Plain and simple: George Bush or John Kerry

[The Delfonics]

Im curious to who schmoes will vote for. Kerrys problem lies in the fact that he isnt well known by casual followers of politics. Although I liked that he changed his slogan (I enjoyed the first one but the new one has a deeper satisfaction). Bush just keeps adding fuel to the fire it seems. I think Kerry will get a ton of votes simply because Bush is alienating alot of Americans. As it stands Im sorta in between. Im kinda at the point where it may come down to what happens weeks before the election that will sway my vote because it seems every few days something around the world connected to Bush goes wrong.

[The Other]

It's going to be 2000 all over again. The election is going to be decided on by key states again (a la Florida in 2000).

I'd go with Kerry, though. Anything to get Bush out of there.

[Grebdron]

What The Other said.

I would vote for damned near anybody before I'd vote for Bush.

[TheDeadWalk]

Kerry, by a mile.

I'm damn near sensing a Regan/Mondale landslide.

There seems to be few people that seem to think that Bush has made a positive effect on our country in the last four years. I understand the 9/11 situation, I don't think he handled that badly, but overall I've been displeased with him and the entire Republican organization.

[Morgana]

Out with Bush, in with... oh hell, anybody. Guess Kerry will have to do. I'm not too particular as long as Bush is out.

[Jon Lyrik]

I'm not particularly fond of Kerry. He could be more strong in his views. But honestly, can he be as bad as Bush?

Kerry.

[Jerk Shapiro]

Ha, neither.

[Moviefan1234]

I can't say I'm crazy about Kerry, I wish Edwards or Clark had made it, but Andy Dick would be better than Bush.

[TheDeadWalk]

Originally posted by Moviefan1234
I can't say I'm crazy about Kerry, I wish Edwards or Clark had made it, but Andy Dick would be better than Bush.

John Edwards seemed like a Catholic Priest that wanted to make this country his altar boy.

I kid. But he was somewhat strange I thought. Can't say much about Kerry either in that department, Jon Stewart was dead on when he said: "BRAINSSSSSSSSSS"

[BorderEevilIII]

I like to see John kick Dubya to the curb but how things are going Dubya looks like is gonna get a second term... :(

[JohnTheHenchman]

I could never compromise my beliefs and vote for Kerry because he's "not as bad as Bush." I'm not gonna vote for Kerry because we need to get rid of Bush. I'm gonna vote for something I believe in.

Michael Badnarik of the Libertarian Party.

[bob]

Kerry in tha fo shizzle.

[bmain77]

If I had to vote now it would be Kerry. I can tell you it sure as hell won't be Bush. I'd like to go with a 3rd party canidate and will if it appears any of them can come close to getting that 5% of the vote to earn federal matching funds for the next election and inclusion in the debates.

[Grim H.]

Heeeeeere's Johnny!!!

Sorry, I just watched The Shining.

I'd vote for Kerry if I could vote. The fact is I won't be 18 until March following the election. I think if he's elected we'll start seeing some drastic changes in how things are being handled. Other than that, anything I could say has probably been said.

[JohnTheHenchman]

I'm curious as to what might those drastic changes be.

[jeo4]

Originally posted by Jerk Shapiro
Ha, neither.

My thoughts exactly. The economy is in the toilet, the war on terror hasn't yielded any positive results other than a Taliban ouster, and jobs are moving overseas at a ridiculous rate. If I have to pick, I'd pick Bush, though. Kerry wouldn't be any better. In some ways, I think he'd make things worse. Now that we've gotten into this mess with Iraq, we need to carry it through and finish what we started. Then we need to focus on one target from there: Al Qaeda. Bush will continue to root out terror networks, but will he fix the economy? I doubt it. I'm not at all a fan of the war, and I fear for my own financial future, but I doubt either candidate will do anything remotely positive about it. :(

[Lindsey]

I'm getting tired of Bush. Kerry isn't my favorite of the bunch, but anything will do.

[Tom Samborski]

Other (Ralph Nadar).

[SenorSpielbergo]

Originally posted by Jerk Shapiro
Ha, neither.

Ditto, but if I was forced to choose then I'd probably pick Kerry.

[Fisting Ackbar]

Neither Bush or Kerry have impressed me so far, so I'll probably end up voting for some third party candidate. Not sure yet who though.

[Grebdron]

Folks...

If you dislike the way things are going right now, please don't vote third party. I understand not being happy with Kerry, but I really don't believe we can stand four more years of Dubya.

I've voted almost exclusively third party in the past, but this one's too important. A third party vote is almost a vote for Bush.

We need him out.

[Fisting Ackbar]

While I'm not fond of Bush, I am not totally outraged at him compared to many other people, so I don't really share the "anybody but him" sentiment.

However, the state that I live in (NH) has been declared a swing state and since I won't be voting Nader, I doubt that my vote will hurt Kerry. I'll probably pick a more conservative/libertarian third party candidate, so that might actually hurt Bush more if me and many others do that.

[Annie Hall]

John Kerry.

I can't vote, and I wouldn't vote for George Bush if it meant voting for Gonzo, but I would vote for Kerry even if there was a formidable Republican in office. Why? Because I think the only thing he lacks is a strong sense of when to get smarmy.

He's deep, intelligent, witty, he's an ex-soldier. He fought and then had the wisdom to realize that he was against the Vietnam war- when he easily could have been a veteran who got angry at anyone who opposed it because of what he had been through. He volunteered to be in the army, he wasn't drafted, he made sure to be put in the front lines, and in reading or listening to him speak it becomes evident that he is a worthy political leader.

If only he could make that clear to the general public who don't bother to read up on the candidates, I'm convinced he would be a shoe-in for office.

[The Other]

What sucks about the last election was that I was only 17 at the time, just missing out on the chance to vote, which kind of annoyed me. This time, I'm 21, and I still need to register, :o but I'm definitely voting...

And like Grebdron said, I'm voting for Kerry because he's the only one that has a chance of getting Bush out of there. Not that Kerry is a bad choice, either, I agree with Annie Hall and all. But, third party candidates just don't have a chance, unfortunately.

[notchreturns]

Not really a fan of either... but Bush must get out of office and if Kerry is the guy to take his place, so be it.

[Morgana]

Originally posted by The Other

And like Grebdron said, I'm voting for Kerry because he's the only one that has a chance of getting Bush out of there. Not that Kerry is a bad choice, either, I agree with Annie Hall and all. But, third party candidates just don't have a chance, unfortunately.

Word. Agree with both you and Greb.

As a voter I'd like to think I can choose whichever candidate I want thinking they all have the same shot. However, despite all ideology, America has a two-party system. Quick... how many presidents in the past few decades can you name who were independents?

I do feel like I'm voting for the lesser of the evils at times, but I know how this game works. Unfortunately independents don't have much of a chance against this very deeply rooted two-party system.

[Unicron]

Anyone but Bush. Trust me........he hasnt exactly painted a pretty picture for americans around the world.
The overseas media loves to mock all because of one

[bowieee]

Originally posted by Grebdron
Folks...

If you dislike the way things are going right now, please don't vote third party. I understand not being happy with Kerry, but I really don't believe we can stand four more years of Dubya.

I've voted almost exclusively third party in the past, but this one's too important. A third party vote is almost a vote for Bush.

We need him out.

These are wise words.


I'm seriously scared of The "w" winning.

Any vote to a third party helps that nightmare inch a little closer to reality.

[jeo4]

Originally posted by Grebdron
Folks...

If you dislike the way things are going right now, please don't vote third party. I understand not being happy with Kerry, but I really don't believe we can stand four more years of Dubya.

I've voted almost exclusively third party in the past, but this one's too important. A third party vote is almost a vote for Bush.

We need him out.

Third party votes aren't a waste. And one day sooner or later, a candidate will come forward to prove that.

And personally, I dread four years of either Bush or Kerry at this point.

[bmain77]

Originally posted by jeo4
Third party votes aren't a waste. And one day sooner or later, a candidate will come forward to prove that.

And personally, I dread four years of either Bush or Kerry at this point.

I agree in part with Grebdron. Bush needs to get voted out. So yeah it might be wise to bite the bullet and vote Kerry just to be safe.

However jeo4 has a great point too. I'm so sick of both major parties. Starting with the Presidential Election of 2000 I've just gone right through the ballet selecting only 3rd party canidates. Even in rather trivial things like college board of regents and school board elections I've been doing this. As more and more Greens and Libertarians(not that I'm all that fond of them but at least its an alternate voice) get positions no matter how small things will start to change. Or at least I'd like to think so.

[JohnTheHenchman]

Originally posted by Grebdron
Folks...

If you dislike the way things are going right now, please don't vote third party. I understand not being happy with Kerry, but I really don't believe we can stand four more years of Dubya.

I've voted almost exclusively third party in the past, but this one's too important. A third party vote is almost a vote for Bush.

We need him out.

Can you prove that a third-party vote is a vote for Bush? Do you have something scientific to back this claim up?

If I would never vote for either, I'm not taking a vote away from either, nor giving a vote to either.

[Thrizzle]

Yup, anyone but Bush.

Kerry has his shortcommings but Bush has failed time and time again.

[countchocula]

Originally posted by JohnTheHenchman
Can you prove that a third-party vote is a vote for Bush? Do you have something scientific to back this claim up?

Well, it depends on the third party's platform. As of right now, I'd say it's too early to claim that a third-party vote is as good as a vote for Bush. If the third party shares conservative views, it will sop up Republican votes, thus increasing Kerry's chances of winning. This works both ways, of course.

Personally, I don't think that it matters who in the hell I vote for. I don't buy into the "your vote counts" piffle.

[The Delfonics]

I find it amazing that 18 people voted Kerry and onl 2 for Bush (along with 5 3rd party votes). Maybe this is the way the election will go? Maybe there will be too many places that just end up hating Bush enough to have Kerry squeeze in.

[JohnTheHenchman]

I hope not.

I'm at the point where I'd rather four more years of bush then a potential 8 years of kerry.

[flowrchild]

I would vote for a gopher or a house appliance over Bush. So Kerry it is.

[Benny]

Kerry all the way. I could never support this incumbent.

I think Kerry has gotten off to a slow start, because he's trying to shake off his image as a Masshole politician. I'm hoping he'll come on strong this summer, especially after the conventions.

Howard Dean was always my first choice though. Unfortunately I cannot vote because I turn 18 three months after the election. :mad:

[JCR]

Originally posted by Grebdron
Folks...

If you dislike the way things are going right now, please don't vote third party. I understand not being happy with Kerry, but I really don't believe we can stand four more years of Dubya.

I've voted almost exclusively third party in the past, but this one's too important. A third party vote is almost a vote for Bush.

We need him out.

Best post ever.

[Grebdron]

Originally posted by JohnTheHenchman
Can you prove that a third-party vote is a vote for Bush? Do you have something scientific to back this claim up?

If I would never vote for either, I'm not taking a vote away from either, nor giving a vote to either.

My only scientific backup is that third party votes in 2000 (Nader) cost Gore the election. Well, that and a corrupt Supreme Court.

I'm not a fan of Kerry, necessarily. But Bush has turned unprecedented worldwide US support into almost universal US loathing in a span of less than two years.

He's a despot, and a fundamentalist nut, who truly believes god is on our side.

There has not been a more dangerous president...ever.

[BadCoverVersion]

Originally posted by Grebdron
Folks...

If you dislike the way things are going right now, please don't vote third party. I understand not being happy with Kerry, but I really don't believe we can stand four more years of Dubya.

I've voted almost exclusively third party in the past, but this one's too important. A third party vote is almost a vote for Bush.

We need him out.

*Begins slow clap*

Kerry for moi.

[MarkItZero]

I am very torn.

I think that sometimes change is necessary even if the replacement isnt an upgrade.

Whether or not you agree with the things that Bush has done, I think that it is coming to a point where his reputation is bad enough worldwide that even when he tries to do good things, it will be met with great resistance.

On the other hand, I am not very impressed with Kerry. I have spent a good deal of time reading up on him and I have also gotten the chance to hear him speak in person. But I remain unconvinced that he would make a good president.

I usually agree with the idea of voting for third party canidates to help them receive funding, but I dont know if I want to throw away my vote in such an important election.

I probably wont make my final decision until very late in the game.

[ANavissi500]

I really don't see how people can stand by Bush after what he has done to our nation. He will go down as one of the worst presidents in our history alongside people like Harding. I mean he turned an opportunity to garner world sympathy and community and turned it into massive hatred. Our environment sucks, deficits have skyrocketed, the war is full of problems, and he is in the pocket of the big corporations.


John Kerry all the way.

And in my opinion, if you live in a swing state, you shouldn't vote for a 3rd party in this situation. Too much is at stake.

[JohnTheHenchman]

I don't buy for one second that third parties cost the election. Nader didn't make Gore lose, sorry.

Although I'm not attacking people who believe this, I don't see the purpose in voting for someone because they aren't Bush. John Kerry is godawful.

Voting third party will not help or hurt him.

Besides, I live in a heavily democrat state, so I might as well vote for what I believe in as opposed to vote for the guy that'll win my state anyway.

[Grebdron]

Originally posted by JohnTheHenchman
Besides, I live in a heavily democrat state, so I might as well vote for what I believe in as opposed to vote for the guy that'll win my state anyway.

So you believe in a criminally unjust war, tax shelters for the ridiculously wealthy, government sponsored torture, non-negotiated contracts to the friends of the leaders, et. al.?

Bush is your man.

[Moviefan1234]

Originally posted by JohnTheHenchman
I don't buy for one second that third parties cost the election. Nader didn't make Gore lose, sorry.


Yes, he did. The number of votes he received in Florida during the 2000 election would have gone to Gore if he hadn't been running. They were enough votes to have given Gore the state, therefore Gore would have won the presidency.

[JohnTheHenchman]

Originally posted by Grebdron
So you believe in a criminally unjust war, tax shelters for the ridiculously wealthy, government sponsored torture, non-negotiated contracts to the friends of the leaders, et. al.?

Bush is your man.

Funny, last time I checked, the Libertarian party stood for none of that.

Since I never said anything remotely supporting that, could you try not to put those words in my mouth? I'd appreciate it.

[JohnTheHenchman]

Originally posted by Moviefan1234
Yes, he did. The number of votes he received in Florida during the 2000 election would have gone to Gore if he hadn't been running. They were enough votes to have given Gore the state, therefore Gore would have won the presidency.

The only way you can say that is if every person who voted for Nader actually said they would have voted for Gore. I know Republicans that voted for Nader in 2000....seriously, it's a theory that really just doesn't hold. People just use it as a means to convince others to vote for Kerry.

[Moviefan1234]

Originally posted by JohnTheHenchman
The only way you can say that is if every person who voted for Nader actually said they would have voted for Gore. I know Republicans that voted for Nader in 2000....seriously, it's a theory that really just doesn't hold. People just use it as a means to convince others to vote for Kerry.

The number of republicans that voted for Nader are about as many as the number of Yeti's in the state. Green party members approve of Gore a whole lot more than they approve of Bush. You can't honestly tell me you think Bush would be president if Nader hadn't been in the mix.

[Grebdron]

Originally posted by JohnTheHenchman
Funny, last time I checked, the Libertarian party stood for none of that.

Since I never said anything remotely supporting that, could you try not to put those words in my mouth? I'd appreciate it.

You didn't say Libertarian anywhere. Hell, I voted Libertarian last time.

Originally posted by JohnTheHenchman
I'm at the point where I'd rather four more years of bush then a potential 8 years of kerry.

This is what you said.

[JohnTheHenchman]

Originally posted by JohnTheHenchman


Michael Badnarik of the Libertarian Party.

That's about as clear as I could have made it.

Anyway, I can not stand Bush or Kerry...so would I rather put up with four years or possibly eight years of someone I can't stand. Obviously I'd rather four years.

[Raoul Duke]

I hope Kerry wins because I think Bush is a complete fucking moron.

[Annie Hall]

Originally posted by JohnTheHenchman


Anyway, I can not stand Bush or Kerry...so would I rather put up with four years or possibly eight years of someone I can't stand. Obviously I'd rather four years.

I don't mean this as an attack...but...do you really think that Kerry is equally as dangerous an individual as Bush? Bush began a war in the 4 years where he is concerned about elections...what in the hell do you think he'll do in the next 4?

In your opinion, would Kerry make equally as costly a mistake as Bush made with the war?

I really think the only issue that Kerry may have is that he's not a STRONG personality. He's mild mannered, I hope it doesn't cost the election. And I agree with what MarkItZero said above- at this point, Bush is basically ineffective in the world of foreign relations.

I've been in Europe for 3 or so weeks, and one of the people I'm with has a shirt that says "George W. You're Fired"...he has gotten surrounded, consistantly, with Americans and Europeans alike every single time he's worn it. Always with ringing levels of approval.

I'm almost a little bit ashamed to be associated with the US for the first time in my- admittedly short- life.

[Anthony4sho]

Neither. I dislike them both.

[JohnTheHenchman]

Originally posted by Annie Hall
I don't mean this as an attack...but...do you really think that Kerry is equally as dangerous an individual as Bush? Bush began a war in the 4 years where he is concerned about elections...what in the hell do you think he'll do in the next 4?

In your opinion, would Kerry make equally as costly a mistake as Bush made with the war?

I really think the only issue that Kerry may have is that he's not a STRONG personality. He's mild mannered, I hope it doesn't cost the election. And I agree with what MarkItZero said above- at this point, Bush is basically ineffective in the world of foreign relations.

I've been in Europe for 3 or so weeks, and one of the people I'm with has a shirt that says "George W. You're Fired"...he has gotten surrounded, consistantly, with Americans and Europeans alike every single time he's worn it. Always with ringing levels of approval.

I'm almost a little bit ashamed to be associated with the US for the first time in my- admittedly short- life.

Why on earth would you ever be ashamed to be associated with the US? The actions of one (georgie porgie) do not speak the thoughts of the masses.

Kerry is the most inconsistent person I have ever heard. He's for something, then against it...depending on who he's speaking to. He has support from foreign leaders but then says it isn't our business who these leaders are.

People pat him on the back for being some kind of war hero, yet he got to home because of a technicality (three purple hearts for three minor injuries that most vets have said would not have stopped them). He brings up the fact that he served in Vietnam as a positive, how he has military experience over Bush, yet he came home and protested against it all those years ago.

It's okay to protest even after taking part, but then don't act like you're proud of being a Vet, because you can't have both.

I don't know exactly how "dangerous" he is. Most of us didn't think Bush would be this dangerous. All I know is that he will make a lousy president, in my opinion. And that's why I won't vote for him.

[Thrizzle]

Yea Kerry is inconsistant but a lot of it is spin by the Republican machine, and they are a crafty bunch (i actually admire their effeciency....they're are like a well-oiled machine).

I also don't care whether or not Kerry protested.....and i don't think it should be held against him. That war WAS unjust and a waste of American lives, it should have been protested.

[JohnTheHenchman]

As I said, there was nothing wrong with protesting, but then he shouldn't bring up how he was more of a vet then Bush, because his actions clearly showed he was "ashamed" of what he did.

Kerry is the type of guy who will say or do anything to fit in. Not my cup of tea.

[SLAW]

Originally posted by JohnTheHenchman
it's okay to protest even after taking part, but then don't act like you're proud of being a Vet, because you can't have both.

Politics. Gotta run on what you can and don't act like there's some politician out there that doesn't.




I don't know exactly how "dangerous" he is. Most of us didn't think Bush would be this dangerous. All I know is that he will make a lousy president, in my opinion. And that's why I won't vote for him.

We ALREADY know how dangerous and awful Bush is. I am very anxious and excited to find out how awful Kerry is.


PS: when do we declare John Kerry president of Joblo.com?

[Annie Hall]

Originally posted by JohnTheHenchman
Why on earth would you ever be ashamed to be associated with the US? The actions of one (georgie porgie) do not speak the thoughts of the masses.

Well, over here it's a different story. American's-in my experience- aren't the most popular crew ANYWAY, and after this the judgement is far more critical. I'm not ashamed of being an American, but I AM ashamed what being an American in this day and age has come to signify internationally.


Kerry is the most inconsistent person I have ever heard. He's for something, then against it...depending on who he's speaking to. He has support from foreign leaders but then says it isn't our business who these leaders are.

People pat him on the back for being some kind of war hero, yet he got to home because of a technicality (three purple hearts for three minor injuries that most vets have said would not have stopped them). He brings up the fact that he served in Vietnam as a positive, how he has military experience over Bush, yet he came home and protested against it all those years ago.

It's okay to protest even after taking part, but then don't act like you're proud of being a Vet, because you can't have both.

I disagree. It is ENTIRELY possible to be proud of fighting for your country- enlisting, even- despite not agreeing with what the war was fighting for. You don't have to support a war to be a casuality of it, and Kerry fought in Vietnam just like everyone else. America is at war, and we're teetering on the edge of some long-lasting issues; experience in a war and as a soldier and leader, whether you believed in it or not IS a plus to a President's resume at this point. We need someone with experience, in my opinion, and John Kerry even with his protesting in Vietnam, has that experience.


I don't know exactly how "dangerous" he is. Most of us didn't think Bush would be this dangerous. All I know is that he will make a lousy president, in my opinion. And that's why I won't vote for him.

Bush presented himself as a fairly middle of the road Republican, sure not liberal by any means but still not drastic or extreme. Once he was elected, he suddenly became a fundamentalist of sorts in all fields. I not only disagree with Bush's politics, but I cannot think of a president who has perhaps posed as frightening a problem in our future.

[Grebdron]

Originally posted by Annie Hall
I disagree. It is ENTIRELY possible to be proud of fighting for your country- enlisting, even- despite not agreeing with what the war was fighting for. You don't have to support a war to be a casuality of it, and Kerry fought in Vietnam just like everyone else. America is at war, and we're teetering on the edge of some long-lasting issues; experience in a war and as a soldier and leader, whether you believed in it or not IS a plus to a President's resume at this point. We need someone with experience, in my opinion, and John Kerry even with his protesting in Vietnam, has that experience.


Are you sure you're not a 35 year old Army veteran?;)

I would have said exactly the same thing. I was in during GWI, and while I'm proud to have served, I vehemently disagree with why we fought that war.

It is possible, John, to be proud to be a vet, yet ashamed of what we have to do.

[JohnTheHenchman]

Possible yes. But still the way he comes off to be, I don't buy it as genuine for one second.

You know, this will actually be the first presidential election I have participated in. And I think it's kind of sad that the only candidate I agree with at all has zero chance of winning.

[bowieee]

Originally posted by JohnTheHenchman
Why on earth would you ever be ashamed to be associated with the US? The actions of one (georgie porgie) do not speak the thoughts of the masses.



I'm ashamed of the U.S. right now. Why? Because I love this country and I know we are better than the tyranny we have become. Everytime I see the news with blurbs on notes that o.k. torture, the treatment of prisoners in Iraq, Bush making his mission to stop Gay marriage, Gas prices soaring throughout the country (as Bush's cabinet gets richer and richer), the death count each day of soldiers who died in Iraq, and these are just the recent reasons why I find myself ashamed as to how our great country is being run.

[JohnTheHenchman]

That's being ashamed of the President, which I am as well. However, every country has horrible leaders, the great thing about the U.S. is we have the freedom to vote in a brand spankin new horrible president.

[Annie Hall]

Originally posted by JohnTheHenchman
That's being ashamed of the President, which I am as well. However, every country has horrible leaders, the great thing about the U.S. is we have the freedom to vote in a brand spankin new horrible president.

But that very fact that we DID vote in this horrible president, one who is against gay marriage, one who is willing to ruin the environment, one who tortures prisoners, one who is against abortion, one who goes to war in the way that Bush did is a reason I find myself ashamed of the US at this point.

[JohnTheHenchman]

Did you vote for him? I'm going to guess that you didn't in which case there is no reason to be ashamed. Why be ashamed of something out of your hands? Look, I'm not telling you how to think or how to feel, but I'm just saying, there's no shame in anything you've done.

With that said, he isn't the one doing the torturing although he has more than permitted it. As for gay marriage and abortion, it's a personal opinion, although anything added to the constitution banning either would be horrendous, as I have said before, The Constitution is supposed to limit government not empower it. Although I must say that I see very little neccessity in Partial Birth Abortion.

[RicochetShaw]

Originally posted by Annie Hall
one who tortures prisoners


:rolleyes: Bush tortured prisoners? When was this?


Originally posted by Annie Hall
one who is against abortion[/B]

Why are you ashamed of some one who is against abortion? I mean, you may believe in it, but just because he doesn't that's shameful? I for one am against it, but maybe the fact that I was almost aborted had something to do with it.

[countchocula]

Annie just worded it the wrong way. She obviously doesn't believe that Bush tortured prisoners himself. She's simply ashamed of a narrow-minded pro-life administration that advocates torture. I'm inclined to agree with her.

[Jerk Shapiro]

...

[Jon Lyrik]

Originally posted by RicochetShaw
:rolleyes: Bush tortured prisoners? When was this?

I'm not too caught up on the Iraqi prisoner abuse scandal, but I think it might have been Rumsfield's fault.

[Jerk Shapiro]

Howbout we boycott voting this year?

[Indiana Sev]

I don't think Bush is as bad as everyone makes him out to be and Kerry isn't necessarily the savior that many hope he will be.

I'm torn, if I were American I probably wouldn't vote this time around.

So, "other". ;)

[SLAW]

It seems we're covering a lot of issues in this one thread where we could have a few threads discussing and dissecting each issue with eachother more thoroughly.

[Annie Hall]

Originally posted by countchocula
Annie just worded it the wrong way. She obviously doesn't believe that Bush tortured prisoners himself. She's simply ashamed of a narrow-minded pro-life administration that advocates torture. I'm inclined to agree with her.

Exactly...I obviously did not intend it to mean that he tortured them himself, and- just to keep the record clear- I didn't say that he went to battle on the front lines by "going to war".

Just what countchocula said, is basically my response...

I very strongly believe that, with limitations and in an appropriate setting, abortion is something that should be legal. And I have trouble participating or being proud of a society that would constitutionally banning it. But that's another thread all together...

I really enjoy this forum, by the way, it's interesting to see what people think about politics.

[BubbaStrangelove]

Save the 3rd Parties for 2008!!

[Grebdron]

Originally posted by BubbaStrangelove
Save the 3rd Parties for 2008!!

Word!

[JohnTheHenchman]

Why save 3rd parties until 2008?

[SLAW]

Originally posted by RicochetShaw
[BWhy are you ashamed of some one who is against abortion? I mean, you may believe in it, but just because he doesn't that's shameful? I for one am against it, but maybe the fact that I was almost aborted had something to do with it. [/B]

Wait a minute, Ricochet, was Roe V. Wade on vacation that day? Or did your Mother possibly ultimately CHOOSE to have you and raise you?

Anyways, wrong thread. :D

[RicochetShaw]

Originally posted by SLAW
Wait a minute, Ricochet, was Roe V. Wade on vacation that day? Or did your Mother possibly ultimately CHOOSE to have you and raise you?

Anyways, wrong thread. :D


She was strongly considering it, but convinced otherwise by my grandparents; it was her choice.

[JCPhoenix]

Definitely KERRY if i was actually of age to vote and if i lived in the u.s.

believe me, canadians hate bush at least as much as everyone else. maybe more.

i don't hate the u.s., but there's been so much anti-americanism in ottawa in the last couple years since 9/11, but most of it is directed at Bush. Bush gone = problem solved.

And of course I don't agree with his stances, I don't like how his administration dealt with the whole Iraq thing (and ignoring the UN), and with every day that passes I hate him more. The whole thing with Bush trying to amend the constitution to protect marriage is bull.

At first I thought he was just a buffoon, but now I know he's not JUST a buffoon, he's a dangerous buffoon.

i want the canadian-u.s. relationship to improve, as it has soured under the bush government (especially due again due to the iraq thing) so naturally with Bush gone there's more chance of that happening.

ETA: changed the top line from Bush to Kerry. man, i must be really tired and stressed out (from exams) to make that mistake. gah.

[James Logan]

Kerry.

And I'm speaking as a foreigner, here. I don't care what Bush is doing for the US of A because, heck, it doesn't concern me. But he's just turning this world into a crapfest. Four more years of him means more people hating America, more Americans hating foreigners for hating them, more terrorists going into training to kill innocents, more useless wars, more chances to see the Arab world collapse into several decades of chaos and instability...

Honestly? God knows I hate Carrot Top. But gimme Dubya against Carrot Top, and I'll vote fuckin' Carrot Top.

As Greb' said...we need him out. We all need him out.

Oh, and I'm studying political sciences every darn day at college, and the numbers and all that...Nader did cost Gore the election in 2000. And voting for a third party does hurt the big party closest to this small party's numbers. But there's one thing that's even worse than voting for a third party. And that's not voting at all. Boycotting elections doesn't only let someone despicable win: it gives him the legitimity to do what he or she wants, because the public won't have supported anyone else. It's like you don't care, like you consider "heck, dude, do whatever you want, I don't fuckin' give a shit, and all the others suck as much ass as you." If you're gonna do that, vote for a third party. Vote for a fourth party. Vote for your mother or even vote for me. Just vote.

[JohnTheHenchman]

If voting third party really does take votes away from the two candidates (which I still don't believe so, atleast not my vote anyway) then so be it. I see nothing wrong with voting 3rd party if I want Bush out.

[Scarface98.9]

If I would've been 18 in November, I'd vote for Kerry. The way I see it, Bush will just ruin our country. Foreign relations'll be in the toilet, the war will continue, the draft may come (to which I'll be of legal age by the time he implements it), gay marriage'll be outlawed, along with abortion perhaps, and the rich'll get richer while we go down the sink. Kerry wouldn't be my first choice to replace Bush, but is a lot more recommendable than George Bush: the Sequel

[DRbeauty]

It's a tie!!!! They both suck!! Really I don't know. I didn't want to vote in this election because i don't like Bush at all, and I don't really know anything about Kerry. I don't like the fact that Kerry wants to raise taxes. That sucks. But then again, I'd rather have to pay more taxes then be blown to smitherians by the many countries that hate us because of Bush.

[The Delfonics]

Wow, I dont wanna sound like my decisions for voting has been swayed easily but F911 really got me against Bush. I guess the problem now is to figure out why I would vote for Kerry.

[Cyclonus]

I'm voting for Kerry. While I'm not a big fan of his, he's clearly much saner and smarter than Dubya. He won't be perfect (at times he seems to have the personality of a cold fish), but at the very least he should bring us back from the edge. As for Nader's bid for the presidency, I'd normally say that third-party canidates are entitled to run if they wish, but in this case I wish he'd drop out of the race. Getting Bush out of office is just too important.

[BubbaStrangelove]

I've come to grow sick of the entire arguement about "Kerry isn't any better." or people bitching about us wanting Kerry JUST to get rid of Bush.

It's like choosing players for your basketball team. Of course the kid who can't shoot worth a damn is much better than the guy who gets penalized 1,000 times per game. We have to choose and there is no way around that.