Support NeoGAF

[Cloudy]

This is pretty sad. You guys can't admit Bush simply got OWNED

 

[Hitokage]

Kerry doesn't need to use cheat sheets. He can go on and on about issues without aid as it is, and frequently gets criticized for it.

 

[DrLazy]

I think a lot of the Republican attack ads came back to bite them.

They said: Kerry is a long winded senator who flip flops.

Kerry showed: He can keep it short, consise, and consistant.

In other words, Kerry suprised the shit out of people who expected a man with no beliefs, and what they got was the real John Kerry. Maybe the Repblicans would have been better off actually attacking issues like the war and economy instead of just chanting "flip flop" over and over.

 

[ConfusingJazz]

http://www.drudgereport.com/dnc57.htm

BOMB BOMB, Kerry potentially cheats during the debate. SHOCK AND AWE!

Could it be *SHOCK* a pen?

 

[Chesapeake Silt]

Hey, if Kerry had been using a cheat sheet, there's no way he would have forgotten about our Mighty Ally Poland. CHEAT SHEET THEORY DISPROVED.

 

[Hitokage]

Hey, if Kerry had been using a cheat sheet, there's no way he would have forgotten about our Mighty Ally Poland. CHEAT SHEET THEORY DISPROVED.

:lol

 

[Incognito]

http://www.drudgereport.com/dnc57.htm

BOMB BOMB, Kerry potentially cheats during the debate. SHOCK AND AWE!

you can be so sad sometimes.

 

[shoplifter]

Could it be *SHOCK* a pen?

Which is technically still against the rules, but just shows how petty it has become.

\/\/ it had to be provided beforehand and placed on the podiums by debate staffers

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

When pressed on the fact that even brandishing a pen from his jacket would have violated debate rules, the Kerry staffer laughed, adding, "See you at the inauguration, Drudge".

My resources are tied up right now so I'm not opening Acrobat... but I'm pretty sure I remember a section about how they could use any type of paper they wanted for note-taking during the debate... and they were obviously writing things all the time... so whaaaa?

 

[The Chosen One]

I think a lot of the Republican attack ads came back to bite them.

They said: Kerry is a long winded senator who flip flops.

Kerry showed: He can keep it short, consise, and consistant.

In other words, Kerry suprised the shit out of people who expected a man with no beliefs, and what they got was the real John Kerry. Maybe the Repblicans would have been better off actually attacking issues like the war and economy instead of just chanting "flip flop" over and over.

Exactly...

The Republican party spent months painting a cartoon-like caricature of Kerry. They took a few characteristics of Kerry and exaggerated them to the tenth degree over and over again. As a result, their portrayal of Kerry was very far from the real Kerry. So when people didn't see a bumbling flip-flopper in the debate, it took a lot of people by surprise and made Kerry look better than it normally would have. Bush's poor showing just made matters worse.

In the final days leading up to the debate, the Bush campaign tried to raise expectations for Kerry at the last minute for the debates. But it was already too late; they spent months and months reducing expectations for Kerry and his reputation to dirt. They're a victim of their own negative campaign.

If they had been concentrating on the issues instead, Kerry wouldn't have taken so many people by surprise last Thursday. Though I'm still amazed at how Bush was just so unprepared. I find it scary that he struggled so much defending his Iraq policy. It's obvious no one in his administration is asking him the hard questions because he honestly looked surprised and offended when Kerry made some tough questions/assertions.

 

[Socreges]

I think Democrats have to be careful about the post debate spin going on. The Republicans are ultra focused on one thing: the "Global Test" remark. On all the cable networks and Sunday news shows they were hammering it home.

What the hell is wrong with:

What prompted Bush’s attack was Kerry’s statement that when the United States goes to war, “you have to do it in a way that passes the test, that passes the global test where your countrymen, your people, understand fully why you're doing what you're doing and you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons.”

Now, I understand that Republicans have leaped on this one thing, spun it, and made it look like Kerry is only concerned about what the rest of the world thinks. But how stupid is the media that they've actually spent time on this story??

 

[3phemeral]

What the hell is wrong with:


Now, I understand that Republicans have leaped on this one thing, spun it, and made it look like Kerry is only concerned about what the rest of the world thinks. But how stupid is the media that they've actually spent time on this story??

I's amazing how it's been taking out of context when all you have to do is read the transcipt, listen to the debate, or actually think to realize it's a non-issue.

 

[OG_Original Gamer]

You know, when I think about the argument thats been brought up for many months, about Kerry and how he plans to handle the Iraq war. Could he be holding on to it for the next debate. How can Bush prepare a rebuttal to something he don't know. Bush got angry and frustrated because he had no easy way rebuttal what Kerry would say, but continue to use the same lines.

Kerry kept his ideas and plans to him through the majority of his campaign making it difficult for Bush to build a response, mainly through his speech righters, I might add.

Everything was a suprise for Bush and had no way to respond.

 

[Banjo Tango]

Kerry kept his ideas and plans to him through the majority of his campaign making it difficult for Bush to build a response, mainly through his speech righters, I might add.

Kerry's had his viewpoints available on his website for months. Maybe he was IP-blocking Rove?

 

[OG_Original Gamer]

Kerry's had his viewpoints available on his website for months. Maybe he was IP-blocking Rove?

I just find it odd that he had no real well thought out responses.

 

[mashoutposse]

http://www.drudgereport.com/dnc57.htm

BOMB BOMB, Kerry potentially cheats during the debate. SHOCK AND AWE!

Bush looks to be getting something from his jacket, too...

 

[Triumph]

I'd like to point out that Raoul Duke, no matter what you say, will not possibly respond with anything to the effect of:

"You make very good points. I think I will abstain from voting for Ralph Nader, as I have loudly trumpeted several times in the past months, and place my vote for one John Kerry!"

I can't imagine ANYONE going back after all of that he's said.

Raoul, what IS your logic? Yes, technically you can vote for whoever you'd like. There are more than two parties. And yes, maybe on some grounds EVERYONE should simply vote for who they feel the best candidate is, regardless of circumstance. But can you explain to me why I shouldn't think that's all irrelevant?

To try and understand where you're coming from, rather than just concluding that you're trying to be different/???????, are you, in effect, voting for 'democracy'? In that, if people continue to vote for who they feel is the best candidate and promote that concept, there is a chance that things could change?

On another note, the Electoral College is retarded.

Uh...

I could care less about being "different". I do have different priorities, though, in what I care about a candidate addressing.

They are:

-The proliferation of Corporate Rule in America.
-The wholesale destruction of the Environment at the hands of Corporate America and the Government.
-The encroaching menace of privitization to several very key facets of the federal government.
-The continued use of a selective interventionist foreign policy. If it is our duty to be the World Police, then we can't pick and choose which calls we respond to. We need to go where we are needed, regardless of the oil reserves involved. The lack of attention paid to Darfur and other atrocities is disgusting.
-Focus on shifting America to the use of non-fossil fuel, renewable energy resources.
-Stopping the erosion of our civil liberties and rights.

Gee, considering that those items are the most important to me, I wonder which candidate I would back? I understand that you're Canadian, so I don't know how much you've kept up with it, but Ralph Nader has taken those concerns and made them his own(well, they really were already, but he has campaigned on them when others have not). It's a no-brainer why I support Ralph. He is the only one paying serious attention to the issues that matter to me.

 

[Socreges]

Uh...

I could care less about being "different".

You misunderstand. I said "rather than concluding...", addressing the fact that a lot of people say that.

I do have different priorities, though, in what I care about a candidate addressing.

They are:

-The proliferation of Corporate Rule in America.
-The wholesale destruction of the Environment at the hands of Corporate America and the Government.
-The encroaching menace of privitization to several very key facets of the federal government.
-The continued use of a selective interventionist foreign policy. If it is our duty to be the World Police, then we can't pick and choose which calls we respond to. We need to go where we are needed, regardless of the oil reserves involved. The lack of attention paid to Darfur and other atrocities is disgusting.
-Focus on shifting America to the use of non-fossil fuel, renewable energy resources.
-Stopping the erosion of our civil liberties and rights.

Gee, considering that those items are the most important to me, I wonder which candidate I would back? I understand that you're Canadian, so I don't know how much you've kept up with it, but Ralph Nader has taken those concerns and made them his own(well, they really were already, but he has campaigned on them when others have not). It's a no-brainer why I support Ralph. He is the only one paying serious attention to the issues that matter to me.

How is that a reply to my post? I don't doubt that you like Nader more than any other candidate.

 

[Triumph]

Ok. Is your question "what is your logic"?

Well, my logic would be to choose the candidate that is actively campaigning to bring attention to the issues that are of the most importance to me. That candidate is Ralph Nader. Case closed. In my opinion, he's not just the best man for the job that's actively campaigning for it, he's the best man for the job, period.

Was that your question?

 

[ConfusingJazz]

Why was this unstickied, there are 2 more presidential, and 1 vp debate left (which is Tuesday).

 

[Socreges]

Ok. Is your question "what is your logic"?

Well, my logic would be to choose the candidate that is actively campaigning to bring attention to the issues that are of the most importance to me. That candidate is Ralph Nader. Case closed. In my opinion, he's not just the best man for the job that's actively campaigning for it, he's the best man for the job, period.

Was that your question?

If you plan on going to the ballots, then I figure you think your vote matters. Your purpose seems to be a novelty to me. That's why I posed:

Are you, in effect, voting for 'democracy'? In that, if people continue to vote for who they feel is the best candidate and promote that concept, there is a chance that things could change?

So that's why JoshuaJSlone, for instance, is voting for Nader. And I can understand that.

 

[Raven.]

Ugh. Yeah. I have the option to write in any candidate(or non-candidate! I could write in your name, but the apparent lack of knowledge you have about the inner workings of our electoral system, in addition to the fact that you're probably all of 19, give me pause...), any how, I have the option to write in ANY CANDIDATE'S name because I only have two choices. There are at least 3 candidates listed on my ballot initially because ONLY TWO of them are available to vote for. You need to realize that you are LOGICALLY INCORRECT, sir.


I just did! Holy monkey! You really don't know much about the finer workings of logic, do you? Ability to vote for any candidate, even if they aren't Kerry, does not = vote for Bush. Vote for Bush = vote for Bush. Seriously. You don't want to try and use logic to make your emotional, talking point fueled arguments against me.

You misunderstood or in honesty I might've mistated, that's all. You can write Michael Jackson, Madonna, Dohn King, whatever... in reality there are two "REAL" CHOICES, whatever you do UNLESS some miracle takes place your action will result in the election of EITHER BUSH OR KERRY, as has been said. That's it, and your present course, is just improving Bush's odds, whether you accept it or not.

Logic is on my side, not yours. The operations of the electoral system are on my side, not yours. And ultimately, truth is on my side, not yours.

Sadly, the only reason that may be is cause I left the word "REAL" out by mistake, but now that it's in I can say NOPE try again(that was what I intended, and could be deduced from my paragraphs back then, but any case here it's clarified). Whether you like it or not, any additional option that's on your ballot might as well not be there. IT IS NOT A REALISTIC CHOICE, it ACHIEVES NOTHING. THUS YOU'RE DOING NOTHING, If you're not going to do anything to stop BUSH, then if he's elected know that you did nothing. When the supreme court's filled with scalias KNOW IT WAS YOU WHO IN PART CONTRIBUTED TO SUCH A THING TAKING PLACE BY DOING PRACTICALLY NOTHING TO STOP IT.

Again, I could draw on the ballot, and eat it, or burn it, or do an INFINITY OF THINGS TO IT, none of those are going to do anything with regards to the election. IN THIS ELECTION THERE ARE ONLY TWO REAL CHOICES, that is TWO CHOICES THAT WILL LEAD TO A PARTICULAR OUTCOME. Voting for Yojimbo, will do nothing with regards to this election.

And let me say, that what one bad man does(Bush) is not going to be noticeably worse than what a mediocre man(Kerry) will do in the same instance.

.
LOL, you don't get it do you the supreme court's supposed to get up to four free slots, and we've heard the kind of judge Bush wants there.

Hah, the important thing here are the courts, do we want scalias or human judges. If you think people who believe GOD is the source of their power, that CHILDREN CAN BE SENT TO DEATH, and that evidence subsequent to the initial trial CAN BE DISMISSED, THE CONSTITUTION IS FLEXIBLE AND IS NOT THE FINAL WORD, I hope you can understand the gravity of filling the supreme court with such.... If neo-cons manage TO SOMEHOW PASS some of the sh!t they'll try to pass again, stuff like more PATRIOT ACT extensions, stuff like more MARRIAGE AMENDMENTS, and other attempts at entering BIGOTRY IN OUR LAWS, the constitution restoration act( aka theocracy USA 200X bill). WHO? WHO? WHO?

WHO will be there to say it's unconstitutional? You think a bunch of dominionist zealot judges are gonna turn down a theocracy bill? You think if say 2-3 or god forbid FOUR judges the likes of scalia make it into the supreme they'll do some good? For one thing they'll make abortion illegal, civilian rights will go to hell, and the constitution itself will be in jeopardy(religious zealots filling all branches)....

Why would someone who doesn't like John Kerry or think he'd do a satisfactory job as President vote for him?

COUGH COUGH BUSH's SAID he finds the likes of scalia exemplary, after all my examples MY GOD, you realize the consequences of filling the supreme with the like of scalia!!!! A court filled with the likes of that man, is the same as the undoing of the constitution and democracy, human rights, the environment....

From a literal point of view, Raoul is 100% correct: A vote for Nader is NOT a vote for Bush.

That's if we ignore DIEBOLD, the media's nice support, and the fact that this is a close election and thus Bush seems likely to win in this close election. Unless we do what we can to give a candidate a significant enough advantage over him.

But how stupid is the media that they've actually spent time on this story??

A lot of it is pro-Bush, if you've not noticed... "look fat boy cnn", so that you may see how abominable things are behind the scenes.

I'm sorry but I'll say it again, there are two choices for america to fill the supreme court with insane religious zealots of the highest kind, which will demolish the law, abolish human rights, make abortion illegal, and who will do all in their power to bring forth bigotry, or a less evil court. IT's your choice, the window is open, and you can throw your rights out the window, now choose!!!( of course we could get some miracle, if God is merciful and americans allow the former to become viable.)

 

[MetatronM]

New polls out, if anybody cares.

 

[Triumph]

Edit: this post was obviously addressed to devius whatever the fuck his name is. I'm fucked on painkillers right now, it's not my job to remember all that. It's my job to type legibly, and I'm acquitting myself admirably.

Good. Great. Grand. All of that will make real, Freedom and Liberty loving Americans wake the hell up and realize that they need to put some hot lead in people that aren't in foreign countries for the Union to perservere. I'm down for Revolution in the Street, you don't sound like you can hack it, pink boy.

Things are going to get worse before they get better, period. If Kerry is elected, the process gets drawn out. If Bush gets re-elected, the process is accelerated. Have no doubt that it is inexorable, and that when the Revolutione comes, many will be called and few chosen. Water and bullets will be the most valuable currency for decades, and women and livestock will step tenderly around the menfolks, if you know what I'm saying.

So buck up, little trooper. Strap your jock on and be a man about this. The world is not going to end if Bush gets re-elected, and humanity won't be magically saved if Kerry is elected. They're both flawed, one is just obviously moreso than the other. Neither is worthy of leading this nation anywhere, even down to the corner store for a red bull and a pack of smokes(which will also be currency in Civil War part deux... trust me. I know a guy). In the end, a massive amount of humanity will have to pay the ultimate price. It's always that way when history makes a massive shift towards something new. Just be prepared. I reserve the right to say "I told you so", fella.

Res Ipsa Loquitor, my good man. Glad to be of service, but I have to pass out due to the downers I've ingested for the next 10 hours of so. Think about what I said, and then do youself a service and invest in some shooting irons for when the going gets weird, ok bubba?

Ok. Good.

-Raoul Duke

 

[duderon]

Edit: this post was obviously addressed to devius whatever the fuck his name is. I'm fucked on painkillers right now, it's not my job to remember all that. It's my job to type legibly, and I'm acquitting myself admirably.

Good. Great. Grand. All of that will make real, Freedom and Liberty loving Americans wake the hell up and realize that they need to put some hot lead in people that aren't in foreign countries for the Union to perservere. I'm down for Revolution in the Street, you don't sound like you can hack it, pink boy.

Things are going to get worse before they get better, period. If Kerry is elected, the process gets drawn out. If Bush gets re-elected, the process is accelerated. Have no doubt that it is inexorable, and that when the Revolutione comes, many will be called and few chosen. Water and bullets will be the most valuable currency for decades, and women and livestock will step tenderly around the menfolks, if you know what I'm saying.

So buck up, little trooper. Strap your jock on and be a man about this. The world is not going to end if Bush gets re-elected, and humanity won't be magically saved if Kerry is elected. They're both flawed, one is just obviously moreso than the other. Neither is worthy of leading this nation anywhere, even down to the corner store for a red bull and a pack of smokes(which will also be currency in Civil War part deux... trust me. I know a guy). In the end, a massive amount of humanity will have to pay the ultimate price. It's always that way when history makes a massive shift towards something new. Just be prepared. I reserve the right to say "I told you so", fella.

Res Ipsa Loquitor, my good man. Glad to be of service, but I have to pass out due to the downers I've ingested for the next 10 hours of so. Think about what I said, and then do youself a service and invest in some shooting irons for when the going gets weird, ok bubba?

Ok. Good.

-Raoul Duke

Can I be on your team?

 

[Triumph]

Can I be on your team?

Sure 'nough, my man! It doesn't even matter if you're handy with the shooting irons, we're all about proper training here. Just remember, value live ammunition and bottled water like it was the family jewels, and don't descend to the level of a savage beast. We'll ride this storm out and come out with guns blazing, thundering across the plains like the Mongol hordes of yore, conquering all who oppose true liberty under our banner.

Yeah. Or words to that effect. Damn klonopin.

OK GOODNIGHT KIDDIES!

 

[Raven.]

This is serious, my friend. To give you an example of what I mean, suppose I hacked your pc and filled it with some terrorist info, and I left a few terrorist plans and bomb material in your house and called the fbi from a public phone anonymously. Unlike other forms of incrimination, you may not get a trial, you may be taken outside the country and tortured for who knows how many years, or worse. THOSE MY FRIEND THOSE ARE YOUR RIGHTS THEY'VE been thrown into a garbage bag, and tossed out the window.

Environmental rules deregulated, Diebold pretty much left unchecked(with funding provided for upgrades nationwide), goverment market rules loosened, many areas of the gov underfunded, huge deficit... all that is coming back, and on top of that the courts will be in their hands... have a nice day, as what little you've got left is put in jeopardy or worse... have a TRULY nice day.

IT'd take something out of this world to give us something even remotely close to the horrible mess we're in.