 |
| |
|
|
Pekka
|
 |
em seu burro dos pais!
Feb 2002
time: 07:20
|
|
But you have to take into account, about my asshattery, that since .. I don't label myself as conservative, but certainly I'm not on the left, except from hard right wingers perspective I'd be, but.. anyway I don't feel like constricting myself to any labels but decide my position time after time. And this time it'll be Bush. But Sava and the rest of active Bush haters should take comfort, that if I was labeled as conservative, which I don't think is a crime word or crime thing so I have no problems with that (just labels in general), so .. I'd be one of the most active Bush protestors in his own camp. So I take everything with grain salt.. it's just that I've started choking on the Kerry salt already, I mean.. we have lot of politicians like Kerry in here and in Europe in general so I knwo the type. He's a good guy IMO and has lot of good qualities, ideas and all that... I think he's a great politician. But as president.... I mean he comes so close in my mind to be a great president. Better than Bush even. But.. I can't put my fingers on it, I just, it's a gut feeling plus some other feelings as well that leads me to support Bush on this election.
But if Kerry wins, I won't be crying for very long time, so it's not life and death to me. But I feel more confident in Bush right now, all the way to the election day.
My past remarks and all that, always bashing both, but usualyl Bush has gotten the worst of it from me is simple. I always expect MORE from the president, or the one who has the higher position. I demand more, I expect it all, and Bush has had 4 years and so I tend to take that into account. We don't have the opportunity to demand Kerry, because he hasn't done the first tour yet. So that's why I say lot of negative things about Bush too, because we must demand him to do better.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000
time: 22:20
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Pekka
I don't have a beef with Kerry. I think he's a lot smarter than Bush. But.. at the end.. since I'd have to choose two of these.. I choose Bush. |
See the idea that Kerry is distinctly smarter would lead me to support Kerry. Forgetting the idological differences between the parties, I would want the brightest guy possible to be the leader.
Bush comes across as if he does not comprehend nuances . Everything is portrayed in absolutes, white or black, for us or against us. I will say this though, his campaign has done a masterful job. Somehow, making reasoned decisions and changing your position if the facts change, has become a BAD thing to do ( flip-flopper). Suddenly it is meritorious to maintain a decision steadfastly even after you find out that all the reasons for that decision are wrong.
Interstingly, on a lot of economic policy I would be a Republican .. . I just don't think I could be Bush republican
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pekka
|
|
em seu burro dos pais!
Feb 2002
time: 07:20
|
|
Flubber, yeah .. I don't necessarily feel that the brightest guy should be the president. He should be at the top, but as president, nto necessarily. I think other qualities come into play as well. Plus more, Kerry has been unable to totally trash Bush. He had 3 debates, IMO he won them all but he didn't absolutely trash Bush. He was UNABLE to do that. And Bush had a bad spot at being in those debates in MY opinion, plus he's not a good debater, YET Kerry was UNABLE to totally slam dunk.
That tells me, that while Kerry can be smarter, on tough issues, he might nto be able to drive points home. Say you get these tough SOB's, talks with Koreas and stuff, you need to be tough. Tough even if you are talking ncie things. If you are a smart intelligent man with experience, and you CAN'T trash Bush in those debates?
That doesn't tell me very much, and these were Bush's weak points too. This was supposed to be Kerry's winning points. Decisively, trashingly and destroying him. But he didn't.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pekka
|
|
em seu burro dos pais!
Feb 2002
time: 07:20
|
|
Arrian,  Well.. I like everyone in here too even when they sometimes think the opposite from my views.. like wiglaf might be the other end in scale, the opposite of my views sometimes but he took the good out of my ramblings when he could of just gotten offended from my words so I have to respect a person like that. And I said bad words to Ben too but I respect him a lot and his advices too, and it doesn't change it for me. But without this getting too much of a love fest...
I think I make sense, I make sense to me. You know, the mainstream, the people.. the are all about parties. In here, you have your democrats, your republicans, your liberals.. I mean you guys are so loyal to the party and the position it holds that it don't make sense to me. I know since you guys are pretty intelligent all of you, that it would be an insult and false thing to say that you let party decide what you're going to think about an issue, so I'm not saying that... but I can't help but sometiems think you do .
I pledge no alliance to any club. I see it as one way road. Like marriage and military alliance, there's no divorcing, so better be 100000% SURE when you step into it. And not thinkign so much about the good but the bad, you have to think about the bad because that's the problems you'll face in the future. So I choose to be independent 100%.
You tell me, what does it say about a candidate that is UNABLE to absolutely trash the president on economy? I mean I tihnk he won, I think he won it easy, but he didn't slam dunk, he didn't trash, he didn't put an end to the discussion? He keeps accepting false debating and braking rules of general debating. If you allow that, then you're not very strong. You have to appeal to the people who don't care os much about the rules of debating, yet within the rules of debating. It's like cops. There are bad criminals and outright *******s there. You need to bust thme, but you have no right to beat them down like that. You have to be good and true to yourself and everyone else to be able to make a distinction, even to those who don't understand you, and to those you hate your guts. Kerry is unable to do this. But I knwo Bush will keep on being tough, stubborn and sometimes wrong. But he won't make the mistake of not winning on point that is HIS point. Where he is strong, he will keep being strong. Where he is weak, his opponent is unable to take him out cold. Take it like you want, but that means a lot to me, that's mano a mano, you can have hte man with muscles and fighting skills, but if that man can't take out the other ugy who weighs 40 pounds less and has less experience in the ring... if he wins on points? That's a loss in my eyes.
So you think, that I feel KErry as an individual would be better candidate, but I still choose BUsh because he is able to survive his onslaughts? Wrong.. but that's the backbone of my feelings. I expect the president to win. You say BUsh hasn't won either, well maybe true. But he has the weaker premise on this election war.
Besides, hells yeah I like what Kerry says about some ideas. But I'm so used to that. Lot of promises. I'm so used to it. Hey, if our politicians really did what they promised, adn things worked liek they say, I'd be a .. god damn green party member or something. But since real world isn't like that, and I know it's just bluff to get votes, it's utopia, it's a dream that won't work.. I choose the one who ... doesn't promise that kind of thing. Bush doesn't promise those things. He gets these things doen he says. Kerry says a lot I like, but he won't be able to get it done.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pekka
|
|
em seu burro dos pais!
Feb 2002
time: 07:20
|
|
And you know when Kerry kicked off his campagn, I truly thought he should win. I wanted to hear what he says about things and issues.. I wanted to hear more. But he doesnt' say more. If you hear him speaking one time, you've heard it all. You know it's too much of a cover, and he wants to please too much.. you know.. I think his basic theme is excellent, the 'respected in the world, stronger at home' thing.. I think it's very good. And I do think he would get a lot better international support. Yes, I believe that. But what is he going to do with it? Is he going to hold those summits he talks about? Likely yes... will it do good for the coalition, would it make it bigger? Maybe yes. And then what? Is there going to be 500 000 soldiers in there? No. IS there going to be a SIGNIFICANT boost of troops in there? No. He must do better. He says he wins Iraq, and that president must have a plan to win the peace. OK.. fair enough, so what is his plan? Because it sure hell isn't sending 500 000 troops there, foreign and own. So I'm wondering what that plan is. THere is no plan with him either. Thus I KNOW he is all about lot of nice promises and little action.
So what is the problem with that? Because the guys with lot of promises usually delivers even less than the guy who promises less.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:20.
Apolyton Time is 00:20. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
22-10-2004 00:29
Not just this thread. We love you anyway, though.
|
|