relation to their views) to the front pages, and not even mentioning negative news at all sometimes, or mentioning it, but with an incredible logic-defying spin.

Yep, you really have to be on your guard if you don't want to be propaganda's next victim. It's everywhere. The only weapon against it is being consious, thinking for yourself, and trusthing your own judgment.

[downthesun]

I rest my case.

And what is your "case" again? :laugh:

[RRunner]

And what is your "case" again? :laugh:

...somn about not being able to spot others views etc etc...but that is not happening here..... is it? :dozey:

[SidewinderX]

yes of course i do... he DID vote against their funding. it doesnt matter what was in the bill that he didnt agree with, the main factor of that proposal was to 'fund the troops'. and he voted against it. plain and simple. you cant possibly defend that (although i see you are attempting to). halliburton has been our country's largest contractor for over 30 years, they would've received a no-bid contract in iraq no matter who was in office, just as they did in bosnia under the clinton administration.
I have just read the breif history of halliburton, and they didn't recieve any contracts in bosnia. Probably because, for the us, bosnia was a military operation. And you're arguing for no bid contracts? there are more companies in the US, giving halliburton a no-bid contract a) is putting more money into Dick's pocket, and b) lowers the quality of the work being done. Your argument against Kerry is a blind argument. The point you're arguing is how riders get passed though congress, and half the reason why the gov't is so inefficent.

the majority of the american public are against legalizing gay marriages.
1) The majority of Americans were fine with segregation and discrimination in the 1950s/60s. Doesn't mean it's right.

agree, to an extent. we are exponentially creating more jobs every month. Yes, we may be, but these jobs are NO where near the same level as those we're loosing.

the vast majority of environmental proposals have been democratically (as in, NOT republican) backed and supported. so, dems = big business? ya i can concede that.
You mis-understood what I was saying. Bush has a HORRIBE record on the economy because companies like Halliburton don't want strict regulation of enviromental issues. The problems that Bush has cause/allowed to continue are things that can NEVER be reversed.

sure i can, saddam refused to comply with 17 UN resolutions over the last 12 years. when he did allow inspectors in, they were denied access to various facilities and parts of the countries. so, of course they didnt see any WMDs. every respectable intelligence agency claimed saddam had WMDs and planned to use them. the simple fact is, WMDs have been found, just not to the extent we were told.
Again, there are many other countries that have done worse and would have been better targets for the war on terror, as well as freeing people.
"The found WMDS"?! Are you talking about that one shell with chemicals in it? THEY FOUND 1. "not to the extent they were expecting" Are you justifing the war based off of 1 shell?

yeah... the ones who weren't allowed into various facilities and parts of the countries.
Saddam gave them free reign before the war. They were allowed everywhere. Or did Fox news forget to tell you that?


new news story: nearly 400 tons of explosives are missing in iraq. 400 tons of explosives = WMDs. but wait, saddam had no WMDs! and thats just the most recently reported case.

400 tons of explosives != WMDs.
Guess you haven't really thought much about this.... but lots of conventonal explosives do not qualify as WMDs.

[Lil' Timmy]

400 tons of explosives != WMDs.
Guess you haven't really thought much about this.... but lots of conventional explosives do not qualify as WMDs.perhaps, but don't forget that saddam had the capacity to make wmds.. or the potential capacity. well, the contingent possibility of potential capacitorious domain at least.

plus, he was mean :(

[Onions]

bush would get my vote :)

[Raziaar]

Onions... lol, that's a cool name. I wonder why I don't see you around much.

Ohh... Onions. mmm, had some nice onions sauteed in garlic and butter. Damn it's delicious!

[BHC]

I dont see a Nader option................................ KIDDING

[Lil' Timmy]

Onions... I wonder why I don't see you around much.it's because he lives in scotland.. it's a long walk :(

[othello]

LOL, yeah right. Your just one of those Bush Boys. Bush is the one sending everyone to war whereas Kerry wants to stop all this war so why would he start the draft?

look it up moron. the democrats are pushing for the draft, NOT bush. kerry's plan is to send more troops to iraq and the middle east in general. its not called being 'a bush boy', its called 'researching the facts' and 'educating myself' and 'thinking for myself'. try it sometime.

[othello]

You seem to be really stuck on clinton.

News flash: Clinton isn't in the election.

i know that... but democrats have a short-term, selective memory. clinton is more responsible for events at hand then you realize. if people would stop raising his ass on a ridiculous pedastal, maybe they would realize that. he was a sad disappointment as a president, and his actions, rather, 'lack of actions', should still be held responsible.

[Lil' Timmy]

i know that... but democrats have a short-term, selective memory. clinton is more responsible for events at hand then you realize. if people would stop raising his ass on a ridiculous pedastal, maybe they would realize that. he was a sad disappointment as a president, and his actions, rather, 'lack of actions', should still be held responsible.ok, wait.. are things shitty right now? are they getting better? how much responsibility does clinton have for the current situation? he's responsible for the job loss right? but bush is responsible for the recent job gain right? set me straight you big man you!

[ferd]

Clinton was not directly responsible for the job gain during his period.

Bush is directly responsible for the job gain during his period.

9/11 is one reason why a lot of jobs got lost, Bush's attitude afterwards is another, a lot of other countries suffered more from 9/11 then the US did (economy wise)

those are all facts

[Some_God]

American and too young... damn Bush for upping the voting age. :)

[CptStern]

a lot of other countries suffered more from 9/11 then the US did (economy wise)

those are all facts


who exactly? the only countries I can think of that suffered as a direct result of 9/11 is afghanistan and iraq

[K e r b e r o s]

American and too young... damn Bush for upping the voting age.

It always was 18. Thats when you, legally, become a US Citizen.

[Murray]

I am from Sweden and I would vote for Ralph Nader.

[Element Alpha]

Voting for Nader is throwing your vote away. He doesn't stand a chance.

Remember kids: voting for Bush is voting for murder!

[TheHitman5]

Bush is an ass, I dont know how americans are voting for him. Everyone in my family voted for Kerry, so we're good.

[Raziaar]

I didn't even have the option for Nader on my ballot. You have to write him in? lol

Had some guy named Michael Badnarik on it. Who the hell is that?

[deltron zero]

Had some guy named Michael Badnarik on it. Who the hell is that?

Good job in researching the candidates. Did you just close your eyes and pick which ever one your finger landed on?