Politics Election 2004: VOTE

If you were to vote in the United States presidential election, for whom would you vote (regardless

  • George Bush (Republican)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • John Kerry (Democrat)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Ralph Nader (Independent)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Michael Badnarik (Libertarian)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • David Cobb (Green)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Michael Peroutka (Constitution Party)

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
Status
Not open for further replies.
I just wanted to say that FINALLY it's over..... I was not looking forward to another legal battle for the oval office.... and I will say this -- John Kerry can never be questioned for his patriotism -- I believe he lost this election for many reasons but specifically because he never ran on a clear platform.... one day he was for lower prescription costs, the next about the economy, the next after that it was the war.... and finally the media conceded themselves that those things were part of the problem.... I believe that hollywood's involvement may have hindered, and the "young people", that so many dems. counted on, stood their guy up at the alter. And to me, John Kerry never came across as personable throughout this election until his concession speech -- I wondered to myself, "why didn't he show that side earlier"? It may have helped.... Who knows

But with grace, John Kerry conceded. And this entire country needs to support our President, George W. Bush. And now there can never be a question as to who this country wanted as our president -- he won the electoral and the popular vote... the first president to do so since 1988. (y) (y)
 
I believe I too owe Kerry a (y) for conceeding instead of challenging the results. This is the way an election is supposed to go.
 
freakforalias said:
I just wanted to say that FINALLY it's over..... I was not looking forward to another legal battle for the oval office.... and I will say this -- John Kerry can never be questioned for his patriotism -- I believe he lost this election for many reasons but specifically because he never ran on a clear platform.... one day he was for lower prescription costs, the next about the economy, the next after that it was the war.... and finally the media conceded themselves that those things were part of the problem.... I believe that hollywood's involvement may have hindered, and the "young people", that so many dems. counted on, stood their guy up at the alter.  And to me, John Kerry never came across as personable throughout this election until his concession speech -- I wondered to myself, "why didn't he show that side earlier"?  It may have helped.... Who knows

But with grace, John Kerry conceded.  And this entire country needs to support our President, George W. Bush.  And now there can never be a question as to who this country wanted as our president -- he won the electoral and the popular vote... the first president to do so since 1988.  (y)  (y)
[post="1052599"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]​
actually, he's the first to win the majority, not win period.
 
P.S. I'm in Maryland which tends to vote Democrate anyway
Hey really? Me too! In fact, the only reason I wasn’t completely pissed off that I’m still to young to vote is because I knew Maryland would go blur :smiley:

Unfortunately it didn’t help.

I'm sorry, but so often it just seems like this country is becoming a place of freedom of speech and tolerance, except for Christians or anyone saying anything about God.
Well, and gay people.

I fail to see how we are less free or less democratic.

Patriot act, that's how.
 
agnes bean said:
Hey really? Me too! In fact, the only reason I wasn’t completely pissed off that I’m still to young to vote is because I knew Maryland would go blur :smiley:

Unfortunately it didn’t help.
Well, and gay people.
Patriot act, that's how.
[post="1052676"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]​


AND because 11 states just voted to limit civil rights. (against gay marraige). There will come a day where people against gay rights will be seen as the type of people that were against civil rights for minorities......


people need to learn from history.
 
Sally said:
In case you've forgotten, Britian's with us in Iraq.

This isn't meant in an "attacking" way, but simply as a clarification. I believe (and any of you who either live in the UK or have experience this first-hand may correct me here) that almost none of Britain is literally "with us" in Iraq except for Prime Minister Tony Blair. Yes, technically, Britain is considered our ally in the sense that the troops are stationed in Iraq (they're soldiers; they're ordered to), but none of them actually support us in the sense they are nothing remotely close to approving the actions the United States has taken against Iraq...In fact, I'm pretty sure most of the British either hate President Bush or hate Americans because of President Bush (not a very comforting thought as the majority of Alias fans are probably American)... Am I wrong here?
 
MyGuardianAngel said:
This isn't meant in an "attacking" way, but simply as a clarification. I believe (and any of you who either live in the UK or have experience this first-hand may correct me here) that almost none of Britain is literally "with us" in Iraq except for Prime Minister Tony Blair. Yes, technically, Britain is considered our ally in the sense that the troops are stationed in Iraq (they're soldiers; they're ordered to), but none of them actually support us in the sense they are nothing remotely close to approving the actions the United States has taken against Iraq...In fact, I'm pretty sure most of the British either hate President Bush or hate Americans because of President Bush (not a very comforting thought as the majority of Alias fans are probably American)... Am I wrong here?
[post="1052775"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]​
You are definitely not wrong. I experienced that for myself when I was in the UK this summer.
 
obsessetion said:
anyway....
i was wondering, was the score thingy
274-bush
242-kerry or wat??
because i'm in england and i'm not sure if it's right or wrong!!
[post="1052561"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]​

Unfortunately for us Kerry-supporters, it's correct. Kerry conceded to Bush around 9:00 AM this morning PST (Pacific time zone) or 12:00 EST (Eastern time zone), although I'm not sure exactly what time that would be in the UK. Before Ohio was declared red, Bush had 254 electoral votes and Kerry had 252...When Bush officially won Ohio, that score became Bush: 274, Kerry: 252, and you need 270 electoral votes (or the majority) to win presidency... A little more clear now?
 
CoveDweller11 said:
You are definitely not wrong. I experienced that for myself when I was in the UK this summer.
[post="1052780"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]​
That's what I thought, but I didn't want a bunch of British people (which, by the way, I love Britain) coming and attacking me in case I was wrong... But yeah, I think all of Europe pretty much hates us because of President Bush and/or thinks all of us are obese (which is absolutely, completely untrue! :P )....
 
Leslie said:
Then thank the good Lord we don't live in Holland! :lol:
Or anywhere else for that matter. :mellow:

HOORAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :D
[post="1052492"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]​
Yes I do, because I'm glad that the Dutch level of intelligence in politics is "a little" higher.
 
Itz da MT said:
Yes I do, because I'm glad that the Dutch level of intelligence in politics is "a little" higher.
[post="1052902"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]​

Watch it, please.
 
It's called lives, people. Get them. ^_^ And I say that only in the most loving of ways. ^_^
 
I wasn’t able to post a full explanation yesterday due to spending the whole day volunteering for America Coming Together and the 21st Century Democrats’ Young Voters Project (which, although nationwide weren’t as effective as we’d hoped were effective in Minnesota where I was working).

First of all, although I’m a US citizen, I’m too young to vote. Yet, I’m more politically active and informed than either of my parents.

In this poll, I voted for John Kerry. Unfortunately, as too many votes are, it was more of a vote against George Bush than anything else. Although I don’t agree with Kerry on a lot of things, Bush makes him look great.

There are many issues that have me very upset with Bush:
  • Iraq – war is ugly and it is never right unless it is necessary. The in Iraq was indeed ugly, and it was also not necessary, thus it was not right.

    America is not safer today than it was four years ago. George Bush has bred hatred of America worldwide. For every terrorist camp he’s destroyed, he’s given many more people reasons to become terrorists.

    Furthermore, the precedent the war sets is horrible.

    First of all, there are many countries being oppressed by evil dictators – and some of them, such as North Korea, are and have been a much more substantial threat to our National Security, and even if Iraq did have weapons of mass destruction, North Korea would have still been a bigger threat. Also remember that there was NO connection between Iraq and 9/11.

    Secondly, saying that we have the right to invade a country we think has weapons and intent to harm us gives countries like North Korea precedent to attack us. Hey, we have weapons of mass destruction that could reach North Korea, and Bush listed North Korea on his “Axis of Evil” as a target.

    Using Bush’s logic, North Korea would have the right (and maybe even the duty) to invade us…
  • Gun Control – When he let the Assault Weapons ban expire September 13th, Bush made it easier for terrorists to access guns.
  • Civil & Human Rights – specifically, at this point, GLBT rights. Bush has said he “doesn’t know” if gay people choose to be gay and supports putting discrimination against GLBT people into the constitution.

    Some people may say that the proposed amendment doesn’t just stop GLBT people – that it would also stop two same-sex friends from getting married just for the heck of it. I would point out that two opposite-sex friends with no intent of ever starting a family can get married under the current system.

    Homosexuality is not a choice, does not require treatment, and cannot be altered – the American Psychological Association, American Psychiatric Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Medical Association, The American Counseling Association, and the National Association of Social Workers all agree – yet Bush still remains uncertain if homosexuality is a choice.

    We should not discriminate based on who people are and what they do with their lives (as long as it does not cause significant direct harm to others) simply because we do not approve of them.
  • Health Care – I strongly believe that health care should be a right, not a privilege.

    People should not have to pay for the right to live.

    In America, 44 millions do not have health insurance. This is unacceptable.

    Bush prohibited the government from getting competitive prices on drugs, in effect writing the drug companies a multi-million dollar check while causing health care costs to rise for all Americans.

    Some might say – I can predict it, lol – that without $$, drug companies cannot sufficiently fund research. Hmm, I have an idea…:

    Stem cells! Now, I am a vegetarian, am against almost all wars, have a very confusing stance on abortion (am against it personally, but realize that it is both impractical and not my place as a male to take away a women’s right to choose), yet I think it is vital to humanity that we continue with stem cell research.

    If we can justify taking human lives to attempt to “liberate” the people of Iraq (note that many if not most of them do not consider it a liberation), we can certainly do the same to attempt to cure diseases such as Alzheimer's. There are some things worth dying for, and a cure for things like Alzheimer's is one of them.
George Bush claims now that he will be unite our country. However, as I look back to four years ago, it is all to clear that he made the same claims then, and look what has happened.

America and the world are worse off because of Bush’s reelection.
 
I voted for Kerry, in IL, which Kerry won by a pretty large margin. I helped verify votes in WI on election night... Kerry was declared winner early the next morning (3:45 local time) by about 12,000.

Kerry wasn't my ideal democratic candidate, nor did I want to vote for Nader, mostly because he moved from Green Party (I am somewhere between democrat and Green) (also, I don't think he was as strong this year as he was 4 years ago). However, I knew for sure that I did not want another 4 years of Bush. There is not one issue that I agree with him on (well, I agree that education in this country needs to be much better, but I do not agree that his "no child left behind" thing is working. Too many children are still being left behind).

Bush got reelected anyways, but I'm trying not to dwell on it. I made my vote count, and I helped with the tabulation process. I did what I could. All I can do is sit and hope that the things I do not want to happen do not happen. You can bet I will be active in certain issues.
 
If a was a US citizen, and of voting age I would have voted for Kerry. If my one vote would have determined it, I would have voted for the Green Party guy. I would have voted for Kerry, because Green wouldn't have much chanch anyway. I know that's stupid, because if everyone said that, yada yada yada...but still that's what I would have done for some reason.
Sally said:
I make no comments about the UK's leadership whatsoever because 1) it's not my country, and 2) I'm not informed enough about it. You should do the same.
[post="1052529"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]​
Okay, you choose not to make comments...personally I would; descions made in one country aren't just confined to what's inside that country's borders, so people should definitley think about what is happening in the rest of the world, and if they think it's going to affect them, they should comment. The UK, contrary to what you have stated(
People in the UK have one source of info about the US: the biased liberal media
) does not only one source of information on the US. Starting right here, any people on this site have access to the internet. People with sky/digital televison will have access to other country's news channels. Sure, we won't know everything about candidates, but how many of the 60%or so of people who went out to vote in America did?
Making suggestions and telling people what you think is, imho, not hurting you, because you don't have to listen. But what about action? What about taking action against other countries leadership. Making them listen. That's somehow better?

Jai
 
Charlie said:
I wasn’t able to post a full explanation yesterday due to spending the whole day volunteering for America Coming Together and the 21st Century Democrats’ Young Voters Project (which, although nationwide weren’t as effective as we’d hoped were effective in Minnesota where I was working).

First of all, although I’m a US citizen, I’m too young to vote. Yet, I’m more politically active and informed than either of my parents.

In this poll, I voted for John Kerry. Unfortunately, as too many votes are, it was more of a vote against George Bush than anything else. Although I don’t agree with Kerry on a lot of things, Bush makes him look great.

There are many issues that have me very upset with Bush:
  • Iraq – war is ugly and it is never right unless it is necessary. The in Iraq was indeed ugly, and it was also not necessary, thus it was not right.

    America is not safer today than it was four years ago. George Bush has bred hatred of America worldwide. For every terrorist camp he’s destroyed, he’s given many more people reasons to become terrorists.

    Furthermore, the precedent the war sets is horrible.

    First of all, there are many countries being oppressed by evil dictators – and some of them, such as North Korea, are and have been a much more substantial threat to our National Security, and even if Iraq did have weapons of mass destruction, North Korea would have still been a bigger threat. Also remember that there was NO connection between Iraq and 9/11.

    Secondly, saying that we have the right to invade a country we think has weapons and intent to harm us gives countries like North Korea precedent to attack us. Hey, we have weapons of mass destruction that could reach North Korea, and Bush listed North Korea on his “Axis of Evil” as a target.

    Using Bush’s logic, North Korea would have the right (and maybe even the duty) to invade us…

  • Gun Control – When he let the Assault Weapons ban expire September 13th, Bush made it easier for terrorists to access guns.

  • Civil & Human Rights – specifically, at this point, GLBT rights. Bush has said he “doesn’t know” if gay people choose to be gay and supports putting discrimination against GLBT people into the constitution.

    Some people may say that the proposed amendment doesn’t just stop GLBT people – that it would also stop two same-sex friends from getting married just for the heck of it. I would point out that two opposite-sex friends with no intent of ever starting a family can get married under the current system.

    Homosexuality is not a choice, does not require treatment, and cannot be altered – the American Psychological Association, American Psychiatric Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Medical Association, The American Counseling Association, and the National Association of Social Workers all agree – yet Bush still remains uncertain if homosexuality is a choice.

    We should not discriminate based on who people are and what they do with their lives (as long as it does not cause significant direct harm to others) simply because we do not approve of them.

  • Health Care – I strongly believe that health care should be a right, not a privilege.

    People should not have to pay for the right to live.

    In America, 44 millions do not have health insurance. This is unacceptable.

    Bush prohibited the government from getting competitive prices on drugs, in effect writing the drug companies a multi-million dollar check while causing health care costs to rise for all Americans.

    Some might say – I can predict it, lol – that without $$, drug companies cannot sufficiently fund research. Hmm, I have an idea…:

    Stem cells! Now, I am a vegetarian, am against almost all wars, have a very confusing stance on abortion (am against it personally, but realize that it is both impractical and not my place as a male to take away a women’s right to choose), yet I think it is vital to humanity that we continue with stem cell research.

    If we can justify taking human lives to attempt to “liberate” the people of Iraq (note that many if not most of them do not consider it a liberation), we can certainly do the same to attempt to cure diseases such as Alzheimer's. There are some things worth dying for, and a cure for things like Alzheimer's is one of them.
George Bush claims now that he will be unite our country. However, as I look back to four years ago, it is all to clear that he made the same claims then, and look what has happened.

America and the world are worse off because of Bush’s reelection.
[post="1053077"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]​

I agree with everything you said. I just haven't been able to articulate it all as nicely as you did. (y) I think you should share this list for congressional candidates to use in the 2006 elections. 😆
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top