If Election Was Today Who Would You Vote For

Discussion of non-phpBB related topics with other phpBB.com users.
Forum rules
General Discussion is a bonus forum for discussion of non-phpBB related topics with other phpBB.com users. All site rules apply.
Locked
sketter
Registered User
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2004 4:49 am

If Election Was Today Who Would You Vote For

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
Registered User
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 7:18 pm
Location: Toronto, Ontario

Re: If Election Was Today Who Would You Vote For

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
Former Team Member
Posts: 958
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2001 11:56 am
Location: Greeley, CO, US
Contact:

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.

User avatar
dhn
Former Team Member
Posts: 4999
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2001 8:10 am
Location: Internet
Name: Dominik Dröscher
Contact:

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
Former Team Member
Posts: 958
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2001 11:56 am
Location: Greeley, CO, US
Contact:

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. :twisted: :wink:

Coffee-n-Toast
Registered User
Posts: 291
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 4:04 pm
Location: Rainy NW ::::

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
I've Been Banned!
Posts: 917
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2004 11:00 pm
Location: Orlando,Fl
Contact:

Re: If Election Was Today Who Would You Vote For

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
Former Team Member
Posts: 958
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2001 11:56 am
Location: Greeley, CO, US
Contact:

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
Former Team Member
Posts: 958
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2001 11:56 am
Location: Greeley, CO, US
Contact:

Re: If Election Was Today Who Would You Vote For

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...

User avatar
Draegonis
Former Team Member
Posts: 3950
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 3:12 pm
Location: Kµlt øƒ Ø
Contact:

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
Former Team Member
Posts: 1034
Joined: Sun Mar 10, 2002 5:28 pm

Re: If Election Was Today Who Would You Vote For

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
Former Team Member
Posts: 1108
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 1:24 pm
Location: Leeds, UK
Contact:

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? :roll:
Above post comprised entirely of opinions © MoonBuggy. Cash value £0.02. Not redeemable in all stores. Check our website for full terms and conditions. Opinions come with no warranty either expressed or implied. ;)

ram86man
Registered User
Posts: 27
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2004 4:17 am

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.

User avatar
Techie-Micheal
Security Consultant
Posts: 19511
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2001 12:11 am
Location: In your servers

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. ;)
Proven Offensive Security Expertise. OSCP - GXPN

MoonBuggy
Former Team Member
Posts: 1108
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 1:24 pm
Location: Leeds, UK
Contact:

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?
Above post comprised entirely of opinions © MoonBuggy. Cash value £0.02. Not redeemable in all stores. Check our website for full terms and conditions. Opinions come with no warranty either expressed or implied. ;)

Locked

Return to “General Discussion”