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)