Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

American elections 2004

Discussion in 'The Members Lounge' started by Ricky, Jul 12, 2004.

  1. corpcasselbury

    corpcasselbury New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    High Point, North Carolina, USA
    via TanksinWW2
    Don't forget Ralph Nader, who wants to remove American troops from Iraq, although he still hasn't said just how he plans to manage that feat.
     
  2. Ricky

    Ricky Active Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,716
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    Stick 'em on planes & ships, presumably...
    :grin:

    (holds head in hand at Nader's amoral idiocy)
     
  3. GP

    GP New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2004
    Messages:
    1,432
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    Like it.

    :wink:
     
  4. corpcasselbury

    corpcasselbury New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    High Point, North Carolina, USA
    via TanksinWW2
    Ah, yes...left myself wide open for that one. :wink:

    The idea of Ralph Nader as President of the United States is downright frightening!!!! :eek:
     
  5. Ricky

    Ricky Active Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,716
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
  6. corpcasselbury

    corpcasselbury New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    High Point, North Carolina, USA
    via TanksinWW2
    If the voters had sense, they'd demand that all political campaigning be done within a ninety day timeframe. I'm already sick and tired of the political ads, and we've still got five more weeks of them to go! :angry:
     
  7. Ricky

    Ricky Active Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,716
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
  8. Greg Pitts

    Greg Pitts New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2004
    Messages:
    542
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    DFW Texas
    via TanksinWW2
    I watched the debate and as far as "debate" goes, Kerry had the advantage. The biggest issue I saw was he was definately more calm and collected than Bush.

    I liked Bush's answers better as Kerry was making large sweeping statements that 1. he cannot implement, and 2. Make it obvious he does not understand the issues nor the limitations of the situation.

    Quite simply, Kerry lied again, and it was a big lie! But then, the people have always believed a big lie before a small one.

    :smok:
     
  9. Ebar

    Ebar New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2004
    Messages:
    2,006
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    On a space station in geosynchronous orbit above y
    via TanksinWW2
    Woo Who, the end is hoving into view. Soon we're no longer going to have to listen to the endless yap about Kerry and Bush. :angry:



    Oh if Florida screw up its voting systems again I think we should nuke Florida to put it out of everyone's misery!

    :bang: :D
     
  10. Roel

    Roel New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2003
    Messages:
    12,678
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Netherlands
    via TanksinWW2
    I get tired of those face of Kerry, Clinton (this morning!) and Bush all over the front page of my newspaper, as well as the endless flow of Bush jokes... Just get it over with! :angry:

    Nothing much is going to change either way, IMHO; after all if Bush stays we get more of the same, and if Kerry gets elected he'll just try to turn back time on Bush.
     
  11. David.W

    David.W Active Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2004
    Messages:
    4,981
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    Devon. England
    via TanksinWW2
    Roel raises a good point here. What, if any difference, to us here in Europe will it make if Bush wins & not Kerry. Or Kerry wins & not Bush?

    B.T.W are we not reducing it to a popularity contest between two individuals, by refering to the whole thing as Bush Vs Kerry?
    Should it not be Republican manifesto Vs Democrat manifesto?
    I know I am as guilty as the next man as my opening question proves.
     
  12. Ricky

    Ricky Active Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,716
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    Does anybody (including the American voters...) actually know much detail on Republican vs Democrat manifestos?

    I speak as somebody who has never really got my head around American political parties, and (after a year of studying American political history 1945-1998) still cannot tell the difference between the 2 parties, or even which Presidents were from which. :oops:
    All I know is that one is politically 'left' and one is 'right', though by European standards both are right of center.
     
  13. Skua

    Skua New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2003
    Messages:
    2,889
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Norway
    via TanksinWW2
    Time to bring out the nukes. They ( Florida ) have apparently lost 60000 votes.
     
  14. Roel

    Roel New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2003
    Messages:
    12,678
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Netherlands
    via TanksinWW2
    Shouldn't that be "lost"? My my, great Skua, time to use your own Guide to Sarcasm!

    OK Ricky, accidentally I do know most of the presidents and their parties, but I know little about the parties themselves... Basically the democrats are progressive liberals whereas the republicans are conservative liberals. By European standards! (please don't wipe the floor with me, dear Americans! :( )
     
  15. Ricky

    Ricky Active Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,716
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    And which are Bush & Kelly?
    And which was Clinton?
     
  16. Roel

    Roel New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2003
    Messages:
    12,678
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Netherlands
    via TanksinWW2
    Clinton = Democrat.

    Kerry = Democrat.

    Bush = Republican.

    Schwarzenegger = Republican.

    Other democrats are Kennedy and Johnson for example.
    Other republicans are Bush Sr., Nixon, Reagan, Lincoln...
     
  17. Ricky

    Ricky Active Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,716
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    Ah, so as a (very) rough rule of thumb...

    Presidents who at least try to attempt legislation to help the poor, the underprivilaged or the oppressed minorities are Democrats, while Republicans are those who say 'sod the poor, build me an army'

    :grin:
     
  18. Skua

    Skua New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2003
    Messages:
    2,889
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Norway
    via TanksinWW2
    I was going to write "lost", but decided to go for a more diplomatic approach instead.

    :grin:
     
  19. Roel

    Roel New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2003
    Messages:
    12,678
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Netherlands
    via TanksinWW2
    Ah, but diplomacy and sarcasm don't get along! :grin:

    Ricky, I think that rule of thumb applies pretty well. If you see any of these two general policies you can make a fair bet at the party of the president. :D

    As my local newspaper jokingly put it:
    "Gun owners are Republicans. Gun owners who are members of a Baptist society are active Republicans. Single mothers are Democrats. Single mothers who live near a potential site for a nuclear power plant are active Democrats."
     
  20. Roel

    Roel New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2003
    Messages:
    12,678
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Netherlands
    via TanksinWW2
    Okay, the following is an essay sent to me by a friend a long time ago, which on the evening before D-Day I just couldn't keep to myself anymore. It has some very good advice as well as some very strong statements...

    A President, Not a Date

    by Charley Reese


    Here are some things Americans should consider before deciding whom they will vote for in November. You are not going to sleep with the president, become his best buddy or be his favorite pen pal. Therefore, you do not have to vote for someone you think is likable or handsome or charming.

    Statesmen, in fact, are often not likable, as they often have to make unpopular decisions. And America needs a statesman in the White House, because the years ahead are full of dangers, both from human sources and from environment stresses. It is also impossible to think seriously and smile at the same time. I have always distrusted people who smile perpetually.

    America, like any other nation or empire, has the potential to self-destruct. Nations and empires self-destruct when their leaders make a series of bad decisions. If you visit Great Britain, France or Spain today, you would never know from their present state that they were once world powers. There is not one single example in world history where any empire ever sustained itself indefinitely.

    Leaders make wrong decisions when they are shallow-minded, uninterested in the affairs of state and ignorant of the world outside their borders. They make wrong decisions when they depend on advisers who are driven by ideology. An ideologue is by definition a person out of touch with reality. Reality is always fluid, complex and changing from moment to moment. The rigid thinking of an ideologue inevitably loses a clash with reality. Its own internal ideologues drove the once-mighty Soviet Union into the ground.

    So remember, when it comes to choosing a president, you're not choosing a date, a fishing buddy or someone to spend your vacation with. You will be choosing someone who hopefully will have the brains to keep this country from joining so many others in the ash heap of history.

    Now, let's look at how people can make a mockery of democracy.

    You make a mockery of self-government when you choose your candidate strictly on the basis of the party label. Political parties in our country are not based on philosophy. They are merely machines for electing candidates and distributing patronage. The truth is that sometimes the best choice is a Republican; sometimes, a Democrat. It all depends on the human beings, not on the party label.

    You make a mockery of self-government when you cast your vote based on the candidate's personality. I've already covered that point.

    You make a mockery of self-government when you vote purely on the basis of your selfish interests. Many Americans make a religion of selfishness, but for self-government to work and to endure, we must all think of the common interests when it comes to choosing the people who will run the government.

    You make a mockery of self-government if you allow demagogues to influence your vote on the basis of phony issues. The real threats facing the United States are not homosexual marriages or even legal abortions. If you allow people to persuade you to cast your vote based on those two issues, you are wasting your vote, because I guarantee that the politicians, regardless of what they say now, will not do anything about either one of them. These are scarlet fish.

    Finally, you are making a mockery of self-government if you allow your vote to be influenced by concerns for a foreign country. And yes, I'm directing this to the Israel-first crowd, both Jew and Christian. The election in November is for the president of the United States, not the deputy prime minister of Israel. If you love Israel more than America, then by all means emigrate, join the Israeli Defense Forces and do your part. We need a president who will make his decisions based on the best interests of the United States, not those of Israel (or France, or Japan, or any other country).

    When one of our Revolutionary forefathers said the price of liberty is eternal vigilance, he meant that liberty is always at risk. It can only be preserved if a sufficient number of Americans care about it enough to take a serious approach to choosing their leaders.
     

Share This Page