Support NeoGAF

[weehomer]

Vote for Nader. PEACE.

Yep. World OWNED.

 

[Alcibiades]

ROFL! Sure that wasn't a Fox News poll?

actually, Fox News's latest poll is the only showing a Bush loss to Kerry, the others have Bush ahead or even.

 

[Alcibiades]

That's odd. FOX News reported something like 49% Bush and 45% Kerry as of now, and also CNN has a different set of numbers. Who to trust!

the 49%-45% are daily tracking polls by another pollster (this thread was based on numbers from TIME magazine's polls.

You can look at that data here, it's the first time since April that Bush has been up by that much I think:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Presidential_Tracking_Poll.htm

Also, for a general overview of polls, including the Zogby one (famously, Zogby is the only one to have polled the 2000 election PERFECT, with a one-point spread win by Al Gore). Everyone else had ties or slight Bush leads.

Go here for the overview of different polls (and converservative analysis as well):

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/

 

[Leon]

*Adds "People like Halo" to list of reasons he doesn't want Bush to win.*


This isn't a game, man...

 

[Socreges]

actually, Fox News's latest poll is the only showing a Bush loss to Kerry, the others have Bush ahead or even.

FOX News must be trying to rile the herd.

YOU'RE OBVIOUSLY NOT CHANTING LOUD ENOUGH, PEOPLE. FOUR MORE YEARS! LET US HEAR IT!

 

[DJ Sl4m]

Halo: It makes you a lot of things, but not a victim. I don't know why anyone is gonna vote for Bush. But I don't know why anyone would vote for Kerry either, besides the fact that he's not Bush. Vote for Nader. PEACE.

But Nader has almost no chance, to make your vote actually count picking the lesser of the 2 main candidates it the only option.

But as a side note, it's a shame that here we are AGAIN with 2 shitty people running for president, that's the second in a row.

I don't like Bush, but I really don't like Kerry either.

I really wish (although it was a rather longshot at the time) John McCain was running, it would be a very clearcut decision for me, and someone I can agree with without thinking he's lying to my face to get my vote. He's one of the few politicians I have full respect for, and that's not due to the RNC recently, I've been behind him when he started his campaign last go round.

 

[Ryck]

Im not left or right......Im just not....and I actually wanted Bush to win four years ago, but how can anyone with any bit of common sense want him in office for four more years. At least with kerry it's change and right now change is not only importnant it's neccessary..I mean we know what's going to happen if Bush stays in office ( who wants the last four years to repeat themselves and or get worse) ......

 

[Phoenix]

Wake me when they release a new electoral college poll. That's all that matters

 

[DJ Sl4m]

.I mean we know what's going to happen if Bush stays in office ( who wants the last four years to repeat themselves and or get worse) ......

Um no we don't, please tell me so I know too.
We know now that he had a short fuse for Saddam when he went into office, he sent troops into Iraq and made a clean sweep of the country, and are now trying to keep it secure untill it's turned over.

But now that the harms done, and his vengence is settled, it's not like he's going to atack Iraq again, the scores already settled.

So really, (and I'm not trying to sound dry, that's just how I come off at times) what can we really expect from him if he wins again ?
*This is an honest question, not trying to be arrogant or sarcastic*

 

[Alcibiades]

Republican leaders in the Senate have already said that there is no way that there would be any action against Iran/North Korea in a 2nd Bush administration. They want to work those out diplomatically. Iran isn't exactly practicing kill-your-own-people by the numbers Saddam was, so the case would not be justified unless Europe went totally along.

North Korea is a bomb waiting to explode though. Anything, BUT a diplomatic conclusion would destroy 1/3 of South Korea's economies and have up to 1 million dead in the first 2 hours of war.

 

[Ryck]

Um no we don't, please tell me so I know too.
We know now that he had a short fuse for Saddam when he went into office, he sent troops into Iraq and made a clean sweep of the country, and are now trying to keep it secure untill it's turned over.

But now that the harms done, and his vengence is settled, it's not like he's going to atack Iraq again, the scores already settled.

So really, (and I'm not trying to sound dry, that's just how I come off at times) what can we really expect from him if he wins again ?
*This is an honest question, not trying to be arrogant or sarcastic*

Lies , oil wars, bad economy, lies, fear...., Don't get me wrong we're screwed either way....but seriously this guy is very obviously bad for the country...No I don't know exactly what's gonna happen but really who wants to, the guy has proven he's not a good president.

 

[Poody]

I'm pretty sure the U.S has setup many defenses in S.Korea, just recently U.S sent the most advnace defense money can buy to the South. It would be very difficult for N.Korea to hit targets let alone major cities.

 

[Alcibiades]

Lies , oil wars, bad economy, lies, fear...., Don't get me wrong we're screwed either way....but seriously this guy is very obviously bad for the country...No I don't know exactly what's gonna happen but really who wants to, the guy has proven he's not a good president.

He isn't KING of the US, he's President. He's powers are actually pretty limited (like war needs approval by Congress), and the Senate (even in Republican hands) is so middle-of-the-road, he could only do massive bad things with approval from elected representatives and the Senate.

 

[Alcibiades]

I'm pretty sure the U.S has setup many defenses in S.Korea, just recently U.S sent the most advnace defense money can buy to the South. It would be very difficult for N.Korea to hit targets let alone major cities.

I really doubt North Korea would miss. I would pray that they do, but they've got a huge arsenal, they could just go bonkers and use everything up as their leader goes desperate.

 

[capslock]

So, is this kinda like the 'double digit' lead that Gore opened up against Bush in 2000 after the Democratic Convention?

 

[Ryck]

He isn't KING of the US, he's President. He's powers are actually pretty limited (like war needs approval by Congress), and the Senate (even in Republican hands) is so middle-of-the-road, he could only do massive bad things with approval from elected representatives and the Senate.

Well the lies worked out well the first time...I see what your saying but If I had told you this four years ago, would your answer have been the same>?

 

[Alcibiades]

Well the lies worked out well the first time...I see what your saying but If I had told you this four years ago, would your answer have been the same>?

not really, the major thing is basically the invasion of Iraq, and Clinton-Blair did do some action on that, plus Gore voted for the war in '91, so basically, one could have concluded that either way, Iraq was just a looming situation.

I've seen Iraq as a situation since a long time ago, way before the 2000 election. Authorizing an invasion by the Senate didn't wouldn't have seemed to out-of-line, regardless of 9/11 happening or not.

 

[Matt]

I'm pretty sure the U.S has setup many defenses in S.Korea, just recently U.S sent the most advnace defense money can buy to the South. It would be very difficult for N.Korea to hit targets let alone major cities.

You are vary, very wrong. North Korea has one of the largest standing armies in the world. It has thousands of pieces of artillery points at Soul as we speak, not to mention ballistic missiles that could be used against SK, Japan, and even the US if given a reason. They also have nuclear weapons. North Korea is a monster, and a war with the south would cost millions of lives, including Americans. Don’t be naive.

 

[Ryck]

not really, the major thing is basically the invasion of Iraq, and Clinton-Blair did do some action on that, plus Gore voted for the war in '91, so basically, one could have concluded that either way, Iraq was just a looming situation.

I've seen Iraq as a situation since a long time ago, way before the 2000 election. Authorizing an invasion by the Senate didn't wouldn't have seemed to out-of-line, regardless of 9/11 happening or not.

9/11 had what to do with Iraq? either way he invaded it because of wmd's which didn't even exist he lied, most people (that aren't blindly right wing) see right through his bullshit, we invaded Iraq for oil period. Those who stood to gain gained, the soldiers died and we're all confused about the truth and suffering a slow economy....gotta love politics.....the democrats will come into power and do something wrong as well and so it goes, in circles forever.....its like arguing religion at this point it's so out of our hands. Someone said early "whoever wins we lose"....correct !

 

[DJ Sl4m]

9/11 had what to do with Iraq? either way he invaded it because of wmd's which didn't even exist he lied, most people (that aren't blindly right wing) see right through his bullshit, we invaded Iraq for oil period. Those who stood to gain gained, the soldiers died and we're all confused about the truth and suffering a slow economy....gotta love politics.....the democrats will come into power and do something wrong as well and so it goes, in circles forever.....its like arguing religion at this point it's so out of our hands. Someone said early "whoever wins we lose"....correct !

I agree with all of that, but the unproven oil theory.

 

[Flynn]

the thought of bush getting a second term makes baby jesus cry.

Correct. Jesus was a liberal.

 

[GG-Duo]

Correct. Jesus was a liberal.

Very true.

Actually, in my own (perhaps stereotypical view), fundamental Christianity seems to have stepped away from what Jesus taught.

World owned.

;_;

 

[FightyF]

BUSH: 52% KERRY: 41% NADER: 3%

Western Civilization...

 

[Hitokage]

Wake me when they release a new electoral college poll. That's all that matters

Indeed. How quickly people forget that national majority vote does not select the president... otherwise it would be President Gore.

What matters are individual state polls and electoral math. Now, certain states are currently too close to call, but Bush has had a small, but winning lead for the past week. The true effect of the RNC as it pertains to the actual election has yet to be seen.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

Republican leaders in the Senate have already said that there is no way that there would be any action against Iran/North Korea in a 2nd Bush administration. They want to work those out diplomatically.

I'd hope that to be true, but then the Bush administration made comments early on about how Saddam was a contained threat. A lot can happen in a few years.

 

[Fresh Prince]

Something tells me the rest of the world will hate america no matter who we elect.

IAWTP, but Kerry would be the less of two evils.
If it didn't matter so much I would love to see everybody's reaction when Bush (probably) wins.
You know I think riots would actually break out.....

 

[NLB2]

He isn't KING of the US, he's President. He's powers are actually pretty limited (like war needs approval by Congress), and the Senate (even in Republican hands) is so middle-of-the-road, he could only do massive bad things with approval from elected representatives and the Senate.

Pehraps the senate is middle of the road, but there an entirely different class from people like you. Sure, the might be middle of the road on things that really don't matter much to them like abortion, homosexual rights, etc. But when it comes to things that involve money, they'll gladly send people to there death. Ask yourself, how many wars that the United States has fought in have been for national defense and how many of those wars have been for money?

 

[Guileless]

All that really matters is Ohio, Florida, and Pennsylvania. Whoever wins 2 of those 3 is president. Everything else is more or less spoken for.

 

[Saint Cornelius]

Why some of you like Bush is just... amazing.

I don't like Kerry, to be perfectly honest... but to let Bush be the leader of the "free world" for another four years is just too horrifying to put into words.

I guess your allowance goes up when your parents get tax breaks?

 

[doncale]

Bush is no more of a liar than Kerry is.

if Kerry wins, things will get MUCH MUCH worse in all likelihood, as they have been ever since Reagan left office.

at least with Bush, we know what we are getting.

 

[Subitai]

Still tons of time for things to go worse in Iraq, bad employment numbers, and a sinking stock market.

The race really depends on how things are the end of Oct.

 

[ErasureAcer]

As a Nader and Kucinich supporter, in terms of ideology...I'm voting for...Kerry.

I really can't stand Bush...and Kerry isn't better or worse on foreign policy...but I think Kerry does have a better plan domestically and if he gets a decent congress...somethings might actually get done in washington(healthcare, funding education).

I'm also in a swing state...Minnesota...so...Kerry is going to get my vote.

There is no way in hell that Bush is going to win this election without cheating...unless the people of America are just completely moronic...in that case...let's all just die and do the human race a favor. k?

 

[Celicar]

bush rules

 

[duderon]

Bush is no more of a liar than Kerry is.

if Kerry wins, things will get MUCH MUCH worse in all likelihood, as they have been ever since Reagan left office.

at least with Bush, we know what we are getting.

What is it that Kerry has lied about? His war record? Nope. Kerry's the one that has documentation from the US Navy on his record in Vietnam. The swift boat vets are spewing shit they made up, they are lying just like Bush.

You have no idea how Kerry will do when in office. Bush has fucked up pretty much everything, it's time for a change.

 

[GaimeGuy]

Why does that poll say that Minnesota has Kerry barely winning against bush, when this state has pretty much ALWAYS been clearly democratic, and seemingly EVERYONE in Minnesota hates Bush?

 

[Semjaza Azazel]

if Kerry wins, things will get MUCH MUCH worse in all likelihood, as they have been ever since Reagan left office.

My father believes this as well and I'd like to know what exactly leads people to think this. People act as if he has no political record and no instances where he had to make decisions.

All I hear anymore is either "I just don't like Kerry" or "He's not a good leader". It's not as if Bush is on the front lines directing our troops. All he's led us to is a war he doesn't actively have to participate in in any way.

True, a lot of Kerry's platform is really just "I'm not Bush", but to think that's all there is to it is rather odd.

at least with Bush, we know what we are getting.

Yeah, that's always a good reason.

 

[Triumph]

Things are going to get much worse before they get any better, friends.

My dream scenario would have Kerry taking everything Gore took in 2000, and adding West Virginia and New Hampshire. That would give both candidates 269 electoral college votes, each 1 short of the 270 needed for victory. The election would then be thrown into the House of Representatives to be decided, and Bush would win due to the Republican majority there. This would cause American Civil War Part Deux, methinks. At least it should, and I will be there on opening day of the War with my "John Titor was right" shirt, smirking like an asshole who knows he's about to get shot.

 

[Piecake]

The reason that they probably think MN will be close is because it was really close between Bush and Gore. I think many expects think that MN is becoming more Republican due to the close race in 2000. But, i dont think Bush will win MN, because i think MN has voted for a Democratic president every single time since Wilson, and the vast majority of people i have talked to are voting for Kerry. We were the only state to Vote for Walter Mondale, lol.

 

[Che]

bush rules

 

[nathkenn]

F Bush, i've never once been included in any of these "polls" that are always used for just about everything, they are bs

 

[Pimpwerx]

I really wish (although it was a rather longshot at the time) John McCain was running, it would be a very clearcut decision for me, and someone I can agree with without thinking he's lying to my face to get my vote. He's one of the few politicians I have full respect for, and that's not due to the RNC recently, I've been behind him when he started his campaign last go round.

Damn straight. McCain >>>>>>> Kerry >>>>> Bush. McCain understands the concept of compromise without compromise. You can find a middle-ground without compromising what you believe in. I like the guy a lot, and would have voted Republican last time if he was the nominee. He was way better than Gore. Too bad we got two turds this time.

I'm voting for Nader. A worthless vote only b/c everyone else is too stupid to follow suit. No offense to the Bush and Kerry fans, but you're fucking nuts. You're selling your vote to the lobbyists that support the two big parties, and as a result, condemning us to another 4-8 years of the same two-party bullshit. You think either party will lift a finger to let in 3rd parties or to fix campaign finance, or social security, or anything like that? Incrementally marginal improvements are all we've gotten and all we'll ever get. I'm voting Nader on blind faith that someone can do better...or at least different. I'd rather try something new and watch it fail than go along with the mediocre status quo.

As for the lead...it's just telling of how much of an assclown Kerry is. The Bush campaign machine is not brilliant in any way. Hell, we all see how much of a failure the guy is as a president and as a person. But people will still vote for him b/c Kerry has failed to distinguish himself in a positive manner. A lame-duck president who's just waiting for the death blow, and Kerry can't finish him off. Pathetic. He's the Dem version of Bob Dole. A loser before he ever won the primaries, and he's gonna lose this November. Thank you New Hampshire...you fucking idiots. Actually, thank you Democratic party, you fucking idiots. Way to fuck up the primary calendar in an attempt to fuck up Dubya, but you only fucked up the party's chance of keeping some dignity this year. Irony at its best.

Anyway, 4 more years of Bush aren't going to be that much worse. They won't be good, and the religious right might take hold of a lot of things. But that's what civil war and me getting the fuck out of this country are for. Should the shit hit the fan, I'm hopping a plan to Europe with my Dominican passport in hand. There are some levels of "freedom" I don't really want, and it looks like that's where we're heading right now. Lots of security and other intrusive forms of monitoring I just don't like. Apparently neo-cons have no problem with Big Government when it's spying on you, or starting ill-conceived wars overseas. Apparently, a huge cash-sink military is not Big Government. Then again, foul concepts like socialism are ok when it pertains to the military. Somehow, we trust our military to control its spending and organization through the use of a socialist system, but we turn around and use said military to combat socialism in the Cold War, and now to spread democracy in the Terror War. Sweet, delicious irony. Nature's nectar. PEACE.

 

[Loki]

Things are going to get much worse before they get any better, friends.

My dream scenario would have Kerry taking everything Gore took in 2000, and adding West Virginia and New Hampshire. That would give both candidates 269 electoral college votes, each 1 short of the 270 needed for victory. The election would then be thrown into the House of Representatives to be decided, and Bush would win due to the Republican majority there. This would cause American Civil War Part Deux, methinks. At least it should, and I will be there on opening day of the War with my "John Titor was right" shirt, smirking like an asshole who knows he's about to get shot.

Please stop it with the "civil war" and "revolution" stuff. To hear you (and a number of other posters on this board) tell it, a second Bush term would (and by implication should) lead to some sort of violent uprising. While I am not a big believer in violent force, I certainly wouldn't be averse to its use under the proper circumstances-- several of which I feel to be extant in our society; the thing is, if the populace has not been lulled out of its complacency by virtue of certain events and trends which have long since come to pass in our government and society, such as the infiltration by monied interests and the seemingly absolute power of the military-industrial complex in terms of shaping foreign "policy", what makes you think that A) a second Bush term will somehow jar them from their slumber, and B) that a mere second term for Bush is somehow worse than these aforementioned events and trends-- worse than the very usurpation of our power and prestige as voters and the attendant loss of rights (overt and covert) which has consequently ensued. What makes you think that a second Bush term is worse than the wholesale hijacking of our entire government, which occurred many years ago with nary a hint of protest? (some of this is due to the surreptitious nature of the takeover, to be sure, but it's still common knowledge that our government is run by money as opposed to our wishes)


If you think that a presidency by either of these two monkeys (Bush or Kerry) really makes a difference in the grand scheme of things, and that somehow this cause is more grave than all which have preceded it, then I have some prime beachfront property that I'm looking to unload. Sure, a second Bush term could possibly serve as the proverbial "straw that broke the camel's back", but given our historical quiescence in the face of outrages far worse than what is currently transpiring, I'd bet against it.


Neither man will change much of anything, and the system is rigged so that those people who would at least try to induce substantive change are effectively (though not explicitly-- that would disrupt our quaint illusion of open democracy) barred from ever attaining office. It's why I don't vote; I just don't believe that the system is looking out for us in any way beyond mere platitudes, soundbytes (sp?), and the occasional bone they toss us in the shape of supposed "reform". And I should prostrate myself before such a sham system, with all its hollow trappings, and lend to it an air of credibility by my participation which it entirely doesn't deserve? I don't think so.


My $.02 -- I've resigned myself to the status quo for the forseeable future, as pusillanimous and defeatist as that perhaps sounds on the surface; it simply gels better with my other beliefs, political and otherwise.

 

[Aurum]

One of the most important things you'll learn in any college statistics class (or AP Statistics in my case) is that telephone polls are one of the worst and most inaccurate ways of conducting surveys. They exclude large demographics of people and generally produce very skewed results. One specific example pertinent to this case would be that the poll excludes (almost entirely poor) people who are forced to work multiple jobs or work shifts outside of the traditional 9-5 slot, skewing results towards Bush. The Gallup polls are usually a much more reliable (and much more respected among the media and political communities) indicator of what the race is currently looking like. The latest Gallup poll (Aug. 26) shows Kerry leading Bush by 1%. Granted this is pre-convention, but even the Time poll was conducted before much of the convention, and comes to early to show the typical convention bump.

 

[AssMan]

Indeed. How quickly people forget that national majority vote does not select the president... otherwise it would be President Gore.

You'd be amaze by how many americans don't know that they really don't elect a president. Electors do.=)