If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Why Bush will be a one-term president.   (story.news.yahoo.com) divider line 215
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

16046 clicks; posted to Main » on 21 Apr 2002 at 4:32 PM (11 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



215 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2002-04-21 09:31:33 PM
(god I have too much free time tonight)

Coelacanth,

While we may be getting there, most people will only notices this once we are way passed that point. How often does the typical middle class person have a run in with the police? I bet the only time most Americans encounter state/federal law enforcement is at the airport. It's going to take a lot of missed flights to get people to become vocal.
 
2002-04-21 09:59:46 PM
since when did yahoo do op peices? since when do they approve this crap
 
2002-04-21 10:11:18 PM
"That's actually a fact. For instance, the average person in the US makes more than the average person in Japan. Yet the average Japanese person has more money in the bank when they retire than the avg American"

And this is why Japan is in the shiatter Deeper than us in teh whole Economy biz! If you haven't noticed Japan is almost in the Great Dipression Terms while The US is starting to hit the regular every 2-4 years a small 2-6 quarter ression.

And to the guy who said Socisim would be great for america, if it did work you would be paying 2-5x as much for products since there is not alot of compition when there is only ONE place to buy things from...The State.
 
2002-04-21 10:13:29 PM
I want one of those fuel-cell cars so we can finally get our big american cock out of the sand, and back into our technology industry's snatch, where it belongs.

Oil's a dead end.
 
2002-04-21 10:15:52 PM
Zoomtown: yeah, his analysis of the Japanese system is a bit flawed, but you confuse what you call "socisim" (the word is "socialism") with communism. Socialism provides aid to the less fortunate members of society yet allows for personal property as well as commerce. Oh, and the USSR was a poor example of this in operation (it was, afterall, a Communism and not a Socialism), so don't even try to bring that one up. If you must post, at least have some idea of what you're posting about. And use spelling that is at least close to correct.
 
2002-04-21 10:16:47 PM
And now for something completely different...


Did you see that tonya harding got arrested for drunk driving the other day, am I the only one here who thinks she's kinda hot? She looked pretty good on celebrity boxing the other night.
 
2002-04-21 10:21:09 PM
And AndrewFish rocks! Best metaphor ever!
 
2002-04-21 10:32:09 PM
If Clinton or Gore were in office, all you terrorist-huggers would be kneeling towards Mecca right now.
 
2002-04-21 10:32:15 PM
As long as the rest of us intelligent Republicans are up against moron Libs like DeLaRocha (man does that Bio read like a cell-mate/follower of Manson), we have nothing to fear.

Man I am so happy that the majority of extreme Lib's live in California... I just hope I live long enough to see the "big one" that hits CA & most of 'em are swimming in the ocean.
 
2002-04-21 10:35:39 PM
Liptus: the Left has people like DeLaRoacha, the Right has people like Emeril, Bevets, and ChuDogg (at least once he does some reading and actually figures stuff out). Please don't be a Facist and assume that all people with Leftist leanings are psychopaths like our resident conspiracy theorist...
 
2002-04-21 10:36:32 PM
Read White Men by Michael Moore and you will understand why we must vote "Dubya" out in '04 at all costs. And Rush Limbaugh is a stupid @sshole as well.
 
2002-04-21 10:36:39 PM
Thanks for clearing that commo misconception up Crotchrocket, and I love the metaphor also :)

Communism opens the door to corruption, otherwise it would be a perfect system.
 
2002-04-21 10:37:09 PM
vote monarchist, and you'll never have to worry about mr. bunnypants getting another pretzel caught in his throat again.

JT
 
2002-04-21 10:52:58 PM
BionicCrab,

While I'm a person who leans to the left (just read my posts), you have to be skeptical about Moore. A lot of the stuff he says are just outright lies. For instance, in Roger & Me he falsified the order of events. The whole plan to turn Flint into a tourist destination was hatched back in the early '70s. AutoWorld, the Hyatt and all the stuff were built and opened in the early '80s, way before the mass layoffs in '86.
 
2002-04-21 10:54:21 PM
Dick Fitzwell:

Rock on! I need to get the T-Shirt for that.


Alexandra: Am I correct in saying that no one CARES about the Middle East unless national security (or finances) is at risk?

Kind of, but you're ignoring the Jewish vote, which is a highly desirable demographic because Jews vote in large numbers.
 
2002-04-21 10:59:56 PM
I love these Republican posts I've been reading....basically saying:"stop whining, we won fair and square, blah blah blah..." Huh. Fair and square? Remember the Fla secretary of state? That trailer trash chick? Worked on W's campaign. Boy she sure was quick to certify that election! Governor of Florida? Huh. Georgies BROTHER! How about all those folks who were removed from the voting rolls because they were convicted of felonies? (Never mind the fact that they were taking people off the lists that were NEVER CONVICTED of anything, and that thier crime was having names SIMILAR to afore mentioned felons) Guess where Jeb got that idea? BINGO! Texas! Or what about this....Supreme Court Justice Scalia's OWN SON was representing the Bush side when they were trying to pressure the Court to stop the recounts In Florida....and He saw NO CONFLICT OF INTEREST!!!! Where the HELL was the American press on all this??? So please stop boring me with your stupid farking posts about crying rivers because we are sore losers....I mean, imagine this: Gore needs the electoral votes from a disputed state, a state where his brother is the governor and his campaign mgr. is secretary of state.....hmmmm. Think the Republicans would be screaming bloody murder about that? So shut the Fark up. Gore got screwed and EVERYONE knows it.
 
2002-04-21 11:02:50 PM
If Dubya doesn't win the election in 2004, he'll be the only President never to have won a Presidential election.
 
2002-04-21 11:03:20 PM
die Pinkos Die


(no one who speaks German could be evil)
 
2002-04-21 11:05:55 PM
Point taken Thornhill.
 
2002-04-21 11:09:11 PM
Blair: actually, I think there are a few VPs that have that distinction, although Bush would be the first pres. appointed to be pres. without being elected (as opposed to simply being awarded the election- which is what happened in a court of law). Yeah, he's the legal president, but not the rightful one in my opinion, and this is my opinion, and it's a lot more informed than the majority of the rants posted earlier by "Republicans" in this thread, so please, don't bother trying to change my mind about this. Remember, it's just my opinion.
 
2002-04-21 11:10:44 PM
that should be "Bush would be the first pres. appointed to be pres. without being elected as Vice President"
 
2002-04-21 11:16:44 PM
BionicCrab, Are you suggsting that the Gore camp and the Dem party in general were Squeaky Clean in the Florida debacle?

I think it is very clear that there was underhandedness on both sides of the fence. We're talking about a lot of money, people with a lot of power, and the highest office in the US, if not the world. To assume that the shananigans were a one-sided affair would be extremly naive.

Sad thin is that neither of these buffoons has the intelligence God gave a marble. Both are about as interesting as watching paint dry. Bush is a dope, Gore is a loon. Either way, we all lose.
 
2002-04-21 11:19:40 PM
haha, very nice Andrewfish :)
 
2002-04-21 11:20:46 PM
So, any presidential candidates anyone here actually wants to run? It seems pretty much agreed upon by anyone and everyone here with one iota of intelligence that both Gore and Bush were lame ducks (and alas, it was all but impossible to take Nader seriously); anyone have any constructive suggestions? GOP and the Democratic National Party, listen up:
 
2002-04-21 11:23:28 PM
The article talks about opression of constitutional laws by republicans yet it is the republicans with good ole Tipper trying to censor my prOn. Damn you and your husband.
 
2002-04-21 11:38:28 PM
You Democratic buttwipes would be totally embarrassed if Gore was in the Whitehouse.

The Sprout rules. Give him credit were credit is due. You could do much worse.
 
2002-04-21 11:46:25 PM
The Sprout rules. Give him credit were credit is due. You could do much worse.

What credit is due? The only thing he has done is respond to the terrorist attack the way any administration would have.

The economy is in a slump, public education still sucks, health care still sucks, pollution is still a huge problem, everyone in the middle east is still killing each other, he's offended countless national/international officials through his verbal slips, broken international treaties...what exactly has he done that deserves credit?
 
2002-04-21 11:53:01 PM
While we are on the subject of things we are tired of hearing.....

I am sick of hearing "Aren't you glad that 9/11 didn't happen with (fill in the blank) as president?"

If we are going to argue hypotheticals, then 9/11 would never have happened if the nameless one you hate had been president, because Kang and Kodos would have tractored that near miss of a meteor a little closer to earth because they were sick of the press fixating on his personal life.

Don't blame me.... I voted for Kodos! :)

http://www.cantech.net.au/~richarsu/spaceship.htm
 
2002-04-21 11:55:28 PM
GreatVoid: *Sigh* Yeah, you're probably right.

Thornhill: You forgot about his Enron buddies and all the special interests that they owe a million favors to. Otherwise, another fine post.
 
2002-04-21 11:59:23 PM
The Democrats will not be able to field a decent candidate.
They are so splintered right now that they will not get their stuff together before the primary season in 18 months.
Sure they will get a dolt like Gore or even a very unlikely McCain.Unless Bush gets caught up in a Nixon like scandal he will win again.The Enron thing will not matter nor will the Democrats touch it.
 
2002-04-22 12:05:40 AM
Why you'll never get the best people to run for president:

1. The media scrutiny and opposition attacks are enough to make all but the most seasoned politician flee in panic to another country.
2. They have more lucrative and/or less stressful jobs in the private sector or academia.
3. It's very rare to find someone who can do a brilliant job ruling a country and have charisma/good looks/pleasing candor that seems neccessary to appeal to the people.
4. Getting elected is a skill. So is being able to effectively govern. Guess which one gets you into office?
5. Even according to Plato, you won't get the "Philosopher King" unless you effectively point a weapon at their head.
 
2002-04-22 12:13:48 AM
BionicCrab,

Enron...Ugh. It's amazing the extent to which big businesses will screw the American public/their employees to maximize profits and how our Government bends over backwards to help them. What really angers me, is how the Government has repeatedly sabotaged the EPA so that big biz can save a few $$$.
 
2002-04-22 12:16:36 AM
BionicCrab: One thing I neglected to say earlier is that I do agree with you on the biatching issue. I am tired of hearing it from both sides actually. regardless of which way it went, it's done and we've been dealt the cards.

Thing is that I have been on earth since the 'end' of the Kennedy adminstration and I have seen a poattern emerge. The more that things change, the more they stay the same. I can not go back and look on any administration over the past 40 years that has not had it's share of strong points, sins, corruption etc. all to different degrees.

Next election rolls around and we get someone different? I'll still be working and Farking and FARKing and drinking a few beers and...
 
2002-04-22 12:20:23 AM
ShamelessPlug,

The Dems have Daschle. He's already an in-house-name, so that makes him perfect. Don't forget that Bush's dad was also very popular around the 1992 election because of the Gulf War, but still lost. Hell, Churchill saved England and he lost the Boobieswar election. If the econ gets bad enough, people will want a change. Also, the Democrats will have a field day pointing out that all of his plans have fell through, less his education reform and artic drilling.

Henchman,

You left out the biggest factor, money. It takes a lot of it to run for President.
 
2002-04-22 12:37:08 AM
OK, I am throwing my hat in the ring. Vote for me and I promise everyone gets two chicks and some Pot. We'll annex France and everyone gets their own personal french maid. Corporate execs will not walk away with millions for running companies into the ground. Nut cases like Gore and Buchanan will be re-assigned as canteen boys.

Oh yeah, and Free beer on Mondays.
 
2002-04-22 12:38:59 AM
Crotchrocket Slim: Looks like I hit a nerve there. Is your belief in your position that shallow that you need to drag a harmless mother joke into anal banging territory?

Since you went there, it's funny you should ask. Apparently your crotchrocket is so slim that mom thought you were offering her a toothpick.

Enjoy. :-)
 
2002-04-22 12:41:16 AM
"You left out the biggest factor, money. It takes a lot of it to run for President."

True. I was assuming that said Philosopher candidate was backed/promoted by one of the existing political parties.
 
2002-04-22 12:50:08 AM
I love a good troll!
 
2002-04-22 01:09:26 AM
Hell, Churchill saved England and he lost the Boobieswar election.

Go filter, go!
 
2002-04-22 01:23:37 AM
I guarantee you that there will be a hell of a lot of Bush's history coming out near the next election. The democrats wouldn't bring it out now...there's no margin. They'll research and hold until it's important.
 
2002-04-22 01:27:04 AM
That article is correct that Bush will be a one term President but not for the reasons that he states. The reasons that he states are just symptoms of the underlying problem.

Bush Jr. suffers from the same problem that Bush Sr. suffered from... he lacks a plan. All great Presidents have had a plan that began in the first four years and continued on through out the second.

Roosevelt was committed to rebuilding the US economy and then to defeating the Axis powers. And every action in his Presidency reflects that.

Reagan was committed to ending the cold war. And every action reflected that aim.

Clinton was committed to growing the economy and reducing the tax burden. And even though he was a democrat, all of his decisions reflected that aim.

Bush Jr. and Bush Sr. though came to the table with aims and goals... but they did not have plans to carry out those goals. And because of that Bush Sr. was beaten by a nobody governor from a nothing state... and Bush Jr. is going to be beaten in 2004 because he has no workable plan to carry out the goals for his presidency
 
2002-04-22 02:13:05 AM
Very insightful Code_Archaeologist, I'd never thought of it like that before. Bravo. :)
 
2002-04-22 02:17:54 AM
Wow, Billyblazer, a 72% turnout (compared to 50% in America).

Holy shiat! Maybe by now about 5-10% of the French think that the sun revolves around the earth (compared to 35% of Americans).

Oh. My. God... Is France becoming.... Americanized?
 
2002-04-22 02:37:48 AM
LOL

"he lost the Boobieswar election"

didn't it mean to say he lost the Boobies war election.....
 
2002-04-22 02:38:27 AM
Damn it it changed it again....

LOL

"he lost the Boobieswar election"

didn't it mean to say he lost the F_|_R_S_T P_0_S_T war election.....
 
2002-04-22 05:36:09 AM
Chick3_16
"...Voter turnout in Europe is very high and multi party systems force accountability upon the coalition in power."

Just to point out, although you probably won't read this :)
Voter turn out in Europe is failing, fast. Check out last nights French presidential candidate elections (its a crrappy, complicated system, look it up), nobody bothered voting and they end up with a right wing holocaust denier as a possible candidate to become president, pitted against the current, corrupt and past it president.

In the UK we had the lowest turnout for an election for about a century last year (less that 50% went out to vote!) And again our own hard right party the BNP made gains in some areas (although, thankfully, they didn't get any MPs from it).

Try looking to Austrailia with its manditory voting system and proportional representation. I quite like that setup but it doesn't fix the problem you get when nobody worth voting stands for election.
 
2002-04-22 07:10:05 AM
Actually, I will read this :)

The UK system is very close to Canada's system. The SMDP (Single member district plurality, all the seats are divided into areas of roughly equal population. Whichever party wins the most seats governs) is more effective than the US system at allowing smaller parties into government.

The problem with the system however is that it creates a "friendly dictatorship" when a party holds the majority of seats in the House of Commons (We also call it that in Canada). Enough of that and voter turnout just goes down the tubes. Canada is around mid-60s but that is dropping. In strong party systems like ours (i.e. you vote with the party, or else you're not in the party. This leads to all members of one party voting the same way.), once they're in, they can pass whatever they want.

Proportional representation would never work in the US, but it couldn't hurt to try it in the UK and Canada.

"Don't blame me, I voted NDP!"
 
2002-04-22 07:37:23 AM
Chick3_16
"Actually, I will read this :)"

Ah, so you have as much of a life as I do :)

Why don't you think proportional representation would work in the US? Anything has got to be better that this electoral college stuff they have which was only a solution the problem of collecting the votes from all over the US back in the old days.
 
2002-04-22 07:57:00 AM
fark Bush, he's outta there in 2004.
 
2002-04-22 08:22:22 AM
Anyone who thinks that he can predict this sort of thing two years in advance knows nothing about politics.

Carry on.
 
Displayed 50 of 215 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report