If Election Was Today Who Would You Vote For

sketter · Post by **sketter** » Sat Jul 10, 2004 5:37 pm

Bush Here, Why? I support the troops over seas. The arab world attacked us on 9/11/01.

Hemidol · Post by **Hemidol** » Sat Jul 10, 2004 5:49 pm

sketter wrote: Bush Here, Why? I support the troops over seas. The arab world attacked us on 9/11/01.

I disagree with you saying the "arab world". It wasn't every single arab person whom which was involed with 911 was it? I don't believe it was, please correct me if I'm mistaken.

If I had to place my vote, I'd say it's going to Kerry. He's just more of the type of person whom which I'd like to see in the high chair, and not Bush. Just my personal opinion over facts.

Heimidal · Post by **Heimidal** » Sat Jul 10, 2004 5:50 pm

And voting John Kerry into office wouldn't be 'supporting our troops' even though he wants to bring them all home? That's kind of a strange logic you've got going there. (You may also want to look up what you said about Arabs as it was bin Laden who attacked us, not all Arabs collectively.)

Honestly, I'm not voting this year. As a Republican, I can't qualify Kerry as a viable president - he's going to absolutely ruin our economy in the long run. And as a human being, I can't vote for Bush.

Either way, this country is ruined.

dhn · Post by **dhn** » Sat Jul 10, 2004 6:11 pm

Heimidal wrote: Either way, this country is ruined.

So in which way do you prefer your country ruined?

Heimidal · Post by **Heimidal** » Sat Jul 10, 2004 6:16 pm

dhn wrote: So in which way do you prefer your country ruined?

Hmm... well, since human life means very little to me and money rocks my world, I'll go Bush.

Coffee-n-Toast · Post by **Coffee-n-Toast** » Sat Jul 10, 2004 6:30 pm

Heimidal wrote: he's going to absolutely ruin our economy in the long run.

So 100+ Billion and rising in cost of the war is doing what to the economy?

ayusuf · Post by **ayusuf** » Sat Jul 10, 2004 6:59 pm

Hemidol wrote:
sketter wrote:Bush Here, Why? I support the troops over seas. The arab world attacked us on 9/11/01.

I disagree with you saying the "arab world". It wasn't every single arab person whom which was involed with 911 was it? I don't believe it was, please correct me if I'm mistaken.

If I had to place my vote, I'd say it's going to Kerry. He's just more of the type of person whom which I'd like to see in the high chair, and not Bush. Just my personal opinion over facts.

i am not arab but thanx for going for the arabs. I doubt it was even the arabs

Heimidal · Post by **Heimidal** » Sat Jul 10, 2004 7:01 pm

Coffee-n-Toast wrote: So 100+ Billion and rising in cost of the war is doing what to the economy?

Easily recoverable and will hardly affect an administration in the future. Kerry's plan looks great now but will hurt us in the long run. Simple economics shows that everything Bush has done for the economy recently will boost it in the end. Bush pulled us out of a recession faster than any world leader, ever.

Also, more jobs have been created by the Bush administration in the past year than during Clinton's entire second term.

Heimidal · Post by **Heimidal** » Sat Jul 10, 2004 7:04 pm

ayusuf wrote: i am not arab but thanx for going for the arabs. I doubt it was even the arabs

You "doubt it was even the Arabs"? Even though they've taken credit for everything we've charged them with? Right...

Draegonis · Post by **Draegonis** » Sat Jul 10, 2004 7:09 pm

Heimidal wrote: Bush pulled us out of a recession faster than any world leader, ever.

Also, more jobs have been created by the Bush administration in the past year than during Clinton's entire second term.

Bush has given the US the largest deficit since the 20's, and the highest levels of unemployment since the same time. Clinton did far better than Bush for the economy. That much is in black and white.
Of course, I wont deny, Bush probably has benifited the rich of the population more than any president for a long time.

As for my opinion, i'd rather see them both shot. Neither of them are fit to be the president of the US as I see it.

arhodes16 · Post by **arhodes16** » Sat Jul 10, 2004 7:30 pm

sketter wrote: The arab world attacked us on 9/11/01.

It worries me that people spreading this rubbish, or even more worryingly people who genuinely believe the line above, are able to vote for the future of the most powerful and hence most dangerous nation on the planet.

The arab world attacked nobody, a few crazy religious fundamentalists attacked you. America needs to realise the reason that they are hated by the people behind these attacks - and declaring war on the 'arab world' isn't the solution to America's terror problems, quite the opposite.

MoonBuggy · Post by **MoonBuggy** » Sat Jul 10, 2004 7:42 pm

The problem is that kind of junk seems to filter down from those already in command. We all know about WMDs and how Saddam was in league with Al-Qaeda, don't we now?

ram86man · Post by **ram86man** » Sat Jul 10, 2004 7:56 pm

I have to say I will vote Bush. Mainly because of the fact that the press has pretty much refused to report the finding of WMD and the fact that mass graves have been found all over Iraq. The economy is doing better than with Clinton and the military is actually funded instead of cut back and forced to operate on a shoestring budget.

See, what I find funny is that people LOVE Clinton and he had Bin Laden. He knew where he was but as we all know, he was too busy with an intern and a cigar to take him down. Imagine that, he killed 3000 people just to get a hummer.

Techie-Micheal · Post by **Techie-Micheal** » Sat Jul 10, 2004 7:59 pm

Bush. Why? Even though I do not agree with everything he has done, he is by far the better candidate. As for the economy, do not forget, it takes jobs to build the equipment. Yes, the economy was in a slouch (technical word ^_^), but has since been improving with a couple of hiccups. http://www.bls.gov/eag/eag.us.htm

Moonbuggy: Not to get offtopic, but last I checked chemical weapons were classed as WMD's.

MoonBuggy · Post by **MoonBuggy** » Sat Jul 10, 2004 8:24 pm

I was actually talking about the fact that many of the intelligence claims on the subject have been disgraced - the Senate Select Commitee said the information was "sometimes wildly inaccurate" and "often was improperly analyzed". I don't claim to be especially knowledgable on the subject of US politics, but I was essentially noting my disapproval of Bush for leading the killing of many, many people on intelligence that has been found to be dubious - if they can see that now why couldn't they see it then?

advertisements