Skip to content

OUR FUTURE, WE NORTH AMERICANS...

Archived

71 replies · 1,032 views

This is an archived legacy thread. Replies are closed, but the discussion is preserved.

Originally posted by Tristan > Originally posted by Darth CHUNKS > Originally posted by Tristan> > > > > > > Originally posted by Uncle Liam> > Bush came too close to losing considering his sizeable lead over Kerry.>

At one point sure, but this was before more than half of the total votes had been reported by individule districts. And when said and done, he did pretty well with many more popular votes and electoral votes than anyone [except me] predicted. 284 electoral votes ain't that shabby!He should have has 300! Hell he was able to get 269+ when he lost by 500,000!

Woulda, Shoulda, Coulda...bur remember, there is NO WAY IN HELL that a majority of Cali or NY would EVER vote for Bush or any Republic similar to Bush in our lifetime. Those states are just too traditional in their liberal ideals to lean to the right. The coasts have typically been that way and rarely do Republicans see that kind of shift in point to their favor. Paradigms like that and traditional values are just too difficult to break, regardless as to whether or not Bush should have gotten 300.

0 likes

Au contraire! It's not been a very long time since when Cali was a more right leaning state. If Bush can make more inroads with the Latino population (through religion), it would not be any stretch of the mind to see a Repub get propelled into the White House by Cali electoral votes. Look at the votes in CA county by county and see how many Bush won.

0 likes

Funny how the Red vs Blue breakdown for California nearly mirrors that of the nation. Coast for Kerry...Heartland for Bush.

Same was for Ah-Nold vs Bustamonte (sp?) as well.

Just thought that was intersting.

0 likes

Originally posted by Darth CHUNKS OK then....6. There are nearly 300 million Americans -- 200 million of them of voting age. We only lost by three and a half million!

A--hem!! It seems he didn't wait for a mojority of the outstanding baloots to come in, did he? Let's see, I think as of this morning he was off by about 4 million. Oh yeah...he's credible.

CNN and NY Times both report a 3.5 million vote difference.

0 likes

Originally posted by twist If the Democrats want the White House then they need to stop being the party of Freaks--welfare moms, gehtto people, gays and those that want to live off the State.

Just to be clear: you're saying that people who are born with a different sexual orientation than your own are "freaks"? You're saying that poor people, or as you refer to them "ghetto people," are freaks? Women who are deserted by the father of their children-- "freaks"?

Its not that 59 million right wing Christian wackos voted for Bush, it's the fact that the Party got its ass kicked everywhere but Hawaii and Chicago. Afrika Bambatta or who ever from Illinois that beat carpetbagger Alan Keyes is not the answer. The Demos need a more moderate message and commitment.

Don't forget California. And Oregon. Washington. New York. And all the other states that voted Kerry-- 252 electoral votes in all. But nice use of racist imagery with the references to the "ghetto people" freaks and "Afrika Bambatta." I'm sure it plays well in the red states.

59 million Americans are not right wing gun nuts that want abortion banned and school prayer.

59 million? No, that's unlikely. But a significant percentage-- yes, that is verifiable.

They are people that would rather stick with the status quo risk 4 years of an extreme liberal that cannot take a position without flip flopping,

Bush propaganda.

By the way, anybody care to claim that Bush hasn't "flip-flopped"?

someone that although a war hero became a traitor then denied it and fought to suppress the opinion and voice of those that said he was a traitor, a Senator who's voting record completely denies his campaign promises. Yes, Clinton is more trustworthy in a motel full of fat horney interns than Kerry is at his word.

Are you sure you're an American? Because you seem to be equating exercise of the First Amendment with traitorous behavior. You seem to be saying that questioning the policies of the government is traitorous behavior.

Until the inner city population out numbers the rest of the nation big liberals will never win. Americans not living in NYC, Chicago et al want less government, want to keep the money they earn (lower taxes) want to keep their guns (most gun crimes committed by those that own them illegally or would have voted for Democratic), do not believe gays should be allowed to marry and believe that Welfare has failed.

One of us uses drugs (criminal behavior, by the way), the other doesn't. I don't use drugs.

Which is why I don't make statements like "most gun crimes committed by those that...would have voted for Democratic [sic]."

Maybe you should re-think the drug use?

Sure Bush got us in this damn war but 59 million Americans did not think that the anti-Defense and anti-CIA Kerry would be better to end this mess. Sure the Recession that cursed the Nation early in Bush's watch hurt but America rejected the Democratic solution.

Interesting that somebody at the White House (**cough**Karl Rove**cough**) outs a CIA agent (a crime, by the way), and Kerry is the one who's "anti-CIA." Interesting that Bush lies about CIA intelligence he's received, subsequently blames the CIA for not giving him good intelligence, and Kerry's the one who's "anti-CIA."

Americans want less government, want to keep their money, and want a strong defense.

So they voted for the candidate who wants to shift the tax system from an income-based tax to a wage-based tax. And they voted for the candidate who saddled their children and grandchildren with historic levels of debt. And they voted for the candidate who has dramatically increased government intrusion into their lives. And they voted for the candidate who has so stretched the capacity of our armed forces that we're relying on under-equipped National Guard units to occupy an oil rich country.

0 likes

Too bad one of the Republicans' major spokesmen is such a pussy :evil4: :

0 likes

Originally posted by Darth CHUNKS 2. Bush's victory was the NARROWEST win for a sitting president since Woodrow Wilson in 1916.

This only refers to the Electoral votes...a silly concept that may have made senes before we were all thought of, but scary one today.

Hmmm...and 4 years ago, the Right was bitching about how Gore supporters kept "yammering" about how Bush had lost the popular but won the electoral...

...I smell a waffle...

0 likes

Originally posted by carroll13 > Originally posted by Darth CHUNKS 2. Bush's victory was the NARROWEST win for a sitting president since Woodrow Wilson in 1916.

This only refers to the Electoral votes...a silly concept that may have made senes before we were all thought of, but scary one today.

Hmmm...and 4 years ago, the Right was bitching about how Gore supporters kept "yammering" about how Bush had lost the popular but won the electoral...

...I smell a waffle...

:scratch: You've no arguement from me on this one Carrol. I was merelt stating that I believe the entire concept to be a bit silly these days.

At any rate...I am done with this stuff. The ballots are [mostly] counted and it's ova...finally!!!!

Now lets get back to important things like picking on NO's choice of singles for Get Ready or something useful!!!

...Mmmmmm...Waffles....:p

0 likes

OK, so far we can agree on melons and waffles. Mmmmmmm. :thumb:

0 likes

Originally posted by bLuE oRdEr OK, so far we can agree on melons and waffles. Mmmmmmm. :thumb:

Melons as is "Juggs" or "Boobies" melons? :eek:

0 likes

:angel2:

0 likes

You're leaving NewOrderOnline

This link goes to an external website we don't operate, which has its own privacy policy and terms.

Destination:
Continue ↗