Er, sorry? Cite?
The ones who are into hell are Republicans, dear.
A cite for something that might happen in the future? Now, that would be a trick!
Since Abbie used the phrase, “more lying about people not being allowed to vote,” I think Zagadka meant that Abbie should provide a cite for the implied assertion that, e.g., Gregory Palast’s book and documentary about the 2000 Florida voter-rolls purge was lies. And he’s right. She should.
Don’t let the door hit you in the ass…
Why?
Have you been reading the thread, or are you just posting glib and unhelpful one-liners to exercise frustration? “Don’t let the door hit you in the ass” and an unclear “why?” (why what?) are rather questionable contributions to Great Debates.
Let me take a swipe at that. I think what S. Monkey means is that he thinks GeeDubya is a really, really shitty President. Which is a bad thing, and kind of dangerous. Very dangerous, really.
That about right, Soap?
I just did not see him give a good reason as to why " I personally am as disturbed and frightened as hell about what would happen if Bush wins the election."…What examples of what Bush has done, or he thinks he will do to make him “disturbed and frightened”. That was my question.
Yep.
I didn’t feel the need to say all the reasons because those issues have already been brought up and I didn’t want to repeat them for the umpteenth time on these boards. Feel free to go into any of the pit threads and you’ll see for yourself.
It is a shame that a 19 YO young man would get his information about a presidential election from a pit thread on a message board. Get off the computer and go out in the real world and form your OWN opinions.
And it is an even greater shame that a [presumably] older man would twist the words of said 19 YO in order to score some unwarranted rethorical point. Unwarranted because is nothing in his post to suggest that A-The Pit is his sole source of information and B-that the tacit agreement implied comes from having read those threads to begin with.
For shame, indeed, sir.
Many of you on the left are now feeling like I did in 1996. I have always had a deep dislike for Bill Clinton. I thought he was a dishonest man who would look out for number one at any cost. I disagreed with many of his political positions. I thought the american people would compare him to Bob Dole and find him wanting. I was wrong. Clinton was reelected. But the world did not dissolve into a lake of fire.
It won’t happen this time either.
I have been maintaining for months that GWB will be reelected. When he is, not much will change. If you disagree with him politically, take comfort in the fact that the Republicans will not have 60 votes in the Senate. That will hold back most of the things he would do with an agreeable Senate and a (mostly) agreeable House. I would get used to the Republicans being in charge, though. Congressional incumbents are very difficult to defeat and most people in the country self-identify as moderates or conservatives. If it helps, you can always tell yourself what I did in the 90’s…if I’m right and things get screwed up, people will finally learn the truth and vote how I think they should.
If your dislike of GWB is personal, there is not much comfort I can offer.
But the difference is that Clinton didn’t send 150,000 soldiers into an unnecessary war. Clinton didn’t piss off our allies when they refused to rubber-stamp said needless war. Clinton didn’t run the deficit into the stratosphere. Clinton didn’t propose modifying the Constitution to marginalize a portion of the populace. Clinton didn’t hand out no-bid contracts to his business buddies so they could leech billions from the taxpayers. And Clinton certainly didn’t ignore the backlash from the voters when he did do something stupid.
Disliking Presidents is old hat, but pushing policies to drive the nation into the dirt is an attribute that’s exclusive to Bush.
The difference, evil one, is that GWB is taking advice from a team of reckless, megalomaniacal neocons. And if they get another four years, the world might actually dissolve into a lake a fire. The president has the fire under his hand and, in some circumstances, can deploy it without consulting Congress.
Its hard for me to believe that rational, intellegent (mostly) adult citizens in America are so frantic about a Bush win that they come out with such gloom and doom predictions. Boggles the mind frankly. If Bush wins there will be no ‘rioting in the streets’ or any other such sillyness…at least not on any kind of scale that matters. There will be plenty of bitching and moaning, but how is that different than now…or during any other president for that matter. Some even bitched and moaned about Washington for gods sake, and you (probably) have no idea how it was under Lincoln.
Bush winning won’t be the end of the world by any stretch of the imagination, just as Clinton winning his second term didn’t see the fall of the republic predicted by the frantic right wing crowd. My personal belief is that Mickey Mouse could sit as president for 8 years without seriously damaging the country.
Personally I think all this hysteria is wasted effort…Bush is most likely going down, much to the joy and relief of the SDMB’s majority. It will be interesting to see in the next 4-8 years the tables turned as those who have been constantly on the attack are forces on the defensive…as defending something, especially in the murky world of US politics is well neigh impossible at times.
I can hardly wait for the “Ya, but under Bush…” hand waving, especially if Kerry actually tries to do anything at all (my opinion is, his best bet is to simply go with being ‘not-Bush’ and look presidential, at least until he has the second term locked up). Should be a barrel of laughs, at least from my perspective. And be it Kerry or Bush things will just roll on as they always have…
-XT
If Bush wins, other countries in the world will begin attempting the diplomatic equivalent of sidling towards the exits while trying not to do anything that would startle the USA…
I think that Bush has pretty much accomplished everything on his agenda when he took office:
- Invade Iraq.
- Cut taxes.
- Open ANWR for oil drilling (two down, one to go).
So the next 4 years will be spent cleaning up from the past 4 years, regardless of who is in office.
I’m not afraid of riots, xtisme. I’m afraid of wars.
Well, with several cousins currently in the military (2 in Iraq right now in fact) and a son just turning 18 with the stated intention of joining the Marines, I’m none to keen on them either BG. However, I think its fairly safe to say that reguardless of if Bush wins or not the US has pretty much shot its bolt for the next few years (perhaps even a decade) as far as foriegn adventures go…unless you really think the rest of the world is going to suddenly come on board and start helping out. :dubious:
Oh sure, we COULD destroy, say, the Iranian or Syrian military…fairly easily in fact. But then what? No way in hell we could occupy either place, and doing so would only further inflame the region against us. And this is all assuming that Bush could get such a plan through anyway in the current US climate…something I find HIGHLY doubtful.
No, I think Bush is pretty much done as far as foriegn adventures goes whether he wins or loses. Most likely he will (assuming he wins :dubious: ) spend the next 4 years trying to repair and smooth over the damage (or whatever) done in his first term, perhaps doing some domestic things with the economy, and perhaps some minor things with ‘The War on Terror’…but that will be about all he CAN do. It will be all we can do to hold on in Iraq and Afghanistan and perhaps see some improvement by the time the next election happens…whether its Kerry or Bush at the helm.
-XT