Jump to content

Thank you John Kerry


NUKE_CLEVELAND

Recommended Posts

I wouldn't get so excited about that nuke.

If the economy keeps going south (5 dollar an hour jobs at McDonalds will get old fast) and the war on terrorism (Iraq) keeps going bad then I think people will be more then happy to long for the days of Bill Clinton when they had jobs and their kids weren't dying in the wrong country. If Hilary is the closest to that then she could possibly win. Plus the republicans are going to have the same problem in for years that the dems had when clinton left. Who is left to run for them?

I'd guess Giuliani would run Pub, if Ahhhhnuld hasn't gotten that pesky little "ya gotta be born here to be President" problem solved by then.

I wouldn't vote for Hilary ever - I don't like her one bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i find it funny that you GOPs liked kerry. i from the beginning thought that kerry was a TERRIBLE choice for us. he doesnt not appeal to the base that he has to appeal to, the hardcore liberals. f*** the moderates. this party has to get back to appealing to its base, not the center. i hope they come up with a better candidate in 08. (Clinton, anyone?)

Kerry was a terrible choice to run. Or at least the people who ran his campaign did a terrible job, I am not sure which honestly.

 

All John Kerry had to do is establish himself as an option, instead of "not Bush", and he would have trounced Bush in the election. He spent so much time on what Bush did wrong, and what was wrong, instead of what he was going to do, and what he stood for. Even with the apathy I have towards Bush, I have to say, they had him on stage saying what he had done, and what he was going to do. Hopefully he can deliver on some of the more intelligent ideas they have had.

 

Social security and the tax systems need big overhauls. Its not a popular opinion, but I agree 100% with the sentiment that at least a part of SS sould be privatized. The government should not be providing peoples retirement funds. People need to give up some of the consumerism they do, and save for it themselves. Up until the early 20th century, that is what people did. Social Security wasn't around for the first 150 years that the US was here, and if people actually planned their finances and took care of their own pocketbooks, it wouldn't be necesary now.

 

Reforming the tax code is as simple as closing loopholes, both on the corporate and private sides. The system itself is fine, the progressive nature of it is perfect. To switch to national sales tax would be to become instantly regressive. Right now the lowest 20% of people actually pay a negative tax rate. Because of tax credits and the like, they actually receive tax money from the government on an annual basis. A national sales tax would crush this.

 

There are other issues, but these are the two that jump off of the map at me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Based on this map of how the election went nationwide by county and based on the fact that we are a center-right country and becomming more so every election cycle I sincerely hope the Democratic party makes another mistake by nominating Hillary.

If it was at all possible I'd like to see another cartogram where each countys size corresponds with its poplulation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Based on this map of how the election went nationwide by county and based on the fact that we are a center-right country and becomming more so every election cycle I sincerely hope the Democratic party makes another mistake by nominating Hillary.

Where'd you get that map nuke?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are so obviously going to be a center right country. Because John Kerry only got the second highest vote total in presidential history - even more than Ronald Reagan.

 

Let's put this "landslide" into perspective. George Bush won reelection of any reelected president by the least number of votes since Harry Truman. Only 50 million people voted in that election. More people voted for Bush's opponent in 2004 than voted for Bush in 2000.

 

Assuming NM and IA go Bush's way, Bush would have won the fewest percentage of Electoral Votes (54%) of a re-elected president since Woodrow Wilson.

 

That's no landslide, that's no mandate. That's, by definition, a narrow victory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are so obviously going to be a center right country. Because John Kerry only got the second highest vote total in presidential history - even more than Ronald Reagan.

 

Let's put this "landslide" into perspective. George Bush won reelection of any reelected president by the least number of votes since Harry Truman. Only 50 million people voted in that election. More people voted for Bush's opponent in 2004 than voted for Bush in 2000.

 

Assuming NM and IA go Bush's way, Bush would have won the fewest percentage of Electoral Votes (54%) of a re-elected president since Woodrow Wilson.

 

That's no landslide, that's no mandate. That's, by definition, a narrow victory.

And a win. Kerry lost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it was at all possible I'd like to see another cartogram where each countys size corresponds with its poplulation.

It's not hard to figure out from the map that Kerry's greatest support came from the major cities. Rural and suburbal areas went for Bush.

 

I pulled the map off Fark.com, not sure of the actual source but there's no reason to doubt its authenticity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i dont necessarily think this country is center right. IMO kerry lost because he didnt appear to the base, the hardcore liberals. he was too close to the center on too many issues. f*** the moderates, the dems gotta go back to focusing on the hardcore liberals in this country. what do you other dems think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not hard to figure out from the map that Kerry's greatest support came from the major cities.  Rural and suburbal areas went for Bush.

 

I pulled the map off Fark.com,  not sure of the actual source but there's no reason to doubt its authenticity.

Oh I totally believe it. My point is that surface area isn't going to win a presidency, population is (for the most part). I just kind of want to see how it breaks down is all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are so obviously going to be a center right country. Because John Kerry only got the second highest vote total in presidential history - even more than Ronald Reagan.

 

Let's put this "landslide" into perspective. George Bush won reelection of any reelected president by the least number of votes since Harry Truman. Only 50 million people voted in that election. More people voted for Bush's opponent in 2004 than voted for Bush in 2000.

 

Assuming NM and IA go Bush's way, Bush would have won the fewest percentage of Electoral Votes (54%) of a re-elected president since Woodrow Wilson.

 

That's no landslide, that's no mandate. That's, by definition, a narrow victory.

That's why i feel the Electoral College is dumb. I mean Bush has won both times cause of it. It sould be whom the American people want in the majority, And both times it was Bush' opponent. Just my cents, I'm learning about US politics just lately, I just relate to somethings down here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i dont necessarily think this country is center right. IMO kerry lost because he didnt appear to the base, the hardcore liberals.  he was too close to the center on too many issues. f*** the moderates, the dems gotta go back to focusing on the hardcore liberals in this country. what do you other dems think?

If they swing to a totally hardcore liberal stance, the Republicans will have a field day. In my opinion, that would be the very worse thing the Dems could do for the health of the party and the influence they have on the nation. The reason it's called "the center" is because that's where most people are. The Republicans retained the presidency and added to the house and senate because they were closer to the center than the Democrats.

 

I'm not trying to start anything here. I'm only expressing an opinion. Feel free to disregard or dismiss it if you so choose. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Democrats miss the point. They don't need to move an inch on the issues. They need to find a better way to phrase the argument. Elections are won and lost on perception, not policy.

Your side isint doing itself any favors by referring to Republican voters as stupid, ignorant rednecks. Your side comes off as elitist and stuck up and that hurts you more than anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...