How Bush Won

Jice Virago · Post by **Jice Virago** » November 3, 2004, 3:18 pm

This is not a liberal partisan post, but some thoughts on how team Bush pulled it off in '04.

Well, it is pretty much a given that Bush won this. The states dominated by Deibold election machines and dirty pool tactics were not close enough for it to matter. Nader was a non factor in any state. Only the most rabid conspiracy enthusiasts would not conclude that Bush was, more or less, elected legitamately. As most of my fellow left leaners are probably thinking, we have to wonder how did this happen when Bush had so many negative strikes against his administration? Here are my thoughts on the matter (and my impression heading into the polls yesterday) from what I have observed:

1) Karl Rove- Like it or not, the well oiled GOP hate machine was relentless and precise. They had several communication giants at their disposal, most notably Fox News, and they pressed that advantage to full effect. They were able to challenge Kerry on unthinkable things (like Vietnam service) thanks to superior buzz and media control. Wether unwilling or unable, the Kerry campain could not match them blow for blow. As Voronwe stated elsewhere, the success of this kind of uber mudlinging campain is going to encourage it to become the norm in the future. Sadly, the Dems are going to have to addapt to it, or they will continue to fail.

2) Welcome to the Uniting of Church and State- The GOP countered the youth vote with the Crispie vote. Churches were distributing pamphlets to tell their parishaners to vote for Bush. Bush played directly into their hands by being the most anti-abortion and anti-gay incumbant in history. As a result, anyone who was a hard core christian voted for him no matter what they thought of any other of his views because imposing their moral code on other people meant more to them than the Iraqi War, Economy, Environment, or Foreign policy. The largest turnout in the modern era was nullified by the Christian voting block comming out in unified force, something all other social groups (gays, blacks, latinos) have not managed to do. This is how Ohio and Florida were won and how so many GOP senate races were won.

3) Organization- The GOP has simply been more unified, funded, and organized than the Dems. This race could have been one by Kerry getting up there and saying "I am not Bush" but the Dems own inability to react and consolidate their base cost them the race. They had no clear message and no sense of true unified "its us or them" mentality like the GOP possesses. The neocon element controlled and weilded their party with an iron fist and until the Dems have someone with that kind of sheer will emerge, they will never win the presidency back.

So gratz Crispies. You pretty much took over this country. I wonder what you will do with it.

Drasta · Post by **Drasta** » November 3, 2004, 3:30 pm

send all of the non christians to a "happy camp"

Rivera Bladestrike · Post by **Rivera Bladestrike** » November 3, 2004, 3:32 pm

Christians seem to be like women, they use their heart instead of their brain... they're brain tells them that Bush is doing a terrible job. Their heart says, "hes a christian too! and he doesn't like gays!"

Obviously we know the result.

Atokal · Post by **Atokal** » November 3, 2004, 3:32 pm

Jice Virago wrote:This is not a liberal partisan post, but some thoughts on how team Bush pulled it off in '04.

So gratz Crispies. You pretty much took over this country. I wonder what you will do with it.

Huh???

The whole post was partisan.

Akaran_D · Post by **Akaran_D** » November 3, 2004, 3:36 pm

No, this is more anti relgion based hatemongering that exists in this country today.

Jice Virago · Post by **Jice Virago** » November 3, 2004, 3:36 pm

No, only the two sentances your tiny brain managed to read, apparently.

noel · Post by **noel** » November 3, 2004, 3:36 pm

I agree with Atokal. The whole post was partisan.

To sum it up:

1. The Dems could not produce a good enough candidate to win the election.

2. Kerry might be a great guy, but he came off a lot as kind of a tool, and somewhat elitist. Though I voted for him, it was because I didn't want Bush, not because I did want Kerry. It's a shame I couldn't vote for someone I really wanted as president.

3. The Bush campaign machine did a better job than the Kerry campaign machine. The fact that we spent weeks talking about the totally irrelevant military service of either candidate bears this out.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · November 3, 2004, 3:45 pm

Kerry failed to produce a positive message. This election was his for the taking. He chose to be negative and hate filled and rip Bush and our country apart. He could have easily won if he went positive and provided a clear vision.

Animalor · Post by **Animalor** » November 3, 2004, 3:48 pm

Akaran_D wrote:No, this is more anti relgion based hatemongering that exists in this country today.

\

Yeah. Cause the religious folks never monger hate...

Rivera Bladestrike · Post by **Rivera Bladestrike** » November 3, 2004, 3:49 pm

You could not have held a campaign without showing how bad the current president was. Look at all the stupid people in this country who don't pay attention to the politics. Hell, a poll in Tennessee said that the majority of people thought that other countries approved of our actions in Iraq. It doesn't get much dumber than that..

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » November 3, 2004, 3:52 pm

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:Kerry failed to produce a positive message. This election was his for the taking. He chose to be negative and hate filled and rip Bush and our country apart. He could have easily won if he went positive and provided a clear vision.

i think it is beyond Kerry even.

I think the Democratic Party is not a party of unified message. it is devoid of cohesive, unifying leadership that can inspire and embolden people. Terry McAuliffe needs to be fired.

The Democratic nominee hasnt had more than 50% of the votes since what, 1976?

The Democrats have not made any inroads Congressionally in 12 years.

The party needs to be dramatically restructured at the leadership level, and they need to refocus the issues they represent such that they can make inroads with lower income whites in the South and Midwest.

well actually i just heard that McAuliffe was leaving his post, but it sounded like that was planned regardless of the outcome.

Xatrei · Post by **Xatrei** » November 3, 2004, 3:54 pm

/agree Noel

I think that the Chrisian vote probably had a more profound affect on the local races and ballot initiatives than on the choice for president. Had the democratic candidate been a more moderate, likeable individual we'd be saying goodbye to Bush in a couple months. While the Christian vote cerainly played into things, it wasn't the sole deciding factor. Kerry, Bush and the parties as a whole, are now too far to their extremes to genuinely appeal to what I believe to be the essentially centrist majority of the voting population. When faced with a choice between two undesireable candidates, the voters chose to stick with a known value rather than to gamble with the unknown. A huge portion of Kerry's support came from people that were simply voting against Bush. Kerry was simply not a popular candidate, and it's virutally impossible to remove an incumbant president with an unpopular challenger.

As a left-leaning independent (and atheist), I would've voted for Kerry if the results in my state were close enough for every vote to matter. As things were, I voted for Nader instead because I simply couldn't bring myself to vote for either of the two party candidates.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » November 3, 2004, 3:57 pm

Like it or not, the Evangelical Christians are on board, and portions of them are easy to manipulate. Fliers insinuating Kerry will ban the Bible, etc.

Rove's gubernatorial campaign with Bush put fliers of gay men kissing on the windshield wipers of cars in Texas churches.

That sort of thing works, and though not all Republican communication is misleading, almost all of it has been extremely effective.

noel · Post by **noel** » November 3, 2004, 4:02 pm

Animalor wrote:
Akaran_D wrote:No, this is more anti relgion based hatemongering that exists in this country today.
\

Yeah. Cause the religious folks never monger hate...

Look, Akaran. I appreciate where you're coming from. I was born in MD, have spent a decent amount of time in WV, and grew up going to church religiously until I was 10.

Having said all that, the religious right is perhaps the most oppressive, backward-thinking, narrow-minded, special interest group in the United States with the disctinction of being widely accepted.

The bottom line is that no one should be able to force their morality on me. I'm not talking about raping, and killing here, I'm talking about social issues such as gay marriage, gays in the military, what sex acts I can perform as a consentual adult in the privacy of my own home, who I have to pledge my allegiance to when I say the pledge, what I can and cannot watch on TV, what video games I can play, what constitutes the music I can listen to, what religion I can practice and where I can practice it... I could go on. Ad nauseum.

I'm sure you're thinking, that we have laws to prevent all of that, but these are the kinds of things that the religious right in this country (you can call them Christians if you want) wants to legislate and this is why they piss a lot of people off. They infringe on my personal freedoms, and they try to force their morality on myself and on others... and for that they can fuck off.

Aaeamdar · Post by **Aaeamdar** » November 3, 2004, 4:02 pm

2. Kerry might be a great guy, but he came off a lot as kind of a tool, and somewhat elitist. Though I voted for him, it was because I didn't want Bush, not because I did want Kerry. It's a shame I couldn't vote for someone I really wanted as president.

Same. I disliked most of what Kerry was proposing. Frankly, at least part of that was because it was identical to what Bush was saying.

Gays - Bush and Kerry shared identical speaking points. "I believe marriage is a union of a man and a woman." Both, in their talking, also supported "Civil Unions." Now, I am certain there would be huge differences in what actually would happen between the to as President, but they talked the same talk.

God - Bush and Kerry were again, identical. "My faith is a deaply personal thing to me that shapes and inspires me." Again, Kerry was lying, so the actual effect of him being President would be radically different. Bush has led and will continue to lead with the Bible and God (and Halliburton) as his primary source of policy. Kerry would have been a pragmatist. But, again, they said the same thing while campaigning.

Iraq - Both said exactly the same thing - that they would seek UN and Allied help in ensuring Democracy to Iraq as soon as possible. Kerry might have had a better chance and Bush might be lying (he certainly has shown no international interest in it so far), but they essentially had the same plan.

Abortion - at least here, Kerry made a break - but he also purposefully softed it. In stead of saying "I support a woman's right to choose" he said "I don't like abortion, I am a Catholic, but I don't believe I should legislate my religion, and therefor I end up supporting a woman's right to choose." He held a very very different opinion from Bush on this, but he himself, used rhetoric that brought him and Bush closer together than they actually were.

The only place he did make large breaks from Bush is when it came to economics - he was gong to raise taxes (always a good selling point for the American people) and he was going to provide a healthcare plan for all Americans (again, one of the few things Clinton completely failed to do).

In the end, Kerry obsfucated his very real differences from Bush on social and foreign policy matters and then chose to make a big break from Bush on issues that were sure and proven losers.

He essentaily ran on the "I am not Bush" campaign - a message that rung strong with me - because against someone other than Bush, a vote for Kerry would not have even crossed my mind, but he and his campaign failed to recognize that was not enough. Frankly, so did I.

Akaran_D · Post by **Akaran_D** » November 3, 2004, 4:48 pm

Look, Akaran. I appreciate where you're coming from. I was born in MD, have spent a decent amount of time in WV, and grew up going to church religiously until I was 10.

Having said all that, the religious right is perhaps the most oppressive, backward-thinking, narrow-minded, special interest group in the United States with the disctinction of being widely accepted.

The bottom line is that no one should be able to force their morality on me. I'm not talking about raping, and killing here, I'm talking about social issues such as gay marriage, gays in the military, what sex acts I can perform as a consentual adult in the privacy of my own home, who I have to pledge my allegiance to when I say the pledge, what I can and cannot watch on TV, what video games I can play, what constitutes the music I can listen to, what religion I can practice and where I can practice it... I could go on. Ad nauseum.

I'm sure you're thinking, that we have laws to prevent all of that, but these are the kinds of things that the religious right in this country (you can call them Christians if you want) wants to legislate and this is why they piss a lot of people off. They infringe on my personal freedoms, and they try to force their morality on myself and on others... and for that they can fuck off.

Noel, I agree with you. However I take exception, and will continue to take exception, to having my religion insulted, slamed, or refered to in a derogatory fashion. Calling us 'crispies' and insinuating that it is 'all of our fault' is offensive to me as a person. I'm pretty sure you would take exception if someone called out that all white bycilists are the root of all problems and then come up with an insulting nickname.

Rekaar. · Post by **Rekaar.** » November 3, 2004, 4:49 pm

noel wrote:
Animalor wrote:
Akaran_D wrote:No, this is more anti relgion based hatemongering that exists in this country today.
\

Yeah. Cause the religious folks never monger hate...
Look, Akaran. I appreciate where you're coming from. I was born in MD, have spent a decent amount of time in WV, and grew up going to church religiously until I was 10.

Having said all that, the religious right is perhaps the most oppressive, backward-thinking, narrow-minded, special interest group in the United States with the disctinction of being widely accepted.

The bottom line is that no one should be able to force their morality on me. I'm not talking about raping, and killing here, I'm talking about social issues such as gay marriage, gays in the military, what sex acts I can perform as a consentual adult in the privacy of my own home, who I have to pledge my allegiance to when I say the pledge, what I can and cannot watch on TV, what video games I can play, what constitutes the music I can listen to, what religion I can practice and where I can practice it... I could go on. Ad nauseum.

I'm sure you're thinking, that we have laws to prevent all of that, but these are the kinds of things that the religious right in this country (you can call them Christians if you want) wants to legislate and this is why they piss a lot of people off. They infringe on my personal freedoms, and they try to force their morality on myself and on others... and for that they can fuck off.

I disagree with you on several counts. First, stereotyping "the religious right" as somehow more oppressive or passionate about ther views than any other group isn't real. There are passionate people on all sides of every issue and each one, if able, would impose their views on the masses. Pro-choice people are just as passionate about their perspective as the pro-life people are, as example. The entire purpose of democracy is for this to be the case, so that when the majority of its people feel a certain way it be made applicable to all in the interest of furthering society.

You need to stop telling yourself that somehow one extreme group is more whacked out than another - they're all over the edge. Most people are moderate. Most people recognize that both extremes have valid arguments and attempt to find the middle ground.

Whoever is making the laws will do so according to their values, whatever they may be based on. I have a problem with people claiming religion and state shouldn't be mixed. They always have been and they always will be. Get over the verbiage and recognize that you're electing a person and not a policy. It's statements like yours that make ordinary people scared when a man of faith embraces his beliefs instead of tucking them under the rug, acting on them but not mentioning them.

I thought you all wanted more honesty? ;p

And for the love of God stop with the blanket labels. It's like you're calling every muslim a terrorist. It's offensive and unfounded.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » November 3, 2004, 4:56 pm

Jice,

That was totally partisan. Your own democrat/liberal people can tell you that.

The reasons Bush won are straightforward and simple.

- Kerry's campaign focused on things that didn't matter to the voters. Vietnam service has never played a factor in electing the president. Clinton Clinton Clinton...Bush Bush Bush...They dodged, they weaved, they were elected.

- Kerry's campaign focused on trying to discredit Bush by relentlessly pounding away that Bin Laden hasn't been captured when anyone with an ouce of brain left can see that Bush has steadfastly been searching and destroying the bulk of the Al-Qaeda leaders and organization as a whole. Who the fuck cares if Bin Laden is hiding out in some rat hole? Bush is still pursuing him and kicking the rest of Al-Qaeda's ass and thus far they haven't been able to attack the US again since 911.

- Kerry's warning of "Four more years of the same" slogan...you bet! I'll take four more years of hunting down terrorists and liberating countries and so will 51 percent of the rest of the country.

- Kerry was just a plain bad candidate. He oozed lack of confidence and projected a "do anything for a vote" non focused mentality that turns off people that want to see the actual plan and not wonder if it's going to change again after the election is secured.

- Kerry said he was going to increase our armed forced by two divisions. Fuck that. That's screaming for a draft. People caught on that it was actually Kerry that would be more likely to have a draft. At the very least, they got the message that Bush was not going to have a draft.

- Democrats are very unfocused. When you have to run on an "anyone but Bush, I "think" we can do better" platform, you've lost before the first vote has been cast.

- Teresa would have been the worst first lady ever

- Lamer actors in hollywood and of course, Michael Moore failed miserably in their quest to make the president look like shit. Fuck Michael Moore right in the ass. That's the best part of this entire election because I can't stand whining fucking shitbag slackers that complain about everything they couldn't do half as good themselves and lack a plan.

- Liberals listening to the new "Air America" radio station that brainwashed themselves into believing more people than they thought were falling for the crap they were listening to.

This is a non partisan post.

Aaeamdar · Post by **Aaeamdar** » November 3, 2004, 5:02 pm

There are passionate people on all sides of every issue and each one, if able, would impose their views on the masses.

I don't agree, but would be happy to see some examples. The main difference between the Religious Right and other "pationate groups" is that only the Religious Right is interested in curtailing the private actions of others. If you can give me some examples to the contrary, I'd love to discuss them.

Pro-choice people are just as passionate about their perspective as the pro-life people are, as example.

I see I did not have to read far for an example, and its a great one to illustrate my point. No one that is pro-choice wants to force a pro-life person to have an abortion. They don't want to infringe on teh person space of a pro-life person in any way, for that matter. The pro-life person, on the other hand, is not fighting for their rights, they are fighting for control of another person.

This pretty much applies across the board to all issues of the Religious Right. Every one of them is all about preventing actions or rights of others. None of them are about securing rights for themselves.

Akaran_D · Post by **Akaran_D** » November 3, 2004, 5:04 pm

Right, because people SHOULD have a right to stop the development of a human life. Know what happens when you abort someone 25 years old? You go to jail.

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » November 3, 2004, 5:08 pm

Akaran_D wrote:Right, because people SHOULD have a right to stop the development of a human life. Know what happens when you abort someone 25 years old? You go to jail.

The 'human life in development' in question is less self-aware than a full grown chicken. Are you a vegan Akaran?

-=Lohrno

Akaran_D · Post by **Akaran_D** » November 3, 2004, 5:12 pm

No, nor do I eat people.
Further, the chicken doesn't have the capabilities to grow into something capable of human thought.

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » November 3, 2004, 5:15 pm

The whole religion part of this conversation here hit a nerve with me.

I am devoid of any form of religous beliefs, I think organized religion is about the most ridiculous thing on the planet. It was started to control the masses of people, make them sheep. And now in the modern day, these sheep are everywhere. I have a problem with people that feel they need help, or faith, or to belong to something to be whole, I think it is pathetic.
That being said, Although I did vote for bush, the fact that all those people did vote for him for the reason of something as pathetic and foolish as religion makes me sick.

But without the bible thumpers things may have been a bit closer so hey, who knows.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » November 3, 2004, 5:16 pm

But without the bible thumpers things may have been a bit closer so hey, who knows.

closer as in Bush would never have been governor of Texas let alone President.

Aaeamdar · Post by **Aaeamdar** » November 3, 2004, 5:16 pm

If you've ever had a cat or a dog you KNOW that these things have to have some sort of a soul, or at least SOME kind of intelligence. Just because they can't speak human doesn't mean they're stupid.

Further, the chicken doesn't have the capabilities to grow into something capable of human thought.

Pick one and stick with it. For what its worth, your statement about the cat is square on. Compassion towards animals, however, has nothing to do with abortion.

Cracc · Post by **Cracc** » November 3, 2004, 5:17 pm

You know akaran, there is a huge fucking world of diffrence between beeing self aware, and not beeing self aware..

And yes, people who eat meat, or otherwise use products derived from the industry wich makes money out of killing animals have no fucking place to talk about abortion being wrong.

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » November 3, 2004, 5:18 pm

Akaran_D wrote:No, nor do I eat people.
Further, the chicken doesn't have the capabilities to grow into something capable of human thought.

Just because of it's potential you believe it's wrong?

Are you for the Death penalty? Those people have the potential to become productive non-violent citizens...
It's also potentially possible that some of those people on Death Row were not guilty.

-=Lohrno

Xzion · Post by **Xzion** » November 3, 2004, 5:19 pm

For the first time in my life, I am embarrassed as well as ashamed to call myself an American. Today is truly a sad day in American history, emotions of anger, sadness, and even fear filled me today as I saw the results this morning.
What’s even scarier is some of the senators that were elected…a few of them make bush look like Michael Moore...it is a sad, and frightening day in American history when GW now has complete power (with an even greater majority of asskissing senators) to do what ever the hell he wants for four more years. Its also very, very disappointing to see practically everything and everyone I voted for and supported in this race defeated. We are living in the decline of American greatness, and Jimmy Carter may have been wrong, before, but I now honestly believe “America’s best days are over”

Aside from the point, China’s economic, military and influential power is rising, and in less then 10 years they will be the world superpower.

Zamtuk · Post by **Zamtuk** » November 3, 2004, 5:23 pm

Akaran_D wrote:No, nor do I eat people.
Further, the chicken doesn't have the capabilities to grow into something capable of human thought.

because it is a chicken you stupid fuck. chickens arent humans so it cant form human thoughts. by your narrow minded thinking, you should include chickens as 'gods children' and not kill them for food. after all he did create him, are you to go on destroying something he created for your own benefit? pretty linear to stem cell research if you think about it...

Cartalas · Post by **Cartalas** » November 3, 2004, 5:27 pm

Xzion wrote:For the first time in my life, I am embarrassed as well as ashamed to call myself an American. Today is truly a sad day in American history, emotions of anger, sadness, and even fear filled me today as I saw the results this morning.
What’s even scarier is some of the senators that were elected…a few of them make bush look like Michael Moore...it is a sad, and frightening day in American history when GW now has complete power (with an even greater majority of asskissing senators) to do what ever the hell he wants for four more years. Its also very, very disappointing to see practically everything and everyone I voted for and supported in this race defeated. We are living in the decline of American greatness, and Jimmy Carter may have been wrong, before, but I now honestly believe “America’s best days are over”

Aside from the point, China’s economic, military and influential power is rising, and in less then 10 years they will be the world superpower.

"Its also very, very disappointing to see practically everything and everyone I voted for and supported in this race defeated."

That should tell you something.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » November 3, 2004, 5:28 pm

Xzion wrote:For the first time in my life, I am embarrassed as well as ashamed to call myself an American. Today is truly a sad day in American history, emotions of anger, sadness, and even fear filled me today as I saw the results this morning.

I'm embarrassed that you are an american so why not take your incoherent rant show on the road?

You fucknut drama queens that go ape shit when your candidates lose need to be bitch slapped. I would never be embarrassed to be american and wouldn't have broken stride if Kerry was elected. A Kerry run america would still have been 100 times better than any other country and I would have continued to apprectiate the democratic process and moved on with enjoying my life to its fullest.

I really wish you would get the fuck out of the United States even though you have every right to bitch here until you die.

Rekaar. · Post by **Rekaar.** » November 3, 2004, 5:37 pm

Aaeamdar wrote:
There are passionate people on all sides of every issue and each one, if able, would impose their views on the masses.
I don't agree, but would be happy to see some examples. The main difference between the Religious Right and other "pationate groups" is that only the Religious Right is interested in curtailing the private actions of others. If you can give me some examples to the contrary, I'd love to discuss them.

Pro-choice people are just as passionate about their perspective as the pro-life people are, as example.
I see I did not have to read far for an example, and its a great one to illustrate my point. No one that is pro-choice wants to force a pro-life person to have an abortion. They don't want to infringe on teh person space of a pro-life person in any way, for that matter. The pro-life person, on the other hand, is not fighting for their rights, they are fighting for control of another person.

This pretty much applies across the board to all issues of the Religious Right. Every one of them is all about preventing actions or rights of others. None of them are about securing rights for themselves.

Here I try to make an objective statement and you let your subjectivity cloud your perception. What validity to the discussion does your distinction have? Liberalism is progressive and consevativism is...conservatory. One challenges the fabric and one seeks to uphold it. What sense does it make to argue that one is somehow worse or more extreme than the other because they hold different base functions?

Aaeamdar · Post by **Aaeamdar** » November 3, 2004, 5:41 pm

You did not present an arguement about extreemism. Had you done so, I would have agreed. You presented the arguement that "on all sides of every issue and each one, if able, would impose their views on the masses." And that is just not true. Christians are unique in that all of their issues involve impositions on others.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » November 3, 2004, 5:42 pm

Cartalas wrote:
Xzion wrote:For the first time in my life, I am embarrassed as well as ashamed to call myself an American. Today is truly a sad day in American history, emotions of anger, sadness, and even fear filled me today as I saw the results this morning.
What’s even scarier is some of the senators that were elected…a few of them make bush look like Michael Moore...it is a sad, and frightening day in American history when GW now has complete power (with an even greater majority of asskissing senators) to do what ever the hell he wants for four more years. Its also very, very disappointing to see practically everything and everyone I voted for and supported in this race defeated. We are living in the decline of American greatness, and Jimmy Carter may have been wrong, before, but I now honestly believe “America’s best days are over”

Aside from the point, China’s economic, military and influential power is rising, and in less then 10 years they will be the world superpower.

"Its also very, very disappointing to see practically everything and everyone I voted for and supported in this race defeated."

That should tell you something.

Best post evar. I think some people owe Cart some apologies after this one.

Xzion · Post by **Xzion** » November 3, 2004, 5:45 pm

Winnow wrote:
Xzion wrote:For the first time in my life, I am embarrassed as well as ashamed to call myself an American. Today is truly a sad day in American history, emotions of anger, sadness, and even fear filled me today as I saw the results this morning.
I'm embarrassed that you are an american so why not take your incoherent rant show on the road?

You fucknut drama queens that go ape shit when your candidates lose need to be bitch slapped. I would never be embarrassed to be american and wouldn't have broken stride if Kerry was elected. A Kerry run america would still have been 100 times better than any other country and I would have continued to apprectiate the democratic process and move on with my life and enjoying it to the fullest.

I really wish you would get the fuck out of the United States even though you have every right to bitch here until you die.

im sorry to tell you that my life is bigger then a moronic redneck from texas winning the oval office 2x in a row. My wednesday has been ruined but beyond that i will continue to live life as i always have done, and occasionally bitch about politics on this message board. Life will go on, and my choice to, or not to leave the US in a couple of years will have nothing to do with this president, unless of course he reinstitutes a draft.
Im just disappointed to see this country that once stood as a great pillar of freedom in the hands oppressive right-wing extremists. Unfortunately those that chose to vote have voted, and there is nothing now I can do, my candidate has been defeated, and fairly so.

Sure I could have your mentality and be a selfish asshole that only looks at my own gain and embrace GW's second term as it will most likely put bigger numbers in my bank account, but i look beyond that.

Forthe · Post by **Forthe** » November 3, 2004, 5:51 pm

Cartalas wrote:
Xzion wrote:Its also very, very disappointing to see practically everything and everyone I voted for and supported in this race defeated.
That should tell you something.

That the US education system has failed horribly to the benefit of republicans?

Rekaar. · Post by **Rekaar.** » November 3, 2004, 5:52 pm

Aaeamdar wrote:You did not present an arguement about extreemism. Had you done so, I would have agreed. You presented the arguement that "on all sides of every issue and each one, if able, would impose their views on the masses." And that is just not true. Christians are unique in that all of their issues involve impositions on others.

1) ...your quoting skills suck to the extreem

2)

You need to stop telling yourself that somehow one extreme group is more whacked out than another - they're all over the edge. Most people are moderate. Most people recognize that both extremes have valid arguments and attempt to find the middle ground.

Rekaar. · Post by **Rekaar.** » November 3, 2004, 5:53 pm

Forthe wrote:
Cartalas wrote:
Xzion wrote:Its also very, very disappointing to see practically everything and everyone I voted for and supported in this race defeated.
That should tell you something.
That the US education system has failed horribly to the benefit of republicans?

Most conservative citizens of the country we're talking about would call you an uninformed moron for that comment. But I won't, I'm above all that!

Akaran_D · Post by **Akaran_D** » November 3, 2004, 5:55 pm

Let's start with saying this:
Eating something capable of human level or beyond human level should be considered wrong, universally, across this messageboard.

Second, fetuses have the capability to become fully aware and functional if allowed to progress normally. It grows. It is alive. It may not yet be conscious, but it is developing the ability to be so.

Third, yes, I am pro death. In your example, yes it is possible for someone to change. However every action has a consequence. If you choose to kill someone, you have to abide by those consequences. If death is one of them, then it is not something I can find fault with.

Karae · Post by **Karae** » November 3, 2004, 5:57 pm

Funkmasterr wrote:But without the bible thumpers things may have been a bit closer so hey, who knows.

Without the mindless bible-thumping drones Bush wouldn't have won even 40% of the vote.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » November 3, 2004, 5:59 pm

Without the fags, african-americans,dope smokers, and kids (under 24), Kerry wouldn't have gotten 5% of the vote.

Cracc · Post by **Cracc** » November 3, 2004, 6:00 pm

So in your book eating severely retarded people, like for instance someone with a severe case of downs syndrome would be legitimate.. im pretty sure there are people with around with thought capability near that of an regular animal?

How about we start munching on cartalas right away then?

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » November 3, 2004, 6:02 pm

Akaran_D wrote:Let's start with saying this:
Eating something capable of human level or beyond human level should be considered wrong, universally, across this messageboard.

Second, fetuses have the capability to become fully aware and functional if allowed to progress normally. It grows. It is alive. It may not yet be conscious, but it is developing the ability to be so.

Why does potential dictate the morality of said action?

Third, yes, I am pro death. In your example, yes it is possible for someone to change. However every action has a consequence. If you choose to kill someone, you have to abide by those consequences. If death is one of them, then it is not something I can find fault with.

What about fetuses that grow up to be murderers? Is the result that said couple copulating responsible for those deaths? And you still haven't answered the question about potentially killing innocents.

Rekaar. · Post by **Rekaar.** » November 3, 2004, 6:12 pm

Stop trying to pick apart akaran's weak logic!

The true irony is that being pro-choice completely inhibits any and all choices that unborn child would ever get to make. Talk about imposing your will on another.

Why do people get sent to jail for destroying condor eggs? They're not hatched yet and therefore not really condors yet, what's the big deal? Well as the judge said: what else could it be?

Atokal · Post by **Atokal** » November 3, 2004, 6:20 pm

Jice Virago wrote:No, only the two sentances your tiny brain managed to read, apparently.

Well I went back and read your statements again and guess what...
they are still extremely partisan.

Now read what Noel wrote and you will see a non-partisan assessment.

Schools out.

Atokal · Post by **Atokal** » November 3, 2004, 6:22 pm

Cracc wrote:So in your book eating severely retarded people, like for instance someone with a severe case of downs syndrome would be legitimate.. im pretty sure there are people with around with thought capability near that of an regular animal?

How about we start munching on cartalas right away then?

How about you learn how to formulate a coherent though. Your argument is as stupid as the presentation.

Animalor · Post by **Animalor** » November 3, 2004, 6:22 pm

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:Without the fags, african-americans,dope smokers, and kids (under 24), Kerry wouldn't have gotten 5% of the vote.

Spoken like a true white supremacist. Why didn't you just use the N word. African-American just looks out of place in that bigoted post.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » November 3, 2004, 6:23 pm

can you drop some knowledge on me plz professor?

Cracc · Post by **Cracc** » November 3, 2004, 6:23 pm

So your saying abortions threaten our survival as a race Rekaar? Im pretty fucking sure that we would still continue to overpopulate this already humancrammed world even if abortions would increase with over 500% worldwide

Likening wildlife preservation laws with abortions? Talk about grasping for fucking straws.

Atokal · Post by **Atokal** » November 3, 2004, 6:24 pm

Animalor wrote:
Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:Without the fags, african-americans,dope smokers, and kids (under 24), Kerry wouldn't have gotten 5% of the vote.
Spoken like a true white supremacist. Why didn't you just use the N word. African-American just looks out of place in that bigoted post.

ROFL yep but Bible Thumper and Jesus Crispie is ok in your book. Or the signature Christians Suck???

VeeshanVault

How Bush Won

How Bush Won

Re: How Bush Won