[timcclayton]

An old quotation but a true one, so with the US election looming I wanted to find out what kind of people I am mixing with here!

Who do you want to win the upcoming election, Kerry or Bush ?

[Intrepid Homoludens]

I vote for Kerry, the lesser of two evils. That jack-ass moron currently in the White House has done waaaaay too much damage already.

[100ja a.k.a. mr_mitja]

Kerry. Although on't think it will affect me much...
And you americans had similar choice last elections, hadn't you Trep?

[Wormsie]

Neither!

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Originally Posted by 100ja a.k.a. mr_mitja

...you americans had similar choice last elections, hadn't you Trep?

If you mean choosing between two evils, it's our country's history and birthright.

[100ja a.k.a. mr_mitja]

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

If you mean choosing between two evils, it's our country's history and birthright.

Yes, here is even worse. We almost wait for someone to die before we elect a different guy. That's that communism leftovers there...

[Mattsius]

Kerry, of course.

What does the rest of the world say? Check it out!

And here's an election between four 'should-have' been Presidents.

EDIT: and then there's this pathological liar vote

[mag]

Originally Posted by 100ja a.k.a. mr_mitja

Kerry. Although on't think it will affect me much...
And you americans had similar choice last elections, hadn't you Trep?

The difference between this election and previous elections is that usually the two candidates are operating at about the same level. Sure, neither one may be somebody you can get excited about, but they're both just your typical politicians. So it basically comes down to a matter of preference. That's what we thought we had in 2000. But in this election Bush is just so overwhelmingly evil that he makes even a petty politician like Kerry look like a saint in comparison...which is sad.

The ironic thing is that in 2000 there was so much talk about Bush and Gore being exactly the same. And this time around Bush and Kerry are even more similar than Bush and Gore, but where they do differ is what makes all the difference.

If only Dean had won the primaries.

mag

[Intrepid Homoludens]

"When choosing between
two evils I always like
to take the one I've never
tried before."

- Mae West

[gillyruless]

Originally Posted by mag

If only Dean had won the primaries.

mag

Nah. Howard Dean would have made a better president than either Kerry or Bush but I don't see him being able to beat Bush. Not only does he have strong liberal beliefs but also he is not afraid to speak his mind, which is a great trait in a leader but not such a great one in a political candidate.

[Sanjuro2]

Originally Posted by mag

But in this election Bush is just so overwhelmingly evil that he makes even a petty politician like Kerry look like a saint in comparison...which is sad.

LOL! That's hilarious.

It's weird how Bush is so "overwhelmingly evil" but he's leading Kerry consistently now in every...single...recognized...poll... The majority of "adventure gamers" prefer Kerry, but as of today, the majority of Americans prefer Bush.

[gillyruless]

Originally Posted by Sanjuro2

LOL! That's hilarious.

It's weird how Bush is so "overwhelmingly evil" but he's leading Kerry consistently now in every...single...recognized...poll... The majority of "adventure gamers" prefer Kerry, but as of today, the majority of Americans prefer Bush.

That my friend can change at any time. My guess is that whoever wins the lection, he will do so by a very slim margin. I'm not sure I agree that Bush is overwhelmingly evil but I personally believe that he did a lot more harm than good by invading Iraq and that his administration intentionally mislead American public to drum up support for the war. I also believe that his administration used the deep emotional hurt and the sense of vulnerability we all felt after 9/11 and manipulated the public sentiment to generate positive acceptance of its policies. That to me is unforgivable.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Originally Posted by gillyruless

...his administration used the deep emotional hurt and the sense of vulnerability we all felt after 9/11 and manipulated the public sentiment to generate positive acceptance of its policies. That to me is unforgivable.

To me that is overwhelmingly evil.

[mag]

Originally Posted by gillyruless

Nah. Howard Dean would have made a better president than either Kerry or Bush but I don't see him being able to beat Bush. Not only does he have strong liberal beliefs but also he is not afraid to speak his mind, which is a great trait in a leader but not such a great one in a political candidate.

Are you sure about that? Kerry's biggest weakness is the perception that he's weak. That he flip-flops on the issues. That he's too similar to Bush. That he has no clear beliefs. In other words, what people are really looking for is Dean.

Dean would have had a much better chance of beating Bush than Kerry has simply because Dean actually disagrees with Bush on some things.

Originally Posted by Sanjuro2

It's weird how Bush is so "overwhelmingly evil" but he's leading Kerry consistently now in every...single...recognized...poll... The majority of "adventure gamers" prefer Kerry, but as of today, the majority of Americans prefer Bush.

So as long as you can find a lot of people who agree with you it's okay to do whatever you want? Cool. Guess I don't have to worry about silly things like ethics any more. From now on I will turn to poll numbers for any moral guidance I might require.

mag

[gillyruless]

Originally Posted by mag

Are you sure about that? Kerry's biggest weakness is the perception that he's weak. That he flip-flops on the issues. That he's too similar to Bush. That he has no clear beliefs. In other words, what people are really looking for is Dean.

Dean would have had a much better chance of beating Bush than Kerry has simply because Dean actually disagrees with Bush on some things.

mag

Maybe you are right, Mag. I just think that more and more the American public demands moderacy in their political leaders. The fact that it's hard to truly distigush Kerry from Bush is a proof of that. One thing that Howard dean is not is to be a moderate, which might have hurt him in a general election against Bush.

[Sanjuro2]

gilly, no offense, but I couldn't possibly care any less what you believe as far as Iraq is concerned. I was simply stating the fact that Bush leads Kerry by a significant margin in all of the polls right now. I also said, "As of today..." because yes, I know it can change.

[Sanjuro2]

Originally Posted by mag

So as long as you can find a lot of people who agree with you it's okay to do whatever you want? Cool. Guess I don't have to worry about silly things like ethics any more. From now on I will turn to poll numbers for any moral guidance I might require.

Mag, I was stating FACTS. That's all. I wasn't making judgements.

[mag]

Originally Posted by gillyruless

Maybe you are right, Mag. I just think that more and more the American public demands moderacy in their political leaders. The fact that it's hard to truly distigush Kerry from Bush is a proof of that. One thing that Howard dean is not is to be a moderate, which might have hurt him in a general election against Bush.

Actually, even though Dean is very passionate in his beliefs, he's really not that liberal. How many liberals do you know that are pro-gun?

I think Americans used to demand moderacy in their leaders. But a strange thing has happened in the past few years. During the Clinton years, it pretty much worked out that the Democrats were on the left side of the center, and the Republicans were on the right side of the center. But they were both pretty centrist. Under Bush, the Republicans have gone to the extreme right end of the spectrum. But the Democrats have stayed where they were. So what we have is not a polarization as some have suggested, but rather a shift to the right in American politics.

These days it seems as though people want somebody who is extreme. People who like Bush tend to like him because he stands for something. Doesn't matter so much what that something is as long as he stands for it. In contrast, people, including Democrats, don't care for Kerry because he is incredibly neutral on just about everything. Most of the people supporting him aren't doing so because they like him. They simply can't stand the idea of Bush winning another four years.

Democrats nominated Kerry because they were scared by Republicans into thinking that he was the only one who could beat Bush. But what they really want is somebody like Dean, or Edwards, or Kucinich.

BTW, I just saw this linked over at Devoter. Thought folks in this topic might find it funny:



Do you guys really think Jesus is soft on terror?

mag

[log p]

Originally Posted by Sanjuro2

LOL! That's hilarious.

It's weird how Bush is so "overwhelmingly evil" but he's leading Kerry consistently now in every...single...recognized...poll... The majority of "adventure gamers" prefer Kerry, but as of today, the majority of Americans prefer Bush.

im always hesistant to get involved in politics cos i always end up being out-argued, out-classed, or simply bored with it and smash things to relieve my copious angst...but i'll grudgingly (who REALLY believes a word i say?) become involved...the majority of Americans are morons...which just goes to show you how bush garners support...and you wanna discuss facts and how i arrived at this conclusion?...i happen to come from a long line of idiots, most of my neighbors are idiots, i've only met several people who could be qualified as particularly non-idiotic, and i, myself, have the honor of being dubbed in my senior class in high school "Most Likely to Remain an Idiot"...so ha!

[log p]

Originally Posted by mag

Do you guys really think Jesus is soft on terror?

mag

that is damn hilarious...and the ironic part is bush would beat jesus handily