Who do you think...

[Guest Mole]

I don't know if this has been a topic before, but if it has, ignore this.

 

Anyway, who do you think and want to be the next President of the US?

 

I don't think Bush will win again, nor do I think Lieberman will win. Lieberman won't win because he is Jewish, which says a lot for the US. Even though Liberman is from my state, Connecticut and a Democrat, which I am, I still don't want him as President.

 

After he said the reason for Columbine was Marilyn Manson, I knew he wouldn't be a good President.

 

I don't know who else is in the primary for the Democrats, but I just hope it isn't Bush.

 

What about you fellas?

Edited June 3, 2003 by Mole

[Guest bob_barron]

I don't know who else is in the primary for the Democrats, but I just hope it isn't Bush.

 

I have a feeling Bush will not be in the Democratic primaries.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Yeah, I think that's a pretty safe bet. I'd call and ask the President myself, but he'd probably either yell at me or laugh at me, so let's just give it really low odds and leave it at that.

[Guest Edwin MacPhisto]

"But G.W., I'm asking it for a guy on a message board! Pleeeeease!"

 

"No! Now go back to mopping!"

 

"Yes sir..."

 

Marney's secret janitor life...REVEALED!

 

On-topic: I don't think the democrats can win next year because Bush still has a lot of support and hasn't offended enough moderates. More importantly, the Dems have still done little to grab them. Joe Klein's somewhat wanky but still vaguely admirable notion that the Dems should come out swinging and not be afraid to directly challenge the current Republican policies are probably the best bet for a party that could get lucky in 2004, but will probably have its best chance in 2006 and 2008.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Heh. No one calls the President "G.W." Not even union workers.

[Guest bob_barron]

Next time you call him- Tell him I say hi Marney

[Guest Cancer Marney]

I'm in hiding right now because I haven't been in the office for a while. In my tiny little mind exacerbating my errors will improve my position because I couldn't possibly be stupid enough to fuck up that badly without a darn good reason... or something like that. Erm, anyway.

[Guest bob_barron]

You WILL tell him I say hi right?

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Sure, if you like. What's your name? Bob Barron?

[Guest Mole]

I don't know who else is in the primary for the Democrats, but I just hope it isn't Bush.

 

I have a feeling Bush will not be in the Democratic primaries.

I said that wrong. I meant to say, I don't know who else is in the primary for the Democrats, but I just hope that Bush isn't President agan.

 

Another mistake by good ol Mole.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

I don't know who else is in the primary for the Democrats

On its own, the fact that almost seven out of ten Democrats say the same thing practically ensures that the President will be re-elected.

[Guest Mole]

There are always tons of people running for the primary.

[Guest Mole]

Well, I just found out who is running:

 

Ambassador Carol Moseley Braun

Governor Howard Dean

Senator John Edwards

Congressman Dick Gephardt

Senator Bob Graham

Senator John Kerry

Congressman Dennis Kucinich

Senator Joe Lieberman

Reverend Al Sharpton

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Congratulations; you are now more informed than 69% of self-identified Democrats. Not that that's saying much - 9% thought Gore was running.

[Guest MarvinisaLunatic]

Democrats should just forfeit and start planning on how they are going to beat Bush in 2008. And by that, I don't mean Dubbya..Im talking bout Jeb...

 

We're that close to having a quasi-monarchy folks!

[Guest Mole]

You guys honestly think Bush is going to win again?

 

He didn't even win the first election, he won't win this one. All I gotta say is:

[Guest bob_barron]

Oh great- the 2000 Election Debate.

 

How did Bush not win the election mole? He won the required number of votes in the Electoral College this making him President of the United States

[Guest MarvinisaLunatic]

The sad truth is that all of the people who go around saying that "Bush shouldn't be president" and "He didn't really win in 2000" and "He's not my president" probably won't even bother to vote in 2004.

 

I hope theres a viable 3rd party to vote for again, because I am not voting for Bush and unless the Democratic candidate is someone not on that list above, I won't be voting Democrat either.

[Guest Mole]

Oh great- the 2000 Election Debate.

 

How did Bush not win the election mole? He won the required number of votes in the Electoral College this making him President of the United States

I know he won, he did get the electoral college votes.

 

I just find it funny that he didn't win the popular vote, that's all.

 

And Marvin I actually have that shirt, and I vote whenever there is an election. Voting is very important to me.

[Guest two_tuff_toddy]

Hillary Clinton OH wait! That's just my worse nightmare.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

I know he won, he did get the electoral college votes.

 

I just find it funny that he didn't win the popular vote, that's all.

Did you also find it "funny" when Clinton was elected without a majority of the popular vote?

[Guest MrRant]

Lets see...

 

Ambassador Carol Moseley Braun - No chance.

 

Governor Howard Dean - Don't know him.

 

Senator John Edwards - Perhaps if confused with the other John Edwards

 

Congressman Dick Gephardt - President Gephardt just sounds.... stupid. I can't think of any foreign country (including France) that would quake under the overwhelming pressure of someone named Dick Gephardt.

 

Senator Bob Graham - Eh.

 

Senator John Kerry - Vaguely familar.

 

Congressman Dennis Kucinich - Who?

 

Senator Joe Lieberman - Not if there really is a god.

 

Reverend Al Sharpton - Hell no.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

You guys honestly think Bush is going to win again?

 

He didn't even win the first election, he won't win this one.

By the way, we've already had this discussion too. Countless times.

 

Here's one of the discussions - now an official Classic Thread, which is why I couldn't find it earlier in this forum.

 

If Bush had won then there would have been a full statewide recount instead of just doing a handful of counties.

...

 

The Democrats were the ones who insisted on recounting only Democratic counties, idiot. Gore said he'd lost the vote in Florida and he conceded the election. Then he withdrew his concession after the recount was ordered. On top of that, when it looked like Bush was going to win the recount too, dozens of Democrat lawyers descended on Florida like a flock of vultures to pick over any and all possible loopholes, and Gore said he'd sue before accepting the recount result. And last of came the Palm Beach farce. Gore was more concerned about 20 thousand ballots there than 120 thousand in Cook County in Illinois. When the Guardian of Democracy realised he might lose this automatic recount too, he decided to have Democrat officials in four extremely Democratic counties demand hand recounts. Meanwhile, President Bush missed every deadline to demand hand recounts in Republican counties.

 

If Al Gore feels he lost "unfairly" even after all that, all I have to say is this: it couldn't have happened to a nicer guy.

[Guest Mole]

I know he won, he did get the electoral college votes.

 

I just find it funny that he didn't win the popular vote, that's all.

Did you also find it "funny" when Clinton was elected without a majority of the popular vote?

What the fuck are you talking about? Clinton won the popular vote in both of his elections.

 

In 1992:

 

William J. Clinton - 44,909,889

George H. Bush - 39,104,545

H. Ross Perot - 19,742,267

 

In 1996:

William J. Clinton - 47,402,357

Robert J. Dole - 39,198,755

H. Ross Perot - 8,085,402

 

So where did Clinton loose the popular vote? If you mean won by the majority of the vote, at least 50%, I wasn't talking about that. The last President who won the majority of the popular vote was Regan in 1984. But I believe you were talking about who won the majority of the vote, who had more popular votes.

 

I was talking about how Bush didn't have more popular votes than Gore.

Gore had 50,992,335 PV - 266 EC

Bush had 50,455,156 PV - 271 EC

 

The last time the President who won didn't have more popular vote, but won the electoral college, was in 1888 when Grover Cleveland lost to Benjamin Harrison.

 

If your going to say something, make sure you do your research.

[Guest Olympic Slam]

Ambassador Carol Moseley Braun - She's just there to make a statement, not a legit candidate

Governor Howard Dean - The guy talks like a total Marxist

Senator John Edwards - He's got nothing to run on

Congressman Dick Gephardt - I just can't see any of his lame "socialist-lite" issues coming anywhere close to what Bush has on his resume already

Senator Bob Graham - Not exactly electric

Senator John Kerry - The guy comes off incredibly stern. He looks like a Frankenstein. Politically I think he has a shot

Congressman Dennis Kucinich - That sound from the left you're hearing is not the call of owls but many asking "who?"

Senator Joe Lieberman - Has a chance if he plays up his "Bush-like" agenda

Reverend Al Sharpton - Tawana Brawley is the start of a very long list

[Guest Cancer Marney]

If your going to say something, make sure you do your research.

"You're."

 

I know my history quite well, thanks, and yes, I was referring to a majority of the popular vote. Of course, that isn't relevant either, is it? - since the Union is comprised of STATES, which have rights within said Union, which are in turn protected from the vagaries of population trends by the Electoral College and the Senate.

 

Did you also find it "funny" when Clinton was elected without a majority of the popular vote?

(emphasis added)

So where did Clinton loose the popular vote? If you mean won by the majority of the vote, at least 50%

I never said Clinton lost the popular vote. If you're going to say something, make sure you can read.

 

PS. "Lose."

[Guest Mole]

By would I find it "funny" when Clinton didn't win the majority of vote? I find it "funny" that Bush didn't win the popular vote, but won the election. The electoral college is only around because the founding fathers didn't think the people could pick a correct canidate, so they had a back system. The EC isn't needed anymore, in my opinion. Basically, I am saying that Bush shouldn't be President because more people voted for Gore. That is all.

 

So where did Clinton loose the popular vote? If you mean won by the majority of the vote, at least 50%

(emphasis added)

 

And if we are going to get anal about grammar, it's composed not comprised.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

By would I find it "funny" when Clinton didn't win the majority of vote? I find it "funny" that Bush didn't win the popular vote, but won the election. The electoral college is only around because the founding fathers didn't think the people could pick a correct canidate

Nonsense. As I said, the Electoral College, like the Senate, exists to preserve the rights of the several States and Commonwealths which comprise the Union. As for finding it "funny" that Clinton didn't win a majority of the popular vote, I don't know why you would. I don't. I also don't find it funny that the President didn't win the popular vote FOR THE SAME REASON. It isn't relevant. It never has been relevant. It never will be relevant. It never should be relevant.

 

And if we are going to get anal about grammar, it's composed not comprised.

 

Main Entry: com·prise

Pronunciation: k&m-'prIz

Function: transitive verb

Inflected Forms: com·prised; com·pris·ing

1. to include especially within a particular scope

2. to be made up of

3. COMPOSE, CONSTITUTE

 

The words are direct synonyms. You're wrong again.

[Guest Mole]

Nonsense. As I said, the Electoral College, like the Senate, exists to preserve the rights of the States and Commonwealths which comprise the Union. As for finding it "funny" that Clinton didn't win a majority of the popular vote, I don't know why you would. I don't. I also don't find it funny that the President didn't win the popular vote FOR THE SAME REASON. It isn't relevant. It never has been relevant. It never will be relevant.

It is relevant in my mind because the President DIDN'T win the election that way. More people voted for Gore than Bush, so I think it is revlevant. Yes, I know the EC says who wins what election, but I think it is dumb. They won't ever get rid of it, but I think it serves little purpose. People don't really care about state rights anymore, atleast the people I know. Nor have I read that the people care about state rights anymore, maybe they do, I just haven't heard of it.

 

Main Entry: com·prise

Pronunciation: k&m-'prIz

Function: transitive verb

Inflected Forms: com·prised; com·pris·ing

1. to include especially within a particular scope

2. to be made up of

3. COMPOSE, CONSTITUTE

 

The words are direct synonyms. You're wrong again.

Actually, I'm not wrong because if they are synonyms, then they both can be used.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Actually, I'm not wrong because if they are synonyms, then they both can be used.

You are wrong because you denied that one of them could be used.

 

As for the rest of it, I'm not going to bother. The people you know don't care about States rights? Well then, I guess it's time to throw away the Constitution.

 

 

 

</eyeroll>