Guest Edwin MacPhisto Report post Posted December 18, 2002 Late getting a word in, but here it is nonetheless. This is fantastic news for the democratic party, because there's no way Gore would have won in 2004. We will not have a Democratic president unless the Democratic party actually develops an agenda that runs contrary to the Republican platform. With the parties as politically centralized as they are now, the Democrats really need to break away from the "us too" mentality that killed them in this year's elections. With someone new, that might actually happen. And a sidenote: Oh, the republicans do care, silly.......about the oil fields in Iraq that is~! I really, really wish people would stop holding this line of thought considering Iraq. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Olympic Slam Report post Posted December 18, 2002 There's nothing wrong with the economy, food and water is still readily available and that's what REALLY matters. I'd just like to point out that a statement like this is cause for contentment in the third world, not in America. If this is the explaining-away that most of the Republican think tank is going to make, there are some serious problems. Don't get me wrong I want a kick-ass economy where there are limitless number of choices. I don't want to live like the Swedes where social necessities rule the day. Believe me, it's the far left LIBERALS that want us reduced to nothing more than cows with feelings. Eat, sleep, drink and no time for consumerist evils. But I swear, employment is at 94%, basic necessities are cheap and there's plenty of fun diversions. Sounds pretty good to me. If you want a good economy, spend as much of your money as you possibily can because its people's dollars that decide what businesses stay and which go, not Bush, Dashle and other no nothing politicians. If you wanna make a difference, buy a Big Mac and help McDonalds out. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest DrTom Report post Posted December 19, 2002 Florida Supreme Court = Patterson, Brisco, and McMahon (except in a good, law-abiding way) Please. They were more than willing to allow Gore to change election laws while the outcome was still being determined. All Bush wanted to do was play under the set of rules that were on the books, which is what the US Supreme Court forced everyone to do. It's one thing to think the Florida election laws were bad, but it's quite another to try and change them in your favor while the votes are still being re-re-re-re-re-re-re-counted. Bush has won every independent recount conducted since the 2000 election. You have no case. Accept it and move on. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest So what? I liked bubble boy Report post Posted December 24, 2002 Bush has won every independent recount conducted since the 2000 election. You have no case. Accept it and move on. True True, True True Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Kotzenjunge Report post Posted December 24, 2002 Find your proof, I'll find mine. Sound good? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest So what? I liked bubble boy Report post Posted December 24, 2002 People, Bush is your president. Respect the man. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Kotzenjunge Report post Posted December 24, 2002 I'll respect him for some things and dislike him for others. But to embrace everything he does just because of his position is foolish. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Gamengiri2002 Report post Posted December 24, 2002 People, Bush is your president. Respect the man. eff that ess. If this was the way it worked we'd be in a pretty shitty democracy. I will follow his lead and honor the things he decides to do, as that is my admission price for living in this country. Telling me I have to respect him is a different matter. Truth is, and I'm not even a stalwart Gore supporter, Gore was the initial winner of the election. Should the governor of Florida have been anything other than related directly to Bush, I don't even think he would have challenged the result. The entire election 2000 debacle was a matter of circumstances. A debate on the issue is meaningless as I don't think the country would be in much better shape had it gone the other way. Perhaps we should have given them each a two month trial run and then re-voted completely. I don't think either man has the vision and the discipline to help this country out. But I would feel much better in the hands of a democratic Washington than a republican one. But this shit about respect Bush because he happened to have survived the presidential election. Fuck that. I won't mutiny. That should be enough. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest DrTom Report post Posted December 26, 2002 Here's a few things in the way of proof. St Pete Times article, showing Bush would have won the recount anyway. USA Today article, in which three different news agencies verified the same results. (Keep in mind that the Herald isn't exactly known for its conservative bias.) Another article that reinforces the USA Today findings. Can we please put this to rest now? It's been two bloody years. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MrRant Report post Posted December 26, 2002 It really irritates me how many people dwell on the past (left and right) instead of trying to make things better for the future which is what we elected these people to do after all. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Kotzenjunge Report post Posted December 26, 2002 Fucking Florida retards... COULDN'T THEY HAVE JUST MARKED THE BALLOTS CORRECTLY????? ARGH!!!!!!! Fine, I concede in face of the evidence and because Rant has a point. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Mad Dog Report post Posted December 26, 2002 Not to harp on all Democrats. But the Democrats in Florida paid for the way they do things. They run out to get a bunch of minorities to vote for them but they don't take the time to educate them. Maybe things would've been different if the people in this counties had their voting rights explained to them. You can't just throw someone into a voting booth without telling them what to do and expect anything good to come from it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Brian Report post Posted December 26, 2002 Why single out the minorities? Wassupwitdat! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Mad Dog Report post Posted December 26, 2002 Not really meaning to single them out. But those are the groups that they tried to get out there to vote. And they screwed them over by not teaching them their rights. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest EricMM Report post Posted December 26, 2002 It's almost 2003. I would give a unspecified yet surprisingly large amount of money for the damn elections of 2000 to never be mentioned again. Simply put IIRC, more votes were counted for Gore, yet Bush won more electorial votes. *Reads book on U.S. Law* Ah yes, Bush is the president. It's OVER. I didn't vote for him, would I rather Gore in office now? Yes. Does that mean I try and act like he didn't get the win? NOOOOOOOO. So please stop. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Vern Gagne Report post Posted December 26, 2002 I won't mutiny. That should be enough. That should be enough? What exactly did Bush do that would warrant a mutiny? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Kotzenjunge Report post Posted December 26, 2002 He drove the Queen Elizabeth's Revenge into a driving Atlantic storm while evading Her Royal Navy. The crew was mighty pissed after three men were tossed overboard in the tumult, not to mention their total loss of bearings and the booty that couldn't be gotten as a result. Wouldn't YOU mutiny? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Gamengiri2002 Report post Posted December 27, 2002 I won't mutiny. That should be enough. That should be enough? What exactly did Bush do that would warrant a mutiny? Nothing per se. My argument is that the only thing a president should be irrevocably entitled to is the obedience of those whom he is elected to govern. That's why I said "I won't Mutiny" meaning I'll give him that. I do not, however, feel it necessary to respect him. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites