FlaSoxxJim Posted January 18, 2005 Author Share Posted January 18, 2005 QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jan 17, 2005 -> 08:39 PM) Every time I watch some asshole on TV talk about how the president f***ed up this or should have done that I think to myself "Why SHOULD he reach out to the other side?" The truth is that the left hates Bush so much that it doesn't make any difference what he does, they'll just hate him more. Better to just bury them so deep in the minority that their shrill voices don't sound quite so annoying. Every time I watch some asshole on TV, it usually turns out to be Bush. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted January 18, 2005 Share Posted January 18, 2005 QUOTE(KipWellsFan @ Jan 17, 2005 -> 07:39 PM) Well that's their job not mine. I keep forgetting you're Canadian. LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted January 18, 2005 Share Posted January 18, 2005 QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Jan 17, 2005 -> 07:50 PM) Every time I watch some asshole on TV, it usually turns out to be Bush. I rest my case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KipWellsFan Posted January 18, 2005 Share Posted January 18, 2005 QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jan 17, 2005 -> 07:52 PM) I rest my case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted January 18, 2005 Share Posted January 18, 2005 QUOTE(lvjeremylv @ Jan 17, 2005 -> 10:38 AM) LMFAO. :rolly Please learn the facts. It will prevent the future utterance of horribly assinine comments. I have. I was studying the effects of transglobal terrorism since 1999. I remember the bipartisan terror commission meeting in 2000. I remember producing an interview with one of the chairs in the summer of 2001 saying "We can't get anyone in the government to listen and this problem is urgent." But hey, I'm sure you have like what, 30 minutes experience, studying transglobal terror? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted January 18, 2005 Share Posted January 18, 2005 QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jan 17, 2005 -> 08:36 PM) Go right ahead, but remember that the reason your side lost the last election is because the best platform you could come up with was "Bush sucks, elect me". People would much rather vote FOR something rather than AGAINST something. How many Bush voters did you meet that couldn't frame their vote in any other message than "better than Kerry." More people voted for John Kerry than Ronald Reagan in 1984. John Kerry got over 48.3% of the vote despite being outspent, and without the media machine that the Bush administration had. Despite all the advantages of incumbency, George Bush won with the smallest margin of any reelected president since Woodrow Wilson, and failed to capture even 51% of the vote. (Final tallies have him at about 50.7%) John Kerry did have a real plan. He did have a positive vision for America. Too bad people were caught up in things like Swift Boat, John Kerry calling a lesbian a lesbian, and an idiotic slip of the tongue about an 87 billion dollar budget vote. But if you listened in the debates, or read his book. You'd have seen a vision that ain't too shabby for this country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilliamTell Posted January 18, 2005 Share Posted January 18, 2005 How many Bush voters did you meet that couldn't frame their vote in any other message than "better than Kerry." More people voted for John Kerry than Ronald Reagan in 1984. How about 4 more years? And that point about Kerry receiving more votes than Reagan is mute. More people voted this election percentage wise not to mention that there are more people in the United States. I also believe I heard that Bush got the most votes in presidential history. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted January 18, 2005 Share Posted January 18, 2005 Yes, you'd be correct. Kerry got the second highest vote total. Over 58 million voters voted for change. But I guess that means nothing to you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxy Posted January 18, 2005 Share Posted January 18, 2005 QUOTE(WilliamTell @ Jan 17, 2005 -> 09:37 PM) How about 4 more years? And that point about Kerry receiving more votes than Reagan is mute. More people voted this election percentage wise not to mention that there are more people in the United States. I also believe I heard that Bush got the most votes in presidential history. Yes he did get more votes, but the percentage of votes cast that he received gives a more telling picture of the state of the union. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilliamTell Posted January 18, 2005 Share Posted January 18, 2005 Yeah I know it's percentage that counts, but that's a mute point saying that Kerry got more votes than Reagan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted January 18, 2005 Share Posted January 18, 2005 QUOTE(winodj @ Jan 17, 2005 -> 09:39 PM) Over 58 million voters voted for change. But I guess that means nothing to you. And they lost. But I guess that means nothing to you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted January 18, 2005 Share Posted January 18, 2005 (edited) QUOTE(WilliamTell @ Jan 17, 2005 -> 10:37 PM) Yeah I know it's percentage that counts, but that's a mute point saying that Kerry got more votes than Reagan. This is such a stupid point ot be arguing. First of all the population has gone up quite a bit in the last 20 years and the turnout was higher as well. Of course candidates today are going to get a higher vote total than Reagan did, even if they lose. Edited January 18, 2005 by NUKE_CLEVELAND Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted January 18, 2005 Share Posted January 18, 2005 QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jan 18, 2005 -> 07:18 AM) This is such a stupid point ot be arguing. First of all the population has gone up quite a bit in the last 20 years and the turnout was higher as well. Of course candidates today are going to get a higher vote total than Reagan did, even if they lose. Wow, I agree w/ Nuke on something in this forum. All this comparing vote totals is so silly, whether it's Bush or Kerry. Both candidates were so good that they each got more votes than George Washington! I know, it's not just here. I've heard pundits talking about this stuff. But what a waste of time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted January 18, 2005 Share Posted January 18, 2005 The Bash Bush platform didn't work. You Democrats really need to try another approach. Maybe an actual platform will work in 2008 ... or are they afraid the American people will reject a democratic platform with a Mondale-esque emphasis? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mreye Posted January 18, 2005 Share Posted January 18, 2005 QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jan 18, 2005 -> 02:18 AM) This is such a stupid point ot be arguing. First of all the population has gone up quite a bit in the last 20 years and the turnout was higher as well. Of course candidates today are going to get a higher vote total than Reagan did, even if they lose. Reagan won 49 states, 58.77% ov the vote and won the EC 525 - 13! But, I guess that doesn't matter. I don't know what any of this has to do with Kerry / Bush / Iraq. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mreye Posted January 18, 2005 Share Posted January 18, 2005 QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Jan 18, 2005 -> 02:43 AM) Wow, I agree w/ Nuke on something in this forum. All this comparing vote totals is so silly, whether it's Bush or Kerry. Both candidates were so good that they each got more votes than George Washington! I know, it's not just here. I've heard pundits talking about this stuff. But what a waste of time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mreye Posted January 18, 2005 Share Posted January 18, 2005 QUOTE(YASNY @ Jan 18, 2005 -> 08:08 AM) The Bash Bush platform didn't work. You Democrats really need to try another approach. Maybe an actual platform will work in 2008 ... or are they afraid the American people will reject a democratic platform with a Mondale-esque emphasis? Yes, and rightly so considering that the Republicans control the Senate, House, a majority of Governorships, State Houses and State Senates. I'd be afraid too if I were them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted January 18, 2005 Share Posted January 18, 2005 I'm not bashing the President, I'm defending my freedom from stupid policy. I'm sure the President is a nice guy. His policies I disagree with. Because they are wrong for America. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mreye Posted January 18, 2005 Share Posted January 18, 2005 QUOTE(winodj @ Jan 18, 2005 -> 09:26 AM) I'm not bashing the President, I'm defending my freedom from stupid policy. I'm sure the President is a nice guy. His policies I disagree with. Because they are wrong for America. Wino, I absolutely respect that. You do an excellent job, unlike many, of expressing your disagreements and backing them with fact. Too many just bash to bash. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted January 18, 2005 Share Posted January 18, 2005 It's not hard, when your right Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mreye Posted January 18, 2005 Share Posted January 18, 2005 QUOTE(winodj @ Jan 18, 2005 -> 10:29 AM) It's not hard, when your right Here I go and say something nice and you had to go there. I take it all back! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.