SothThe69th Posted August 28, 2003 Author Share Posted August 28, 2003 For me, its gotta be the Patriot Act thats sealed my dislike of Bush, if only because it was a obvious powergrab in the wake of a terrorist attack. Further- Cthulhu for President- http://www.cthulhu.org/cthulhu/index.html Dean for President- http://www.deanforamerica.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASCLEPUS Posted August 30, 2003 Share Posted August 30, 2003 And I suppose if we had simply repealed the 22nd amendment to the constitution we could have endured the constant weasling, lying and womanizing of former President William Clinton for another four, eight, or even twelve more years. I do not feel that this is the place to debate anyone's merits as president or to throw about useless slander at political leaders. I believe the topic was: Who will be the next President of the United States? In all likelihood (even though I like none of the candidates which have been presented to me by any party) it will probably be George Bush. My own party (Democrats) don't have a clear leader and probably will not for at least another eight or ten years. So, barring some unfortunate circumstance, I see no end to the Bush administration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DM Posted August 30, 2003 Share Posted August 30, 2003 Most people seem to think Bush is not actually in charge. If that is the case, how come so many blame him for so many things? I'm not here to defend him, or bash him. As of now, I live in a house without major worries or concerns. That's good enough for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Corbett Posted August 31, 2003 Share Posted August 31, 2003 I'd call the Patriot Act a powergrab only if it wasn't bipartisanly supported. If it is, and the Democratic party fell for it en masse, then that hardly spells for their intelligence? I'm sure they're all very smart people. Anyway, I'm hoping for a re-election. The Democrats have too much votesplitting to EVER win, and their candidates kind of stink. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albareth Posted August 31, 2003 Share Posted August 31, 2003 On the topic at hand (You don't want me to start rambling about Dubya, rust me :P ), I fear I think our good friend Dubya will be elected again. People like to look past cold hard facts of neglect in office and vote in patriotic fury... beside which it's not like there's any other strong candidate to go against him, which is absurd IMO. :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mojlnir Posted September 1, 2003 Share Posted September 1, 2003 Intrinsic to the discussion of "Who will be the next President" is a discussion of the candidate's merits as President. Professional performance, not personal peccadillos, are what counts when assessing a president. President Kenndy was by no means a saintly individual, (case in point: Marilyn Monroe) but he was by many accounts a very successful president (redemption for the Bay of Pigs occurred during the Cuban Missle Crisis in my opinion). Bill Clinton was, in addition to being a philandering ninny, a very successful President as well. We were well on our way to improved relations with North Korea, had participated in negotiations concerning the Kyoto Protocol, and managed to run a budgetary surplus (after years of largess on the part of former presidents) among other things. These are not small accomplishments, and should not be outweighed by the fact that Clinton liked to chase particularly ugly women.The current presidential situation is not what I would call ideal. The current administration has managed to reverse all the aformentioned accomplishments in addition to boycotting in the ICC (International Criminal Court), refusing to sign the anti-landmine treaty, botching relations with North Korea, alienating many nations in the world, and (not least of all) running an amazing debt. Oh and, I almost forgot, we waged an essentially pointless war in a state whose political situation is equivalent to a ticking time bomb...leaving us with billions of dollars in projected reconstruction costs, pissed off allies, royally pissed of citizens of the aforementioned country, and a nasty quagmire for our troops.Now, the upcoming election stands to see the reelection of Bush, because the Democractic Party is confused, leaderless, messageless, pedantic, and generally pathetic. The majority of them have attacked the President on things they gave their support to, focused on dead-end issues and generally placed their heads in their arses. Democratic voters are adrift without a solid candidate and often without common ground among themselves. A rudderless party means no presidency in 2004. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eltiraaz Posted September 1, 2003 Share Posted September 1, 2003 I'm not an American, so I can't give TOO much of an accurate view-point, but if I was voting in that election, I would vote for Howard Dean, (I think thats his name..) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakkara Posted September 1, 2003 Share Posted September 1, 2003 If I had the rights to vote I sure wouldn't vote for any candidate from the Democrat OR Republican party. They are all corrupt to the core IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Corbett Posted September 2, 2003 Share Posted September 2, 2003 Ummm... go Stephen Harper! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Reaper Posted September 2, 2003 Share Posted September 2, 2003 You people only have two Parties??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now