This isn't really the place for a political debatebut to put it another way, I've paid close attention to the media coverage around the world and in the US. America has been deceived constantly by the Bush administration and he has proven himself to be incapable of eliciting any international sympathy. Most Bush supporters think that Hussein caused the Sept 11th attacks, and that the world likes Bush.
There is, of course, no such thing as unbiased media, but it seems more than a little odd that the rest of the world, with countries that support Bush and those that don't, all agree that he has been lying to the public and making bad decisions.
What is difficult to understand about the situation? America has voted in (rather than voted _back_ in, because he didn't win the first time) an absolutely terrible leader when they had the option of a man who was infinitely less terrible, and who stood a good chance of actually being quite good at the job.
Now it's your turn to not throw insults. Just because I'm in the UK it does not mean that I haven't been paying attention.
EDIT: I really am crap at trying to avoid political debate. My apologies to those who find this mind numbingly tiresome.
EDIT2: I do really like the pictures you've made though, even if we disagree on politics!
(There is, of course, no such thing as unbiased media, but it seems more than a little odd that the rest of the world, with countries that support Bush and those that don't, all agree that he has been lying to the public and making bad decisions.
What is difficult to understand about the situation? America has voted in (rather than voted _back_ in, because he didn't win the first time) an absolutely terrible leader when they had the option of a man who was infinitely less terrible, and who stood a good chance of actually being quite good at the job.
Now it's your turn to not throw insults. Just because I'm in the UK it does not mean that I haven't been paying attention.
EDIT: I really am crap at trying to avoid political debate. My apologies to those who find this mind numbingly tiresome.
EDIT2: I do really like the pictures you've made though, even if we disagree on politics!
Matazone has new icons, but is keeping this one,
Thu 4 Nov 2004, 1:33,
archived)
1. Most bush supporters know that Saddam didn't cause the 9/11 attacks.
2. Bush did win the first time. That is just an excuse that people like Michael Moore use to make up for the fact that they don't know how the electoral college works.
3.John Kerry was extremely corrupt. He also had no plans for anything. And his running mate was also a horrible choice. I'm not saying Bush is great, he wasn't great at all, but Kerry is just as bad as Bush. You could have replaced Kerry with a cactus, and he would have gotten as many votes solely on the fact that he is not Bush.
(,
Thu 4 Nov 2004, 1:42,
archived)
2. Bush did win the first time. That is just an excuse that people like Michael Moore use to make up for the fact that they don't know how the electoral college works.
3.John Kerry was extremely corrupt. He also had no plans for anything. And his running mate was also a horrible choice. I'm not saying Bush is great, he wasn't great at all, but Kerry is just as bad as Bush. You could have replaced Kerry with a cactus, and he would have gotten as many votes solely on the fact that he is not Bush.
This could turn into yet another 'no, you're wrong' debtates...Alright then:
1 www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20030906.wpoll0906/BNStory/International/
2. Bush only won because of what is generally considered at best a very shakey court decision, and at worst corruption on the decision making committee. Yes, technically it was legal, but only because of severe loopholes.
3. I've read John Kerry's policies, and he had consistent plans for most aspects of American life and a morality that he has stuck with throughout his voting history. Yes, he certainly wasn't perfect, but even if he was exactly the same as Bush in all other respects (which he's not) it still would have helped the global perception of America to have got rid of Bush. I think you underestimate just how hated Bush is throughout the world.
For more info about lies told by both sides of the campaign, check out this article: www.factcheck.org/article298.html
(1 www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20030906.wpoll0906/BNStory/International/
2. Bush only won because of what is generally considered at best a very shakey court decision, and at worst corruption on the decision making committee. Yes, technically it was legal, but only because of severe loopholes.
3. I've read John Kerry's policies, and he had consistent plans for most aspects of American life and a morality that he has stuck with throughout his voting history. Yes, he certainly wasn't perfect, but even if he was exactly the same as Bush in all other respects (which he's not) it still would have helped the global perception of America to have got rid of Bush. I think you underestimate just how hated Bush is throughout the world.
For more info about lies told by both sides of the campaign, check out this article: www.factcheck.org/article298.html
Matazone has new icons, but is keeping this one,
Thu 4 Nov 2004, 1:53,
archived)
I know how the electoral college worksand the decisive florida vote - that isn't proportional unlike some states - was dubious, and after recounts was found in Gore's favour. Whethe on record the electoral college votes went to Bush in the end is academic due to Gore's submission to defeat after the Supreme Court ropey decision... and what of the *unbelievable* electorate exclusion policy? You committed a crime so you can't vote? do you have any comprehension of the desperation and hopelessness cause by poverty? a larger proportion of those people turn to crime ( or indeed terrorism - which is a subjective term anyway ) So the Republican mission was to remove the right to vote from those most hard done by. Hm.
3. No one was expecting Kerry to be a saint. No one was expecting Kerry to really even be any good, he simply presented a chance for America to build back some of the bridges Bush burnt internationally. That's all. And that should remain a desirable thing for *everyone*. If the Democrat was actually any good, he probably would have won.
(3. No one was expecting Kerry to be a saint. No one was expecting Kerry to really even be any good, he simply presented a chance for America to build back some of the bridges Bush burnt internationally. That's all. And that should remain a desirable thing for *everyone*. If the Democrat was actually any good, he probably would have won.
.spanky is singing "PEANUTS!",
Thu 4 Nov 2004, 1:54,
archived)