0
   

Who Would Vote For bush Again?

Forums: Politics, Bush
Email this Topic • Print this Page
 
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Mar, 2006 09:34 am
He is assured of at least one vote.
from his friend and benefactor Osama Bin Laden
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Mar, 2006 02:40 am
Re: Who Would Vote For bush Again?
JTT wrote:
oralloy wrote:
JTT wrote:


Dittohead sighting!


I guess this means you are incapable of logic.

Oh well.


oralloy wrote:

I just vote for whomever the NRA endorses.

That means I'd probably vote for him again.


Oh, the irony!


Yawn. I must have missed this when you posted it. (Not that you ever post anything worth reading.)

This is message a notification that I'll not be wasting much time conversing with you low-IQ types from now on.

Feel free to attempt to say something intelligent, though. If you succeed, I might pay attention to that.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Mar, 2006 05:41 am
Thank goodness for small favors.
0 Replies
 
Green Witch
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Mar, 2006 06:16 am
Re: Who Would Vote For bush Again?
oralloy wrote:

I just vote for whomever the NRA endorses.


I hear the NRA is endorsing Osama Bin Laden, he's been a great boost for the gun industry.
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Mar, 2006 06:36 am
McGentrix wrote:
As opposed to John Kerry? You bet I would.


That m'dears, is exactly the issue. As much as I have learned to dislike Bush, I could have never voted for Kerry.

Let's see whom the geniuses in Washington pick to run in '08. Stay tuned!
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Mar, 2006 06:47 am
yes because Kerry MIGHT have f**ked things up.... pay no attention to the fact that bush, as predicted, DID f**k things up even worse.....

stop propping bush up with Kerry, it's so.... 2004.....
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Mar, 2006 06:59 am
blueveinedthrobber wrote:
yes because Kerry MIGHT have f**ked things up.... pay no attention to the fact that bush, as predicted, DID f**k things up even worse.....

stop propping bush up with Kerry, it's so.... 2004.....


Relax, BVT. The point that I was making was that there was no really decent choice. At the time, Kerry was, to me, an aversive cypher. I voted for Bush. It WAS a mistake, but I am not convinced that the alternative would have been any better, but bad in a different, but important way.

In order to turn the mess in Washington around, both the Democrats and the Republicans need to come up with candidates that the populace can respect, that they believe will do a good job, and that have a committment to the Constitution first, and their religion second.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Mar, 2006 07:03 am
no offense phoenix but I am constantly amazed at how people ignored everything about bush in 2004 and re elected him anyway, while running kKerry into the ground for no real reason I've been able to figure out. Oh wait.... swift boat veterans.... right..... meanwhile the country is f**ked but Kerry would have done worse.... how?
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Mar, 2006 07:03 am
Kerry was a much better choice than people are willing to admit. I think Bush voters are just rationalizing when they blame him for their vote.
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Mar, 2006 07:18 am
Not rationalizing. At the time, Kerry was an awful choice. I agonized over this for a long time. It may appear ridiculous now,, but I think that it was a matter of "The devil you know......................"
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Mar, 2006 07:21 am
Phoenix32890 wrote:
Not rationalizing. At the time, Kerry was an awful choice. I agonized over this for a long time. It may appear ridiculous now,, but I think that it was a matter of "The devil you know......................"


why was he an awful choice?
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Mar, 2006 07:37 am
Quote:
why was he an awful choice?


There was no way that I could get a "handle" on him. I had the perception that he really did not have a platform, had no real philosophical underpinnings, and would sway with the political breeze.

He also had a personality that was not conducive to engendering confidence from the populace, which is important in a leader. ( Not that Bush is any better! Rolling Eyes )

I also thought that at the time, it was important for the US to have a strong defense in the international arena. I did not think that Kerry was up to the task.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Mar, 2006 07:46 am
so a viet nam vet was not as well suited compared to an entitled frat boy who pulled strings to avoid military service... voted for the appearance of a tough cowboy... good thinking....
0 Replies
 
gustavratzenhofer
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Mar, 2006 07:47 am
I was not a big fan of Kerry either, but I would rather see him in the White House than Bush.

Hell, I'd rather see Osama Bin Laden in the White House than Bush.

At least then we'd know where he was.
0 Replies
 
gustavratzenhofer
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Mar, 2006 07:50 am
I got into an argument with a security guard the other day. I was confused over his unwavering support of Bush and asked him how he could continue to support a man who is slowly destroying the country for the average working man.

You know what he says? He turned red in the face and started yelling at me about Hanoi Jane.

I stared at him and was momentarily speechless. Then I told him I had difficulties communicating with aliens and walked away.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Mar, 2006 07:54 am
Perhaps he was bothered by the vagueness of " how he could continue to support a man who is slowly destroying the country for the average working man. "?
0 Replies
 
gustavratzenhofer
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Mar, 2006 07:56 am
Yeah, that was probably it.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Mar, 2006 08:04 am
I'd like to see Edwards run again for the Dems. He seemed like a someone who could reach the crossover vote.

Maybe not me, but others.

To hell with a chicken in every pot, more like a shotgun in every closet to put the chicken in the pot.
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Mar, 2006 09:15 am
I think that we are all playing Monday morning quarterbacks. The fact remains is that we are stuck with Bush until '08. If both parties are smart, they will give the voters a decent choice the next election.

The problem is that I probably would not like anyone who would covet that job.

That reminds me of the old Groucho Marx joke: "I would never join a club who would have me as a member".
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Mar, 2006 09:57 am
Yes, but it's looking increasingly sure that we won't be stuck with a Republican Senate and Congress for the last two years. This could be the last nail in Bush's coffin as far as his place in history. He's hobbled himself, all he needs is a legislature that will leave him with no legs whatsoever.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND - Discussion by Foxfyre
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Fellow Bostonians: How many of us wished we had an assault weapon last night? - Question by maxdancona
What should be first on the agenda of the winner in November? - Discussion by Frank Apisa
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Who Would Vote For bush Again?
  3. » Page 3
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/17/2025 at 02:40:55
▲ ▼