The 2004 US Election General Commentary Thread

This thread can now be used for commentary on the elections as the votes come in etc. I noticed that all the threads are specific right now with regards to things such as who you'll be voting for, what's the world opinion and whatever. So, now general flowing discussion is free to be held here with regards to what the news is saying etc. etc.

Feel free to post links, quote news stories and... uh... whatever else you do in all this stuff. I don't know. Say when a state has an official vote count or something? Any sort of developments, I guess. I'll sticky this, too.

All that I can say aboot this whole thing, is that America is going to crap all over the world no matter what butt-hole that they ellect.

Go Canada. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by White Raven

All that I can say aboot this whole thing, is that America is going to crap all over the world no matter what butt-hole that they ellect.

Go Canada. :)

---

chaos: :love:

Rubedo: Personally, I think that America won't be heading in a good direction either way. I find both candidates to be horrible in many ways, but, I don't think I'd be wanting to stand four more years of Bush.

Elections are fun for everyone!*






(SPOILER)*Except sober people.

I voted after coming home from school. The lines were great, I only had to wait 2 minutes.

But my polling place was packed in the morning...as it will be later tonight when people come home from work. I hate how my state doesn't allow early ballots...you can at least divert some votes from rushing in all at once.

Virginia hasn't called yet - worrying for the Republicans? I'm going to bed once the next few states have called. I have to be up at half five...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skogs

Virginia hasn't called yet - worrying for the Republicans? I'm going to bed once the next few states have called. I have to be up at half five...

---

Virginia is going Republican unfortunately. Northern VA is highly democratic, while southern virginia is highly republican. Good news for Kerry though, he has leads in Ohio, Michigan, PA, and NY...that's about 70 electoral votes...and he'll most likely win the chunky 55 electoral votes of California...but we'll see. It looked bad early on with Bush taking a 39-3 electoral vote lead, but that was because the Southern states had already cast their ballots.

Edit: Gosh damn, Bush has the popular vote in almost every reporting state that has not been declared. Some by extremely large margins. I get more and more depressed each time I see this...how can people vote for an idiot? Kerry's only hope is that he wins the chunky states like Ohio, Cali, NY, and PA because Texas will surely go to Bush.

Bush has won most of the states he was expected to win already. The rest are pretty solid Kerry or toss-up states.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Behold the Void

Bush has won most of the states he was expected to win already. The rest are pretty solid Kerry or toss-up states.

---

Thank God for California being so big. PA going to Kerry wasn't a surprised despite Bush visiting PA 40 times. Ohio is what worries me. So far, it's leaning in Bush's favor.

*Doesn't use Split Personalities in Important Threads*

Say it isn't so... Bush is very close to winning this election. If Kerry doesn't obtain Ohio, his chances of winning are going to be very small. So far, according to ABC News, the results are:

Bush: 237
Kerry: 188

I think it's about over. Bush seems to be leading in Ohio. With Florida under him too, I don't think he's going to lose.

If this turns out like I think it is I may be eating mutton for a few solid months.

My compliments to anyone who got that last comment.

*explodes*

It's all over...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trumpet Thief

*Doesn't use Split Personalities in Important Threads*

Say it isn't so... Bush is very close to winning this election. If Kerry doesn't obtain Ohio, his chances of winning are going to be very small. So far, according to ABC News, the results are:

Bush: 237
Kerry: 188

---

According to an NBC poll, Bush is at 207 to Kerry at 199.

Well, they are all pretty much projecting the results. Still, it feels as though Bush is going to come out on top, which just sickens me :mad2:

Refer to the attchment on my Anti bush reasons...:/

Must think happy thoughts. Absentee ballots, Absentee ballots...

Bush=246
Kerry=199

Bush needs 21
Kerry needs 24...

*cries*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Del Moomba

Refer to the attchment on my Anti bush reasons...:/

---

:love:

Still, I'm pretty much dead. How can the re-election of Bush even be an option? It's a crime against nature!

This is annoying me. I don't want anymore Bush. His face alone bugs the crap out of me.


:D

What sickens me is that the young-voter turn out didn't work out as planned. What the hell happened to all these young voters?

For the young voters who claimed they wanted Bush out and didn't vote...go to hell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trumpet Thief

:love:

Still, I'm pretty much dead. How can the re-election of Bush even be an option? It's a crime against nature!

---

Against nature, God, Physics, Yevon, Moombas, Me, America, Earth, The Milky Way, Canada, Men, Women, Children, SeeD's, Root Bear, Poor People, Middle Class people, The Ancients... Etc.

There is still hope, and I guess we'll have to clutch onto that small light. Regardless, If Bush gets re-elected, I will just go into denial, and eventually, reach the point of insanity. Better than living in reality :D

Nice...

Bush:246
Kerry:207?

You're already insane.

But it will drive me over the wall...bleh. I'm tired of all this crap in Iraq.


:D

This is just my opinion, but Bushs' change in reasons for invading Iraq angered me more than anything else.

Last I checked, USA was harbouring weapons of mass destruction for "liberation". Don't those count?

Ohio has a good black population...and it's about 78% tallied right now, hopefully Ohio didn't count all the black votes yet...because Bush is pitiful with minorities that it just sickens me.

9 to 1 African Americans go Democratic.
7 to 1 Asian Americans go Democratic.
6.5 to 3.5 Hispanic Americans go Democratic.
7.5 to 2.5 Middle Eastern Americans go Democratic.

That just tells you right there how Bush is so damn overated when it comes to minorities...he could give a about them.

Damn, Colorado belongs to Bush. Although I predicted that before, it's still hard to believe that America is stepping it's way into destruction.

But they usually vote Democratic. That's not a new thing...

Its because Kerry "flipped-flop" and is "ugly"

Thats the main reason i heard for anti Kerry...

How sad...

I'm pretty sure Kerry isn't the only one that flipped flopped. Check out a thread made by noname asking "How many times do you think Kerry Flip Flopped" and you'll find a post by Agent Proto revealing the many times Bush did the same thing. At least Kerry admitted that he had made a mistake, unlike Bush, who kept on going, even if the decision wasn't right.

*Hopes Ohio and Washington go to Kerry*

Ya i know... Thats why i used "..."

Yeah, I knew too. I was referring to those who attacked Kerry because of those petty reasons.

As you may have noticed, I'm zooming back and forth from the computer room, to where my sisters and my uncle are watching the elections, and the frowns on their faces don't make the situation any better.

:(!

I'm still hoping on the fate of Ohio. If this doesn't turn out the way I want it to turn out... I can't even think to list the possible disasters that willoccur.

*prays*

We are in for a disgustingly conservative 4 years.

I've officially lost faith in America and humanity. Good night.

Four more years... it's... it's too horrible!!!! *Runs off crying*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Necronopticous

We are in for a disgustingly conservative 4 years.

I've officially lost faith in America and humanity. Good night.

---

I lost it 4 years ago...

Democrats are claiming 1 million absentee ballots for Florida are not counted for, even though polls have Bush winning Florida by over 300000 votes...so hopefully Florida will screw this country in the right direction!

YAY!!!.... *Leaves and goes and wacthes Election fulltime...*

I decided quite early on that if Bush wins again most of the remainder of my (waning) faith in the American people will shatter. Surprise surprise...

Accursed lambs.

*sigh* No use now. How could've they voted for him? How?! It doesn't make any sense. It feels as though the Florida votes were rigged...

Dammit...many polls project Ohio going to Bush. I guess they had to lose even more jobs to actually think straight.

I think the option of Kerry winning is now impossible, and it's all because of those morons. :mad2:

I seriously don't think I can live on.

One more state will seal the deal...I guess the United States is 51% moron.

Watch it. --Unne

I predicted Bush would win eons ago. Why do you people insist on questioning my infallibility?

:D

I guess because I'm still naive enough to believe that there were intelligent people in America. This proves me wrong.

I hate lambs.

Banned from this forum, two weeks. --Unne

*cries*

What's worse is that there's no way Kerry can win now. Even if Bush gets no more electoral votes, this goes to the House...where Republicans have the majority.

Looks like we're screwed for four more years...damn you Al Gore.

Can you say recount redux, in Ohio this time? There is hope yet for Kerry if he can get Wisconsin.

I think it would be poetic justice if Kerry wins now based on a recount after Bush won in 2000.

Take care all.

Wow. I can't believe that everybody in this forum allows themselves to be spoonfeed the crap put out by democrats. The election 4 years ago wasn't screwed over by the republicans. We are about to have so many legal battles that it would make what Al Gore did look like childs play. They are both sore losers and for they last 4 years they have both been telling you what you want to hear. They have been telling you that Bush didn't win 4 years ago and now they will fight tooth and nail for something they just lost. This is the breakdown of this democracy with a small "d" so as not to be confused with Democrats as my AP U.S. history teacher says. Not to be blamed on bush but perhaps to all united states citizen with the least blame on Bush. I can't tell you who started it but this is what it is. Corruption in one side of politics causes the other to have to respound in the exact same way if they want to win that is. Then it becomes standard politics and while we are wasting our time being selfish and wanting to blame the president for things not caused by and not in the control of a President of the United States, the terrorist continue to plot. We are at war and it should be a total war. Don't know what total war is? Look it up because i can't stand to spoonfeed you every piece of information. Get a damn high school education. Listen to talk radio which is bias to republicans rather then Democrats as Democrats are dominate to almost every other form of media and get a second opinion. I prefer The Savage Nation because he supports bush but he gives him plenty of tough critisism. He is in my opinion the least bias of all. Bush is the better candidate and I think that the margin he is going to win by is not properly representing how good a president he is. So he can't talk smooth which the Democrats seem to specialize in. We need values that are set. Values should determine alot of who you vote for. If you don't want Christian values running our government then you shouldn't have voted for Bush which is what you all did according to your comments here in this thread. I'm tired. Need anything? I might not come back here so just mail me your pathetic questions.

Bush: 254
Kerry: 252

Ohio will be the deciding state.

New Mexico with 5 votes is still undecided. 50% Bush, 49% Kerry (1% Nader! Go figure. But doesn't that add to 101%?)

Iowa with 7 votes is still undecided. (50% Bush, 49% Kerry)

Ohio with 20 votes is still undecided. (51% Bush, 49% Kerry. Again, doesn't this equal 101%?)

Info taken from here: http://network.ap.org/dynamic/files/...WIMIL&SECTION=

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daryl

New Mexico with 5 votes is still undecided. 50% Bush, 49% Kerry (1% Nader! Go figure. But doesn't that add to 101%?)

Ohio with 20 votes is still undecided. (51% Bush, 49% Kerry. Again, doesn't this equal 101%?)

---

50 + 49 + 1 = 100
51 + 49 = 100

Where did you go to school? ;)

I lift my voice and pray:
May the lights in The Land of Plenty
Shine on the truth some day.

- Leonard Cohen

Man, oh, man. I can't believe Bush still has a chance of pulling this through. It's all the Democrats' fault, really - if they had nominated some sort of rational, reasonably intelligent human being to run, they could have swept this election clean. Instead they put up a shaved monkey. Face it - the only thing Kerry had going for him was that he wasn't Bush. They could have put up ANYONE, and he would have gotten at least as many votes as Kerry. I, along with many others, only voted for Bush (note: My state went to Kerry) because I/we found Kerry to be such a fool and a prick.

The Democrats blew it.

Well it was just announced Bush won.

And Kerry called him to concede, so there's not going to be a 2000esque scenario, either.

I'm feelin' it.

Just a note: Anyone who continues along the lines of "All Americans are morons" is getting banned from this forum. If you can't remain civil, you'll be shown the door. Thanks.

I guess it's time to start looking at canadian and british colleges.

What a shame. Well, not an enormous one. Both seem like bad candidates, but Kerry seemed a bit better.

I just don't know what to do...I seriously need help. :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loony BoB

50 + 49 + 1 = 100
51 + 49 = 100

Where did you go to school? ;)

---

Guess when I posted? Right after I woke up after like 4 hours of sleep.
So I can't do math half awake... that is what calculators are for. >=\

Well, I'm happy. I voted Bush. Yes, I'm one of "them". *twists moustache villainously* I had pretty much concluded that this would become another year 2,000 election with recounts and court drama, so I didn't stay up for the finish. I was pleasantly suprised when I turned on MSNBC and it was all finished.

On a side note, now Bush doesn't have to moderate his plans with reelection in mind. I imagine we'll see a much more no-holds-barred president than we did thus far. Politicians always bring out their more controversial plans once reelection is sealed.

Aye Garland. Honestly, the thought frightens me, but then again, so did the thought of Kerry as commander in chief.

The next 4 years ought to be interesting. Then we might finally see 2 interesting people as candidates. Probably not, but at least there's hope.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dingo Jellybean

One more state will seal the deal...I guess the United States is 51% moron.

Watch it. --Unne

---

correction... 83%...
a world total of 87.274% morons...

Im so glad Bush won. Kerry was to unfit to command anyway. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by master01

correction... 83%...
a world total of 87.274% morons...

---

I'm pretty sure that Unne asked you all to stop the moron talk..

I voted for Bush, because I like him and I don't like Kerry.

Sad.
I only hope this election result won't have serious repercussions for the rest of the world... with any luck, Bush will re-discover the meaning of "international co-operation" rather than going off on any more slap-dash plans and bringing about the next big genocidal war. Here's hoping, but I won't be too surprised if things end up that way.

It's especially sad, considering that President Bush had very little public support before the campaigning began. The dazzling media whitewash was enough to re-write people's thoughts and opinions... pity, really.

I wonder, though... just how 'clean' was this election? The US is one of the first to lash out against electoral corruption elsewhere, but we know that Bush is dishonest and untrustworthy. If he'll send his own people to die just to support his lies, then rigging an election to secure his grip on power wouldn't be that much of a bigger step.
I'm not levelling any accusations here; I'd prefer that the result be a just and genuine one, whichever way it goes. Just saying I wouldn't be surprised, that's all.

Bush has to be one of the biggest assholes alive. And now Americans were stupid enough to elect him. This is causing me to question my faith in democracy and human rationallity.

There really aren't very many logical reasons to support Bush over Kerry. Whenever I argue with someone about this, they always come back to saying "Well, I don't like Bush's character." That's crap. Character shouldn't matter if you're a rational human being. As if the fact that Kerry married a rich woman is worse than Bush disregarding the Clinton Admin. reports on Al Quaeda pre-9/11. Piss-poor.

Enjoy your World Event's ban ~Matt

:rock:LONG LIVE BUSH:rock:

:beer:HE WON:beer:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moose Knight

Bush has to be one of the biggest assholes alive. And now Americans were stupid enough to elect him. This is causing me to question my faith in democracy and human rationallity.

There really aren't very many logical reasons to support Bush over Kerry. Whenever I argue with someone about this, they always come back to saying "Well, I don't like Bush's character." That's crap. Character shouldn't matter if you're a rational human being. As if the fact that Kerry married a rich woman is worse than Bush disregarding the Clinton Admin. reports on Al Quaeda pre-9/11. Piss-poor.

Enjoy your World Event's ban ~Matt

---

I agree with what you're saying...but I don't agree with the ban if someone has to voice their opinion.

It's funny...the whole world was shocked Bush won...they thought he was just as unpopular outside as he was inside. But Republicans outnumber Democrats in this country, and it's a real shame the young voters didn't go and vote like they were promising. Maryland had the highest young voter turnout...so much for the youth population, maybe 4 years from now they'll actually take it upon themselves to act responsibly.

Dingo, maybe they didn't vote because they didn't have confidence in either candidate and wanted to show that, rather than have a lack of responsibility.

I can't see why everyone is getting so worked up about it. Everyone is entitled to vote for who they want, whether or not anyone else agrees, and to say people are morons for taking part in the democratic process and choosing someone they believe in...I just don't get it.

Four things that depressed me:

1. The lack of any jump in youth turn out, it went from only 19% to 21%. Very depressing indeed. I thought perhaps this would be the year, but again I was wrong. What will it take to get the youth of this country interested?

2. The fact that religion, once again, decided this election. I'm growing very weary of this. I'm rountinely amazed that "Moral Values" trumped the economy and terrorism in this election, but that appears to be the direction of the country. Religion has no place in politics and vice versa, it should be something completely personal and not matter in a leader. The fact that the major churches of this country supported Bush and told their believers to vote Bush made this election all but decided before the first vote had even been cast.

3. The conservative movement this country is undergoing. I had to laugh when both Kerry and Bush said that we need to unite as a nation when it's impossible for me to do that. I am for gay-marriage, stem cell research and am pro-choice in most situations, not because it's what I believe, but because to me, it seems logical and also allows for the most personal freedoms in this country. The fact that we will all but certainly have a VERY conservative Supreme Court is tough for me to swallow because it means that probably all of these thoughts of mine will be rendered unlawful.

4. The lack of vision, from either side. With Iran steadily beginning to power up again and North Korea looming, how will we react? Will we again race blindly ahead and try to stop them? If that's so, where will the troops come from? We can expect NO support from much of the world, so we'll be left to handle it again on our own which means, either we leave Iraq soon, OR, we reinstate the draft.

Our current prospects, no matter how you spin it, are not optimistic to me.

One final thing to note, even though all of the Democrats and Liberals of this country will likely be sealed up even further in the next four years, don't allow that to be so. Democracy thrives on difference, on a variety of views and the ability to try more than one thing. If we can find a way to get a grip and regain our backbone and stance, I think this country can still work. If the Republicans and Conservatives of this country completely overwhelm and shut down the debate... I hate to think where this nation will end up. Don't give up the fight, and hopefully in 2008, we'll have candidates with real ideas and visions, people who can make a difference in this world, but for now, it's up to us individually.

Take care all.

You have to remember though is that not all 21% of the youth vote is a guarantee vote for Kerry.

I was worried at the beginning until Bush caught up.
I'm very pleased with the outcome of this election. :) Not only do we have a Republican President but the House and the Senate are also all Republican. :D :D :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wakka

:rock:LONG LIVE BUSH:rock:

:beer:HE WON:beer:

---

Bush agrees!

The Senate was Republican to start off with, just not with the 'big' majority it has now. It's just Tom Daschle is now out. :D I never really like Daschle.

"You have to remember though is that not all 21% of the youth vote is a guarantee vote for Kerry."

It's not really about who they vote for Proto, but the fact that they vote at all. The major factor the issues of our generation have no impact on politics is because we don't have a voice or express it, be it Republican or Democrat.

Take care all.

Both were bad candidates, Kerry is the lesser of two evils. Bush got the vote because he's conservative and that's what every God fearing American wants in a leader, right? Yeah, well, that's why he won my state. Religion is important, but a government should be led by the brain, not the bible, and most people in my state (Ohio, which I'm guessing is a target now) seem to look past that. This was especially prevelant in school today, in which there were debates in one of my classes loud enough that I was able to yell "BOOBIES BOOBIES BOOBIES BOOBIES" across the room to my friend without anyone noticing. Also a girl saying, "Yay, let's vote for Kerry, the baby killer!" and a teacher telling students that a vote for Kerry is a vote to destroy America.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Doomgaze

Bush agrees!

---

:love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love:

I know, Proto. Still though! I'm so pysched about it!
One thing that really surprised me was that I thought Kerry would win. In all honesty I did. All I ever heard about was Kerry this ( making him sound like Jesus or something ) and Bush that ( how he was the devil ). This of course in my community. It was amazing to see Bush win.
Although, Michigan gave it to Kerry. :cry: Mississippi gave it to Bush though!! :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dingo Jellybean

One more state will seal the deal...I guess the United States is 51% moron.

Watch it. --Unne

---

Sorry, Unne, I tend to agree with him here. If not moron, then zealot, bigot, xenophobe, warmonger... take your pick. I cannot see how anyone with a good conscience could have voted for Bush. I really can't.

All of my friends voted except for the ones that wouldn't've voted for Bush. All the Kerry supporters didn't vote, which I find amusing.

Eh, whatever. I don't really care which one won; they both suck. I think Bush is the lesser of two evils, but with all the complaining and misery his re-election caused in Kerry supporters I almost wish Kerry won instead just so people would shut up.

I'm so glad I voted Libertarian.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Captain

2. The fact that religion, once again, decided this election. I'm growing very weary of this. I'm rountinely amazed that "Moral Values" trumped the economy and terrorism in this election, but that appears to be the direction of the country. Religion has no place in politics and vice versa, it should be something completely personal and not matter in a leader. The fact that the major churches of this country supported Bush and told their believers to vote Bush made this election all but decided before the first vote had even been cast.

---

Precisely. While I really detest people who unneccessarily bash on religion, since there are few things capable of greater good in an individual's life, it has absolutely no place whatsoever in politics, because it's an indisputable fact that there are few other things that have caused as much widespread devestation and suffering throughout the world. And it looks like the citizens of the world are going to continue to pay because one man was elected because he was a "religious man".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Agent Proto

You have to remember though is that not all 21% of the youth vote is a guarantee vote for Kerry.

---

Vice versa, all my friends (of age) voted for Bush

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShlupQuack

All of my friends voted except for the ones that wouldn't've voted for Bush. All the Kerry supporters didn't vote, which I find amusing.

Eh, whatever. I don't really care which one won; they both suck. I think Bush is the lesser of two evils, but with all the complaining and misery his re-election caused in Kerry supporters I almost wish Kerry won instead just so people would shut up.

I'm so glad I voted Libertarian.

---

*agree*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Behold the Void

I hate lambs.

---

Awww, lambs are cool.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShlupQuack

All of my friends voted except for the ones that wouldn't've voted for Bush. All the Kerry supporters didn't vote, which I find amusing.

Eh, whatever. I don't really care which one won; they both suck. I think Bush is the lesser of two evils, but with all the complaining and misery his re-election caused in Kerry supporters I almost wish Kerry won instead just so people would shut up.

I'm so glad I voted Libertarian.

---

:D :p

Kerry would've fared better if he ran for president based on who he was, rather than who he wasn't. Granted, Bush is not a popular man, but to run your campaign with no other argument than not being Bush is no way to go. He really offered very little of what HIS views were, and what HE wanted to do with the country. His views, as a result, lacked consistancy, and I believe it was his apparent "flip-flopping" that killed his campaign. I can say that I would've voted for Kerry, had he spent more time on what he would do right, rather than what Bush would do wrong. The entire focus of the 2004 election was whether various Bush decisions were right or wrong. That means that when people went to vote, they voted based on how strongly they agreed or disagreed with Bush's decisions thus far, and not on whether Kerry had good ideas on how to do things better. Bush got the votes of people that liked his decisions and people who didn't care. Kerry only got the votes of people who strongly opposed Bush. Kerry seemed to assume the US was more polarized than it was. He thought people either loved Bush or hated him, and in reality, once 9/11 faded from memory, most people just didn't care. He wasn't able to convince enough people that Bush should be ousted no matter who was replacing him. Not too suprising, since that's a hard argument to support. Bush isn't a good president, but he's not so bad that ANYONE should be president in his stead. Kerry failed because he never elevated himself above that "I'm anyone but Bush" status.

Just of note, the two areas most directly effected by 9/11, Washington DC and New York, and probably the two most vulnerable places in the USA, chose Kerry as the person who would keep them safer.

Then again, those "Moral Values", which I'm assuming don't include the Environment, trumped even one's safety.

Our country is heading backward, back to the late 60's and early 70's, back to a time of very polarized beliefs and a general lack of unity all surrounding a very questionable war, and it's so very sad to see.

Take care all.

Gays are about as unwelcomed in the south and midwest as blacks were in the 60's.

The two areas most affected by 9/11 voted highly democratic, with DC going 90% for Kerry and NY going Kerry pretty handedly.

What hurts me most being a minority is that Republicans have had a poor repore with minorities. It's not wonder why 80% of minority votes went to Kerry.

But let me ask you this, if these people care so much about moral values...why not just ban alcohol? Why not go for a stronger economy, because without a strong economy...people's real morals get tested. It's easy to be moral when you're living comfortable...but when dire straights are presented, many people wilt like a dead flower. Without a strong economy, you lose jobs...faith gets tested and so on...and we can't even protect ourselves because we wouldn't have money for a military.

But I'm happy with how faithful Democratic voters voted. The top four metropolitan areas in the US(NY, LA, Chicago, Washington D.C...in that order) all went Democratic.

To a newcomer, looking at the electoral map would assume that Democrats got whooped. We probably did, losing ground on the House, Senate, and White House. But since the Northeast, west and northern central part of the US is democratic and heavily populated...we still have a strong chance in 2008.

All these Bush voters talk about morals, but they are probably no better than Democrats themselves or worse.

It's funny though, on NBC news, Brian Williams mentioned how the midwest and south were sick of Viagra commercials during dinner time. And that it was a major deciding factor into moral values. Please. They don't ban a harmful substance like alcohol, but yet hate it when a product comes out for ED that's practically harmless in virtually all cases?

I also think Kerry might have offended some of the "obese" voters. I think during an interview he said the health of America was appaling and the number of "obese people sickens me." Unfortunately, obesity is most rampant in the south and midwest...and that of course will turn swing voters to Bush voters. With the number of obese people rising, the next Democratic nominee should be careful with how he talks about fat people. But Kerry's right, if you don't have your health...you don't have anything.

PS: Kerry's daughters are WAY better looking than Bush's daughters. Don't any of you conservatives say they're not...just look at them. Jenna Bush looks like her father...which is just...scary.

No one is a moron.

You can't call a person a moron just because you disagree with how they voted.

Shame on you for calling people morons. It makes me really sad, to be honest.

Shame on non-voters. It's just laziness. You can always go to the polls and click no vote, but I'm pretty sure I said that before.

As Americans, we can change the direction this administration will head if we stop crying and start doing something. Everyone upset about having Bush for another four years, go do volunteer work in the name of the DNP to raise public awareness about what Bush is really doing.

And considering the person you're trying to win over a moron isn't just condescending, it's going to make them more steadfast in their opinion.

I, now more than ever, think we need to do away with the Electoral College because for one thing, we'd not have to worry about any of these recounts for electoral college votes, but rather would have a winner once all the votes are in. Granted, there can still be recounts on these votes, but I'd believe it'll occur a lot less.

Secondly, I think using just the popular vote would make even more folks come out and vote since now there really is no claim to be made about the power being taken out of the American people's hands or that their votes not counting.

Third, and finally, the Electoral College was created by our founding fathers because they feared mob rule and thought that the citizens of this country as a whole were uninformed. Now, over 200 years later, I'd like to think we are infinitely more informed and now, more than ever can figure out who we will vote for and why.

Though, if the Electoral college goes, please make spinsters go as well because they just dilute all possible discussion of facts in this country and are one of the leading causes of polarization of beliefs on both sides.

Take care all.

For those who think Bush did a horrible job and think Kerry should have been elected unanimously (especially those of you who don't live in the US),

Do any of you actually know anything about what Kerry stands for?

I ask because he essentially ran with the "I'm not Bush" motto, which anyone could have done. I despise Bush just as much as anyone else, but when I looked at Kerry's stances on the actual issues, it was clear as day that I COULD NOT VOTE FOR HIM (Kerry). If the Democrats had put up a reasonably intelligent, responsible, rational human being, they could have swept this election clean. They didn't. And so they didn't.

I'm not a sheep and no, I don't think that just ANYONE could do a better job as president than Bush. When you start to think that way, you allow your vote to go to anyone who wants it - possibly the next Hitler, for example. I'm not saying that Kerry would have been that bad. I'm just saying, please, educate yourselves before you make decisions and judgments.

Respect to any supporter of either candidate who has done their research and come to conclusions in a logical manner. Shame on you if you didn't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MartyM

For those who think Bush did a horrible job and think Kerry should have been elected unanimously (especially those of you who don't live in the US),

Do any of you actually know anything about what Kerry stands for?

I ask because he essentially ran with the "I'm not Bush" motto, which anyone could have done. I despise Bush just as much as anyone else, but when I looked at Kerry's stances on the actual issues, it was clear as day that I COULD NOT VOTE FOR HIM (Kerry). If the Democrats had put up a reasonably intelligent, responsible, rational human being, they could have swept this election clean. They didn't. And so they didn't.

I'm not a sheep and no, I don't think that just ANYONE could do a better job as president than Bush. When you start to think that way, you allow your vote to go to anyone who wants it - possibly the next Hitler, for example. I'm not saying that Kerry would have been that bad. I'm just saying, please, educate yourselves before you make decisions and judgments.

Respect to any supporter of either candidate who has done their research and come to conclusions in a logical manner. Shame on you if you didn't.

---

That's one of the assumptions about Kerry supporters. People accuse us of being anti-Bush rather than pro-Kerry. Not true.

Yes, he flipflops...but if new facts arise and you see another alternative...why aren't you allowed to go against your old views? It beats staying on the wrong course and sticking it through. Bush just thinks he's right, he's too black and white.

If Al Gore would have ran, I think this election would have been different.

^^Hey, don't take offense at my post if you have reasons beyond "he's not Bush" for supporting Kerry. :) I asked this question on another forum and many pro-Kerry foreigners had no IDEA what Kerry actually stood for.

Quote:

---

Respect to any supporter of either candidate who has done their research and come to conclusions in a logical manner.

---

I apologize that my above post was written in a bit of a stream-of-consciousness style and therefore might be a bit hard to decipher. All I want to know is whether those with strong opinions against Bush here have actually done their homework on Kerry to decide whether he's a better candidate or not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MartyM

^^Hey, don't take offense at my post if you have reasons beyond "he's not Bush" for supporting Kerry. :) I asked this question on another forum and many pro-Kerry foreigners had no IDEA what Kerry actually stood for.



I apologize that my above post was written in a bit of a stream-of-consciousness style and therefore might be a bit hard to decipher. All I want to know is whether those with strong opinions against Bush here have actually done their homework on Kerry to decide whether he's a better candidate or not.

---

I have done my research on Kerry...I support his views on gay marriage, stem cell research, and abortion.

For example, Bush does not tolerate abortion whatsoever. Kerry only tolerates it on 2 conditions: In cases of rape, and when the mother's life is in danger.

Stem cell, Bush heavily is against this as he is pro-life. Kerry supports this because, like me, the illnesses of today to be cured are critical if stem cell research is allowed.

Gay marriage. Bush wants to ban it completely. Kerry wants each state's judicial system to determine if it's fair or not.

I support everything that Kerry is for, and with that I'm pro-Kerry...more so than anti-Bush.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dingo Jellybean

For example, Bush does not tolerate abortion whatsoever. Kerry only tolerates it on 2 conditions: In cases of rape, and when the mother's life is in danger.

---

No that's completely wrong. Kerry is Pro-Choice, and Bush is the one that can tolerate it in cases of rape and when the mother's life is in danger, even though he's mostly against it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Agent Proto

No that's completely wrong. Kerry is Pro-Choice, and Bush is the one that can tolerate it in cases of rape and when the mother's life is in danger, even though he's mostly against it.

---

No, Kerry stated this in his presidential debates. He made it specifically clear on this issue.

I agreed with a few things Kerry said, whereas I disagreed with EVERY stance Bush had. Kerry probably would not have been a good president, but at least he had a few issues that were right.

John Kerry on abortion during the 3rd presidential debates:

Quote:

---

I believe that choice is a woman's choice. It's between a woman, God and her doctor.

---

Definitely sounds pro-choice to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dingo Jellybean

Gay marriage. Bush wants to ban it completely. Kerry wants each state's judicial system to determine if it's fair or not..

---

For the record, a number of states were asked about a ban on gay marriages, and 11 states voted for a ban. It means the people of 11 states are against gay marriage, regardless of what the federal state favors. Why should a judge (or a panel of judges) decide what people want? Isn't that something the people of each state should decide?

Quote:

---

Isn't that something the people of each state should decide?

---

Actually, I believe that on the issues of gay marriage, the only ones to be asked are the homosexuals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dr Unne

Just a note: Anyone who continues along the lines of "All Americans are morons" is getting banned from this forum. If you can't remain civil, you'll be shown the door. Thanks.

---

I think its fair the same rules apply to all countries.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shadow Nexus

Actually, I believe that on the issues of gay marriage, the only ones to be asked are the homosexuals.

---

I agree with that too...but unfortunately the bulk of the midwest and south despises gays like the plague.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wuggly Blight

I think its fair the same rules apply to all countries.

---

I agree, of course... but no one else has been calling any one but Americans morons.

A few people I know were going to vote for Kerry until they found out he about him being Pro-Choice ( I'll go ahead and call it that because that what is sounds like to me ) and at the last moment changed their vote to Bush.

As for the "Don't Call Each Other Stupid," rule that had to be reannounced in here - It's pretty sad in my opinion that we must resort to that sort of thing. I voted for who I felt more comfortable with as President and regardless of if you voted for Bush or Kerry you shouldn't be put down for it. To be honest, I'm extremely tired of being called a moron because I voted for Bush.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fuzakeru

A few people I know were going to vote for Kerry until they found out he about him being Pro-Choice ( I'll go ahead and call it that because that what is sounds like to me ) and at the last moment changed their vote to Bush.

As for the "Don't Call Each Other Stupid," rule that had to be reannounced in here - It's pretty sad in my opinion that we must resort to that sort of thing. I voted for who I felt more comfortable with as President and regardless of if you voted for Bush or Kerry you shouldn't be put down for it. To be honest, I'm extremely tired of being called a moron because I voted for Bush.

---

Well, Republicans(those that I spoke with) generally say Democrats are such whiners. I guarantee you that if the reverse were true on the election, you'd have red shirts whining just as much as blue shirts are now. So for you Bush voters, you're going to have to deal with our miscontent until time eases our pain...because 4 years is a long-long time and frustration often leads to complaint.

When you put so much faith into one man(or into opposition of his opponent), you get angry and depressed that he lost. You wouldn't understand how some of us Democrats feel, because we're on the losing end. It's funny how people call it "pathetic" or "sad" that some people call voters of another party morons for voting for the opposition...yet it's just calling the kettle black. It's easy for Bush supporters to gloat and look down on us, because you've won.

I'm not defending anyone(including myself) now, but the fact that so many of the youth let us fellow youth down was pathetic. If there is a possible draft, and those who were Kerry supporters didn't vote and they were drafted...well, eh...I don't want to wish any bad luck on anyone right now, but I hate how these young voters want change and yet sit back and hope that everyone else does their job. It's pathetic really. I'm more angry at the non-voters than the voters of the opposition. What happened to the so called youth gap? Are we so fat and lazy that we can't leave a bag of chips behind and just walk to a booth and vote? They had the day off for Christ's sake...most people had the day off on election day...and most stores were closed...absolutely no excuse.

Dingo, I can understand where you are coming from and I suppose ( after relooking at what I've said ) that it wasn't right for me to say, "Stop calling me a moron!" when I just got finished practically saying that those opposed to Bush are whiners. For that I do apologize. And thank you for pointing that out to me in the manner you did. :)

If the handle was turned and Kerry had won I would have been equally upset and I have no problem with people saying that they didn't want Bush in office or saying they thought Kerry was a better choice but the comments like, "Oh noes! Bush is going to send America to hell." or things like that ( you know the ones I'm talking about ) I'm quite tired of seeing. However, I'll just have to be more tolerant and remind myself that I would have been just as upset if the reverse had happened.

I'm just as tired of the "Oh noes, Bush won! We're doomed!" crap. Sure he's done some questionable stuff, but he won fair and square this time around. No doubt about that.

It's also just as annoying to hear the same people wanting to move to Canada. It's ridiculous. I was hoping Kerry would have won, but he didn't. Most of my family went with Bush so it's funny to hear them call me "Loser!" when Kerry lost. I'm not terribly upset, but I can tolerate Bush. And I hope I can tolerate his new administration as well. I'm glad that Ashcroft is resigning before Inaugaration.

I think some non-Democrats misunderstand us sometimes.

None of us thinks Bush being elected is the end of the world, it just feels that way to some(though not to me). I have a hard time tolerating Bush because of his policies, and the fact that he's shunned allies like Germany and France, when there was no reason to. I don't think Bush is a bad person, I just think there was someone better for the job. I wouldn't mind John McCain(Republican), most Democrats like John McCain...he's much better for the job. so it's not anti-Republicans coming from some of us Democrats, it's more so anti-Bush.

I love the Bush jokes and all, and comedy is better with Bush in than Kerry (because Kerry is pretty boring), but most of the Democrats(thus most of the youth) hoped to see another and possibly better alternative.

I think Chris Rock said it best regarding gay marriage, and racism:

"Hating people because of their color, or race or sexual orientation is damn stupid because we all know, the minute you start hating someone, they join your family. You hate gays? Guess what... you're son's gonna be gay! You hate Italians? Guess what, your daughter is gonna marry one."

I always thought amendments to the Constitution were to enlarge our rights, not exclude. The only amendment that excluded rights dealt with Prohibition of alcohol and guess what, it got taken out several years later.

Once again, to me, this all goes back to religion, which with every day is being perverted to divide people instead of bring them together. If someone can interpret a line written in the Bible almost 2000 years ago and say that it has relavance today, then using that logic, shouldn't condoms be banned? Shouldn't girls be married when they can begin giving birth? Shouldn't we all live into our thousands? All of that is in the Bible, yet has been shoved aside because it's obsolete. Let people be who they are. Being homosexual is not a sin, nor is it a crime.

Marriage to me, should be about love between two people. I think anyway, that if people are so worried about marriage being ruined, then perhaps they should pass more laws against gambling or against Las Vegas weddings, or perhaps even against alcohol which leads to more domestic disturbances than anything else in this world. If two men, or two women are in love, who are we to tell them no?

Take care all.

Just a thought. This time around, Ashcroft won't be in power. Ashcroft was the mastermind behind the much maligned Patriot Acts. While Bush was largely responsible for the campaign against Islamic terrorism, it was Ashcroft who was responsible for any attempts to turn the US into a police state w/o civil rights. I don't think the people who fear for their rights have anything to worry about. Bush apparently thought Ashcroft too extreme, as did we all. That said, those who fear for Islamic 3rd world countries everywhere might still have grounds for concern. I wouldn't be suprised to see a war against Iran fairly soon. Only Saudi Arabia, and Egypt will be left unscathed when the campaigns are finished.

Ashcroft isn't going to be around and from what I have heard, for about a year now, Powell is going to retire also.

Ashcroft being gone is good but Rice and Rumsfeld need to get out also.

I wonder who will replace Greenspan in about 2 years? His 14 years are going to be up soon so who will run the Fed then?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by edczxcvbnm

Ashcroft isn't going to be around and from what I have heard, for about a year now, Powell is going to retire also.

Ashcroft being gone is good but Rice and Rumsfeld need to get out also.

I wonder who will replace Greenspan in about 2 years? His 14 years are going to be up soon so who will run the Fed then?

---

What's dumb was that Bush hired most of his people based on race. Except Powell(who was a decent hire), everyone of his minority held staff positions could have been better. Bush tried to appeal to minorities, but it didn't work well with the voters in this election...the most staggering stat? 91% of African Americans went democratic. It's the lowest percentage of African American voters for Republicans since 1964, when LBJ had a 94% advantage from African American voters.

[/QUOTE]For the record, a number of states were asked about a ban on gay marriages, and 11 states voted for a ban. It means the people of 11 states are against gay marriage, regardless of what the federal state favors. Why should a judge (or a panel of judges) decide what people want? Isn't that something the people of each state should decide?[QUOTE]

If the United States were a democracy, than yes, the people should decide. However, it isn't. This country is a Republic. Now im not an expert on this, but as far as I know, in a Republic, 99% of the population cannot take away the rights of the 1% that is left, no matter how much they want it. So, in other words, if 99% of America was made up of the christian right, and one percent was gays, the christians could not hinder the rights of the gays. Period.

Quote:

---

Once again, to me, this all goes back to religion, which with every day is being perverted to divide people instead of bring them together. If someone can interpret a line written in the Bible almost 2000 years ago and say that it has relavance today, then using that logic, shouldn't condoms be banned? Shouldn't girls be married when they can begin giving birth? Shouldn't we all live into our thousands? All of that is in the Bible, yet has been shoved aside because it's obsolete. Let people be who they are. Being homosexual is not a sin, nor is it a crime.

---

I believe it was Marx who said "Religion is the opiot of the masses" This is an undeniable truth in my eyes, regardless of whether god exists or not.

Quote:

---

Only Saudi Arabia, and Egypt will be left unscathed when the campaigns are finished.

---

Don't forget about Pakistan. I don't believe that we would ever attack Pakistan, seeing as they have nukes and all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nik0tine

If the United States were a democracy, than yes, the people should decide. However, it isn't. This country is a Republic. Now im not an expert on this, but as far as I know, in a Republic, 99% of the population cannot take away the rights of the 1% that is left, no matter how much they want it. So, in other words, if 99% of America was made up of the christian right, and one percent was gays, the christians could not hinder the rights of the gays. Period.


I believe it was Marx who said "Religion is the opiot of the masses" This is an undeniable truth in my eyes, regardless of whether god exists or not.

---

Note, the following has nothing to do with my position on gay marriages (I'm against the bans), but with following the rules of your country. This is also in answer to Shadow Nexus.

The USA is not a republic in the classical sense of the term, but rather, a representative democracy, which, under today's acceptance, falls into the "republic" category. From the Wikipedia entry: Representative democracy comprises a form of democracy and theory of civics wherein voters choose (in free, secret, multi-party elections) representatives to act in their interests, but not as their proxies—i.e., not necessarily as directed but with enough authority to exercise initiative in the face of changing circumstances. Modern liberal democracies are important examples of representative democracy. It could be argued that this term is synonymous with "republic". Now, it means that the representatives get the vote on the matters of law, not all the people, not a particular subset of it. Which means that by this definition, gays can't decide on their own what the law should be for gay marriages.
Next, on the role of judges. I learned today that a country ruled by judges (which is what some people unknowingly ask for) is called a Krytocracy. Personally, I think it's worse than a dictature of the majority, because not only are they unelected and not representative of the population, they are overstepping their functions.
Last, about letting the gays decide: it doesn't work. Regardless of being in a republic or democracy, either all the population participaes, or none. Gay marriage is a change of status on marriage in general, and concerns more than just the gays. Let's draw a parallel about banning smoking in some buildings/areas: is it right that only smokers are asked or decide whether or not there should be non-smokers areas/rules, or are you going to try and work a compromise between the two groups?

Quote:

---

Gay marriage is a change of status on marriage in general, and concerns more than just the gays. Let's draw a parallel about banning smoking in some buildings/areas: is it right that only smokers are asked or decide whether or not there should be non-smokers areas/rules, or are you going to try and work a compromise between the two groups?

---

The difference here lies in the fact smokers create passive smoking to non smokers. It is a matter of health. In the case of gay marriage, it is simply a matter of prejudice. I cannot deny such prejudice exists, but I can't understand how a supposedly rational goverment can make laws based on irrationality (religion or prejudice, and both tend to be tied). In a religious goverment, I find it completly normal for gay marriage to be banned. On a democracy, I do not.

From a politician point of view, it is perfectly rational to push for such laws if 80% of the voters want this law, because if you don't, your opponent will and will get elected in your stead. It is particularly true in the USA were reps can be kicked out of office very easily (elections) by an angry electorate.
Second, these bans most likely are the answer from the state legistaltures to the activist judges: try to make laws from the bench and we will stomp it. Now, I disagree that a (full) ban was necessary for that, but I agree that it is not the judge's role to legislate (especially on social matters).
Last, you're not going to change the Bible belt by forcing them to accept you, because they will kneejerk, and you'll take it in the chin. Gays in France did it much more smoothly, by not pushing for gay marriages, but for civil unions, which, in terms of privilege, is exactly the same as a marriage after two years (to avoid the "let's pretend we're a couple to get tax deductions"), but with a different name (and therefore religious people can't scream that their sacrosant marriage is hurt or something). In my opinion, a more pragmatic approach in the US would be more successful, because religious zealots would be much more likely to see gay couples as "I don't like them, but whatever, they leave me and my values alone, I leave them alone" instead of "they're attacking my religious values, let's fight".

You are right, maybe the term "marriage" may make it less acceptable to some religious people, but as far as I know, such term is not defined as sacred unless done by the church. Whats the difference between civil marriage and civil union?

Nothing, as far as I've been able to see.

And you know, this is how I've felt from the get go. I mean, even if gay "marriage" is allowed, then the religious aren't going to see it as a sacred state anyway. And if you really love someone, why does it matter that everyone else in the world things you're wrong? I love my family, but my family are prejudiced and in some cases racist. I believe this is wrong, but who's to say I should stop loving them?

If you love someone, I don't think it should matter what you call your union, as long as you get the rights of other people in a similar union.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shadow Nexus

You are right, maybe the term "marriage" may make it less acceptable to some religious people, but as far as I know, such term is not defined as sacred unless done by the church. Whats the difference between civil marriage and civil union?

---

In France, the civil union (the "PACS") can be signed by any couple (2 men, 2 women or 1 man and 1 woman), but it takes two years to get the fiscal advantages, and I think there are restrictions on adoption possibilities (but don't quote me on that). The civil marriage gives them immediately. The religious ceremony can only take place after the civil ceremony (the priests will ask you for a certificate from the mayor).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Endless

I think there are restrictions on adoption possibilities (but don't quote me on that)

---

I think I can tolerate every Bush plans on doing, barely...except his whole anti-gay plan. :mad2:

My comments on his election is... why? For more years of the same and for what? Do the children of this generation really deserve to foot the bill?

Sadly, that's been the lost problem of every power: they never really consider the future. Hopefully, when we get to be the generation in power we can change that, but it'll be an uphill struggle.

Take care all.