March 11, 200323 yr What are your thoughts? I think in the end, the American People will re-elect him.
March 11, 200323 yr I Think it depends on his opponent, but as of right now I say yeah he will be re-elected.
March 11, 200323 yr it depends on his opponent... I won't vote for him.. my entire family is a proud D(Democrats).
March 13, 200323 yr I think he will get Re-eected. He is doing pretty good as a president he just needs to bomb Iraq already and stop giving hi chances to bomb us...My whole family are republicans...
March 13, 200323 yr I think its a really sad thing that says a lot about this country that you are 14 and say you are Republican. Im not making a value judgment about the party, either. It would be the same thing if you said Democrat. Most people just choose the party their parents belong to and repeat things they hear their parents say without even knowing the difference between parties or even if it reflects their own values. And Im not just talking about you. I dont think any 14-year old should have already been tagged with a party affiliation.
March 13, 200323 yr :mischief2 You know, I keep talking about doing this but I never do it... I want to set up a site that tells you who you WANT to vote for. It takes "political affiliation" and bipartisanship and throws it all out the window. Here?s how it works: You log into the site. You fill out a questionnaire on some major issues and how important they are to you [to give more weight to the issues most important to you]. You also pick a position [for the matching portion]. After you have filled out all the questions, you click the submit button. It will return the candidates that most match your viewpoint regardless of party. This way, it doesn?t matter if your name is George Bush, John F Kennedy, or Pee Wee Herman ? if the candidate has the same stance as you on the most issues, you?ll get their name. The only snag I?m running into is this: do I base my matching on their voting records or on their promises? As we all know, these two things are not always one in the same... :mischief
March 13, 200323 yr he just needs to bomb Iraq already and stop giving hi chances to bomb us As long as we don't get some more support in this war.. this war won't start... we can't go in alone..
March 13, 200323 yr I hope neither one of them gets re-elected. Dubya is screwing up our country, whist his brother is killing Florida. What a quinella..... So sad but so true...
March 14, 200323 yr If in the time of election there's a war he will. It makes no sense to change presidents in the middle of war. If theres no war he wont get re-elected.
March 14, 200323 yr if the majority of the american people are against something, a change will be made.... never assume that things will not change based on past actions.... never before have the United States taken on the role of agressors like they currently are.... on a side note... have hte united states ever succeeded in a conflict where they were deemed the agressor.... i cannot think of any 'war', especially none outside the western hemisphere.
March 14, 200323 yr have hte united states ever succeeded in a conflict where they were deemed the agressor.... Good question. Ask Geronimo... :whistle
March 14, 200323 yr ahh yes the conflicts with the native americans.... but again that was confined to the western hemisphere. as were all other conflicts with the native americans where the USA pushed their Manifest Destiny ideals among many others pushing out the Natives for their own purposes.... Also same thing applied with Mexico in the middle of the nineteenth century. The Spanish-American war was another where the US were deemed as the agressor and they won.... Again this was in the western hemisphere... But in a global conflict.... the World Wars cannot be counted, the US were not the agressors.... I dont know enough about Korea to say anything... Vietnam was a great failure. Did the US really 'win' the last conflict in the Middle East....yeah sure they were able to get Saddam to 'disarm' but look at where that has got them.... Then of course you have all your other 'minor' conflicts in places like Bosnia, Somilia, etc...
March 14, 200323 yr Good points. A couple of areas of clarification... We were most decidedly NOT the agressors in the Korean War. Here's a pretty good - yet brief - synopsis of what the Korean War was all about: http://www.encyclopedia.com/html/k/koreanw1a.asp Lesson Learned? Dont trust politicians when it comes to global freedoms. I would argue that the North Vietnamese were the agressors in the Vietnam "Conflict" as the US was asked by, of all people, the crappy French to clean up after their mess and maintain the 17th Parallel. I would also argue that the United States did a very good job of maintaining this boundry despite having their hands tied diplomatically by China. Some say that b/c South Vietnam ultimately collapsed, we failed. *I* say b/c South Vietnam still existed while we were there, it was successful. Lesson learned? Don't trust politicians when it comes to global freedoms. Did we "win" the Persian Gulf War? Is Kuwait a providence of Iraq or it's own independent nation? :mischief2 We got Saddam out of Kuwait, we just didn't go after Saddam. Iraq surrendered UNCONDITIONALLY and agreed to publish a document listing their weapons of mass destruction and disarm at the UN's request. Lesson learned? Don't trust politicians when it comes to global freedoms. Which brings us to today... As my 2-year-old nephew once said "Ouch! Hot!" when he got burned sticking his finger in the toaster. Oddly, the 2-year-old did not repeat his mistake. :whistle
March 14, 200323 yr also very good points..... do we deem saddam as a real threat? do we feel like saddam must be removed from power? is there any alternative? what do you do about other regimes similar to iraq in the world? do you go after them next? or are you picking on saddam because of events a decade ago? is this really about terrorism anymore, which was the tenet of all of this military action? or is this about dubya working to fulfilling what daddy started a decade ago? just a few questions among many to consider. some are rhetorical. others should be taken as real, valid questions that should be debated. you decide which are which.
March 15, 200323 yr :mischief2 You know, I keep talking about doing this but I never do it... I want to set up a site that tells you who you WANT to vote for. It takes "political affiliation" and bipartisanship and throws it all out the window. Here?s how it works: You log into the site. You fill out a questionnaire on some major issues and how important they are to you [to give more weight to the issues most important to you]. You also pick a position [for the matching portion]. After you have filled out all the questions, you click the submit button. It will return the candidates that most match your viewpoint regardless of party. This way, it doesn?t matter if your name is George Bush, John F Kennedy, or Pee Wee Herman ? if the candidate has the same stance as you on the most issues, you?ll get their name. The only snag I?m running into is this: do I base my matching on their voting records or on their promises? As we all know, these two things are not always one in the same... :mischief Good idea. Some people really don't know where they stand. I am a registered democrat, and at one point voted D across the board. Now, I only vote for the people I know of and where they stand on issues. Doesn't matter Democrat, Republican, Independent or other.
March 15, 200323 yr also very good points..... do we deem saddam as a real threat? do we feel like saddam must be removed from power? is there any alternative? what do you do about other regimes similar to iraq in the world? do you go after them next? or are you picking on saddam because of events a decade ago? is this really about terrorism anymore, which was the tenet of all of this military action? or is this about dubya working to fulfilling what daddy started a decade ago? just a few questions among many to consider. some are rhetorical. others should be taken as real, valid questions that should be debated. you decide which are which. depending on the opinions of the current events.. many people will have different answers.. and more questions.
March 17, 200323 yr Highly suggested reading.... Oi Gavalt! [smacks head] Another one of THESE arguments... :mischief
March 17, 200323 yr Ugh, Texan, you're REALLY testing me aren't you? :mischief2 Here are my PERSONAL feelings: [note: the opinions expressed do not necessarily represent the opinions of the White House, The President, or the Government of the United States of America] *I* think Saddam is a threat to peace - more in his own region than anywhere else. We are talking about a man who used chemical weapons on his OWN people. We are talking about a man who uses fear and terror to rule his nation. *I* think that the United States should do nothing without UN support. *I* think the UN is a worthless collection of sycophants if they do nothing to support their own resolutions. *I* think that the UN should do whatever it takes to preserve peace and maintain civil order. *I* think that until the UN actually stands up and DOES what they PROMISE? Their resolutions will continue to be ignored... *I* think that if nothing gets done here, nothing will get done in Korea. *I* think that would be a VERY bad thing.
March 17, 200323 yr Ugh, Texan, you're REALLY testing me aren't you? :mischief2 Good. I am glad you find this to be a good test..... Now if more would have the ability to put their thoughts down, things could really get interesting.... I will reveal my stance on some of these issues some time tomorrow....3/16/03
March 17, 200323 yr ps. Being that "dirty bombs" are one of Saddams weapons of choice, have you ever seen what it is like for someone to die from radiation sickness? Can you imagine the intense pain as your swelling brain is crushed by your own skull? [shudder] Not pretty.
March 18, 200323 yr I will reveal my stance on some of these issues some time tomorrow....3/16/03 Dude, you made that statement on the 17th. And we're still waiting :whistle later...... maybe Texas is on the other side of the international date line :mischief2
March 18, 200323 yr Thats eastern time for you bud..... It was 1137 Central time where I am at..... Expect more after my dinner.
March 18, 200323 yr Woo...it's been a long time since I've been here...anyway, that aside... I think that since we're basically at war, Bush will definitely be re-elected. I think a major point for Bush is to turn the economy around, and so far he's been unable to do it. One of the key factors in him getting re-elected is helping our hurting economy. Call my bluff here, but doesn't war help the economy? And, to my knowledge, this country has never voluntarily switched presidents during a war (heh, feel free to call me on that one if I'm wrong, too. I suck at history, but I'm pretty sure that's right.) I don't expect this time to be any different.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.