• Howdy! Welcome to our community of more than 130.000 members devoted to web hosting. This is a great place to get special offers from web hosts and post your own requests or ads. To start posting sign up here. Cheers! /Peo, FreeWebSpace.net
managed wordpress hosting

Bush's Resume

Interesting you bring up Ralph Nadar.. hoping he'll continue to run to hurt Kerry and let Bush win again? Only way to win.
Click to expand...

I brought him up because only polls with him in it are more accurate. But whether he is in the equation or not it doesn't matter, Bush is still winning either way in the polls, the question is just how much.

It will not be a close election as it was in 2000. Bush will win.

and just as a side note: it was Algore who tried to steal the election in 2000, not Bush. The supreme court simply ruled that what Algore was trying to do is unconstitutional. If Algore wanted "every vote to count" why did he want to disqualify military ballots? Why did he only want to count those in counties where he was likley to gain votes? It's all a crock of s***. Algore attempted to steal the elction and failed, yet the partisan media and his surrogates in the radical left put a spin on it to make Bush look like the criminal.
 
Dear Conscript, (jak sie nazywasz?)

Your polls about Bush beeing in the lead don't prove anything. How do they choose the people that answer the poll? You'll never be able to correctly represent a whole nation, until election day (when is it btw)

Here's an example.
How many people are pro bush in this thread? 1, you
How many people are against bush? 5

Pro Bush = 17%
'Stupid Leftists' = 83%


Say something regarding Iraq? Uptil now you'v never defended your president, just posted articles about his opponents. What's YOUR oppinion on that issue?
 
Originally posted by Wojtek
Dear Conscript, (jak sie nazywasz?)


Pro Bush = 17%
'Stupid Leftists' = 83%
Click to expand...

you can't be serious in taking this forum as a good representation of the population?:coolmusic
 
I was showing that depending on what people you use in your 'survey' answers will vary.

For example If they randomly ask 1000 people and it happens that 900 of them are unemployed, the level of dissatisfaction will be higher then if only 100 were unemployed.

Polls can give a rough idea, but may not always be right.
Maybe even Kerry is in the lead right now and will win, maybe its bush. We'll find out after election day :)
 
Originally posted by Wojtek
I was showing that depending on what people you use in your 'survey' answers will vary.

For example If they randomly ask 1000 people and it happens that 900 of them are unemployed, the level of dissatisfaction will be higher then if only 100 were unemployed.

Polls can give a rough idea, but may not always be right.
Maybe even Kerry is in the lead right now and will win, maybe its bush. We'll find out after election day :)
Click to expand...

They have scientific ways of doing polling, thats why they get paid the big bucks. Anyone can go randomly into the street and ask 1,000 people what they think, the idea is that they have demographic data and other statistical data and follow certain procedures so that they are representative of the general public.

If you look at polling data from before an election and compare it to actual election outcomes it's usually within 2 to 3 points, depending on the poll, sometimes up to 5. There hasn't ever been case where someone was winning a landslide in the polls and ended up losing in one - because polls are fairly accurate.
 
and...

Originally posted by allanh
you can't be serious in taking this forum as a good representation of the population?:coolmusic
Click to expand...

...and of the 6 posters in the pool, how many are Americans and would be voters? That channges the percentages a little mre doesn't it?

I'll just say I am pro-Bushie. Most of the adults I am personally acquainted with are also pro-Bushie. Most of the kids I know have only one goal in mind - defiance. And therefore say they are anti-Bush and rely on false rhetoric like the original post to back them up.

The thing about rhetoric is that unless it contains only the truth, the small lies and outright inflammatory half-truths tend to make the entire document suspect. But just because there may be "some" truth hidden in there somewhere doesn't mean you should adopt it as your anthem or flag.

And I am not at all sure I would vote for ANYONE whose entire platform consists of "I don't have an opinion on anything but I believe I can defeat Bush"...

The "Anyone but Bush" campaign has actually changed my mind about the Democratic Party altogether. I would be willing to listen to anyone that speaks of reality, the issues, beliefs, and solutions...no matter what party they represent. Voting for someone JUST because they are the other side is ignorant and idiotic. It is a real shame to see a political rally where the audience is chanting "No More Bush" instead of "Kerry is the Best", or "Kerry for President" ( I know that is hokey, but try and get the point)...
 
america should make it mandatory for citizens to vote, fine their --- if they don't...

i don't even follow this crap.. kerry doesn't look like a president to me...

i'm not saying bush isn't any better.. but you guys need better choices...
 
Yeah

I think almost all Americans would agree with you Tandoc...

Every election year it seems we end up with only 2 choices. There is the odd chace that an Independant candidate will appear, but since they usually have little money (relatively speaking) they don't have much of a following because nobody really knows where they stand or what they believe.

The Republican and Democratic Partys are so deeply ingrained into our society that unless a majorly signifcant financial backing from somewhere that has looooong term staying power, there will always be only two Partys and only two choices.

As advanced as our world has become it has allowed us to raise a bunch of professional politicians who will say anything to get our vote.

Most people from the USA never even bother to care who is outside of the two Partys. Independents are looked at as eccentric (in the nice view) to fringe loonies. It is weird... but true.

Everyone I know is always saying that we should have more than two choices... but, what can we do?
 
use all of the nuclear weapons the united states has and tactically nuke every major city in the u.s, thusly, solving the problem? :devious2: :chinese2:
 
Yeah, in Singapore, once you're 21, it is compulsory for you to vote. Add me in under 'against-Bush', although my father is 'pro-Bush' for some reason.

There's no point arguing now anyway, wait till the freaking elections.
 
Re: Yeah

Originally posted by WhereToLook
I think almost all Americans would agree with you Tandoc...

Every election year it seems we end up with only 2 choices. There is the odd chace that an Independant candidate will appear, but since they usually have little money (relatively speaking) they don't have much of a following because nobody really knows where they stand or what they believe.

The Republican and Democratic Partys are so deeply ingrained into our society that unless a majorly signifcant financial backing from somewhere that has looooong term staying power, there will always be only two Partys and only two choices.

As advanced as our world has become it has allowed us to raise a bunch of professional politicians who will say anything to get our vote.

Most people from the USA never even bother to care who is outside of the two Partys. Independents are looked at as eccentric (in the nice view) to fringe loonies. It is weird... but true.

Everyone I know is always saying that we should have more than two choices... but, what can we do?
Click to expand...


It's all about money. The more money you have, the better chance you have at winning. Independent voters are looked "down" because in a way, it's a waste of a vote... since the Republican and Democratic candiate are the ones likely to win the election.

All in all, this country needs better candiates for Presidentcy.
 
exactly

Originally posted by Robert
It's all about money. The more money you have, the better chance you have at winning. Independent voters are looked "down" because in a way, it's a waste of a vote...
Click to expand...


That is exactly what I mean. people DO believe it is a waste of a vote! I disagree in that there is no such thing as a wasted vote.
 
It really boils down to money. When Ross Perot spent millions of his own money on his election campaign he ended up with 19% of the popular vote - if he just spent a little more he wouldve ended up with some electoral votes and been a viable candidate.
 
Originally posted by Conscript
It really boils down to money. When Ross Perot spent millions of his own money on his election campaign he ended up with 19% of the popular vote - if he just spent a little more he wouldve ended up with some electoral votes and been a viable candidate.
Click to expand...

"if he just spent a little more".

That's what is wrong with this country.

A President of the United States of America should be elected by the American people because they like him as an individual, because they believe in him and trust him. Because he has good intentions for this country, because he places this country before himself....

... Not because he has more money to spend on advertising.

If Bush wants my vote, he would take the $500,000 he has to spend on advertising and donate it to charity.
 
Last edited:
Well you have to get your message out. You cant do that without money for ads and campaign literature, not to mention pay for stuff like campaign staffers. It's expensive to run a campaign, even a local one. My State Rep, who has 100,000 constituents, spends $450,000 on his campaign every 2 years.

And you say that people should vote for who they like, which is true, they should, but they won't vote for someone they don't know.
 
Originally posted by Conscript
Well you have to get your message out. You cant do that without money for ads and campaign literature, not to mention pay for stuff like campaign staffers. It's expensive to run a campaign, even a local one. My State Rep, who has 100,000 constituents, spends $450,000 on his campaign every 2 years.

And you say that people should vote for who they like, which is true, they should, but they won't vote for someone they don't know.
Click to expand...

Of course. But Bush is the president.. has been for 4 years.. I would expect everyone in America to know who he is by now lol
 
Originally posted by Robert
Unless the Government is appointed by the Supreme Court. :confused5
Click to expand...
Tell me about it, thank God it never has and never will come to that, not in this country.

You know, while we're on the topic of fake politically-biased resumes... maybe we should post Kerry's "resume".
 
Last edited:
Originally posted by keith
Tell me about it, thank God it never has and never will come to that, not in this country.

You know, while we're on the topic of fake politically-biased resumes... maybe we should post Kerry's "resume".
Click to expand...

G'head.. it may be fun.

I for one have not defended Kerry, and will not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top