»Will Bush win the 2004 presidential election?«

Register as a user then vote here

OK, OK, this has actually NOTHING to do with the matrix (except that Bush 41 (George Bush) and Bush 43 (George W. Bush) are shown in the Architect's room)

It is just a poll to check the forum users' political views

Vote:
Yes, I want a second presidency (Double Double You)
No, I don't want a second presidency (Trouble Double Double You)

Remember:
Both, Bush and Kerry, are members of the secret society google.com.... Please also read "google.com..."

100fps.com... (I made this 22sec movie - hope you like it).

Hey, I cast the first vote, and I'm not even American!

Neither am I...

Just goes to show how much our American friends really care!

Anyone has to be better than BUSH

Too many people loathe and despise Bush for him to win again. Even in the 2000 election the votes were really close and people are still discovering missing ballots, so it is evident that he will only be elected once. It sucks that the next (hopefully far superior President) has to clean up his mess.

maxius wrote:

Even in the 2000 election the votes were really close

I think the total votes were not close. USwide approx 500'000 people more voted for Gore than for Bush. But due to the election system of the US Bush won.

Gore won the popular vote, but Bush won the electoral.

I figured this forum would be full of Bush-haters and liberals.

Conservative is the way to go! Vote BUSH!

I think the problem is also that there are only 2 parties. OK there are more but because of the electoral system is practically impossible to have other parties (Green party etc) win and all votes for them are wasted.

Well heres hoping he doesn't get through. There is much evidence that he cheated the 2000 election and its clearly possible giving his sources.

knnknn wrote:

I think the total votes were not close. USwide approx 500'000 people more voted for Gore than for Bush. But due to the election system of the US Bush won.

this is the common view, but Bush actually cheated his way to victory.. and the electoral system shouldered the blame. also Gore and the democrats were stupid in their handling of it and threw it away.

I am not american either but, as mentioned before, ANYBODY on this earth (or in the matrix) is better than the Bush apes (Old bush and baby bush)

whoa lotsa democrats here....

- bush is by far the stupidest (in intelligence) president in the history of the U.S.
- and he cheated to get to presidency.
- and he killed thousands of innocent people in iraq by declaring war against them.

...

on the other hand...he lowered the taxes for the tax payers...

i'm glad i'm not old enough to vote yet. this stuff is way too hard to decide for me.

knnknn wrote:

I think the total votes were not close. USwide approx 500'000 people more voted for Gore than for Bush. But due to the election system of the US Bush won.

It's still very much a system designed for pre-railroad, pre-telegraph society isn't it?

I have an old 1961 Webster's Encyclopedia (has a photo of JFK as president) which details the American electoral system. It still has a that "Electoral College" doesn't it, where they're assuming that the elected officials of each state will go off to Washington and cast their votes.

Don't worry, other countries electoral systems (such as Australia's, where everyone MUST vote and with a preferental system) are just as fucked!

Thats true. I mean John Howard has survived what? Two elections now? I mean when he came to Lismore (where I used to live) people where trying to kill him, but when went to a town full of upperclass, self-centred, immoral bastards, they all shook his hand. Mark Lathan will get this election (whenever it will be) he is the lesser of two evils in a sense. But anythings better then John Howard methinks, maybe not George Bush but hes an exception.

knnknn wrote:

I think the problem is also that there are only 2 parties. OK there are more but because of the electoral system is practically impossible to have other parties (Green party etc) win and all votes for them are wasted.

I am quite thankful that our party system nullifies the Green party.

The only political party which I wish had a little better chance is the Libertarian party.

hungarian kid wrote:

Well heres hoping he doesn't get through. There is much evidence that he cheated the 2000 election and its clearly possible giving his sources.

What sources? The only reason you think he cheated is because you dislike him personally. Admit it.

wake_up_neo wrote:

this is the common view, but Bush actually cheated his way to victory.. and the electoral system shouldered the blame.

Democracy is a terrible government system. The American founding fathers knew this. Democracy tramples the minorities. As a compromise which gave a little more power to small states, the electoral college system was set up. So, yes, it is not democratic, but NO this is not a bad thing, as you all assume.

Quote:

I am not american either but, as mentioned before, ANYBODY on this earth (or in the matrix) is better than the Bush apes

This blind belief is getting old.

Quote:

- bush is by far the stupidest (in intelligence) president in the history of the U.S. - and he cheated to get to presidency. - and he killed thousands of innocent people in iraq by declaring war against them

All completely baseless claims.

stinkz wrote:

I am quite thankful that our party system nullifies the Green party.

The very system that makes it possible that Bush is president alrhough half a million more voted for Gore. THIS is strange.

stinkz wrote:

Democracy is a terrible government system.

The reign of stupid average people over the intelligent minority?
The reign of atheists over the pious minority?

stinkz wrote:

Quote: - bush is by far the stupidest (in intelligence) president in the history of the U.S. - and he cheated to get to presidency. - and he killed thousands of innocent people in iraq by declaring war against them All completely baseless claims.

Somewhat true, since we all don't know much about former presidents: How much is reputation and how much is truth? Or as google.com... writes:

Code:

"I think, legally speaking, there's a very solid case for impeaching every American president since the Second World War. They've all been either outright war criminals or involved in serious war crimes."

BUT: Whatever Bush did or didn't do: He has changed the view people have on USA to the worse. And THAT will have big impacts in the future. In this sense he is one of the worst presidents US ever had.

Very true indeed. The world opinion of the US has been badly damaged. Strange, considering that the world was universally behind the US after the two towers incident. For such a groundswell of popular opinion to be lost is a testament to the poor handling of US foreign policy.

knnknn wrote:

The very system that makes it possible that Bush is president alrhough half a million more voted for Gore. THIS is strange.

Would you have the same problem if Gore had won with less votes? I don't think so. Our government system is not a democracy. The American people do not have a problem with this. So get over it.

knnknn wrote:

The reign of stupid average people over the intelligent minority? The reign of atheists over the pious minority?

Democracy is a terrible government system because the will of the majority can be as corrupt as that of any individual.

knnknn wrote:

BUT: Whatever Bush did or didn't do: He has changed the view people have on USA to the worse. And THAT will have big impacts in the future. In this sense he is one of the worst presidents US ever had.

The fact that the people of Europe see something wrong with ridding the world of a viscious, terrorist tyrant, even in light of the recent terrorist attacks shows where the problem lies: in you! Perhaps they are more afraid because America has done it without UN approval and, thus, their approval first. Get over your power trip. The UN is a terrible organization which needs to be disbanded.

I would rather have our country be the way Thomas Jefferson envisioned it when he said "peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations; entangling alliances with none." But, perhaps this is wishful thinking.

stinkz wrote:

The fact that the people of Europe see something wrong with ridding the world of a viscious, terrorist tyrant

Ridding of a tyrant? Why? Bush is still in the White House!

Just kidding.

You simplify here beyond belief:
*None of Bush's accusations were true
*Ideology of "preemtive strikes" is probably one of the worst examples for other contries. Imagine China made a preemptive strike against USA.
*The UN has been bugged (US spying)
*Allies have been blackmailed
*Faking images and distributing ridiculous suspicions
*Whatever the Iraq has done to prove that it has no WMDs was invalidated. Bush wanted that war no matter what. WMD were never an issue.
*Bush cancelled the prohibition for CIA to kill in foreign countries
*Saddam has most probably nothing to do with the WTC attacks.
*US has dropped in the international rank list of freedom of the press
*Torture in Guantanamo Bay, but Amnesty International was not allowed to come, "because there is not enough food for them for their visit"
*Civil rights in the US have been reduced to a large extent
*Online publications of official speeches of the president have been altered
*Bombing of the al-Jazeera TV channel (that broadcast independent reports)
*The Jessica Lynch fake story
*Breaking of the Geneva convention
*Opposing Kyoto protocol
*Opposing the International Court of Justice. American soldiers can commit crimes without the fear of presecution.
*"Axis of evil" black-white-ideology
*US-Scientists who opposed Bush have been threatened
*Science has been perverted and the Bush administration has been accused by approx 60 scientists (including 15 nobel prize winners) of google.com....
*If it wasn't for the internet USanians couldn't probably get a rounder picture, because the press and the media were totally war-biased. Sometimes 100:1 (pro-war experts : anti-war-experts).
*Bush is still supporting a country that has broken almost all UN resolutions and has supposedly several hundred atom bombs: Israel.
*....
The list is endless, but I must admit, I don't know exactly what other presidents have done. Part of Clinton's behaviour was porbably a war crime, too:
google.com...


Both, Bush and Blair, are praying in their offices. They could be said to be bible followers. My question to you, stinkz: Do you think Bush and Blair are good Christians? Doing god's work? Bush and Blair themselves said in interviews that they are on a mission and they are chosen and they are doing god's work.

History will tell weather Bush's "war for a just cause" will be the beginning of the end of the US. Big organizations (e.g. the US) fall longer... but they CAN fall. It's not only "bad opinion" about Bush outside of the US. Bush has managed that even former allies are "hating America" now, not only muslims. Moreover (although I might err here) it may be the beginning of the end of Christianity.

Quote:

Democracy is a terrible government system because the will of the majority can be as corrupt as that of any individual.

Is theocracy (reign of god, reign of gods) the solution, stinkz?

im of the opinion that to withdraw from the war on terror as john kerry would inevitably have america do...it would not only be dangerous for america but it would also be dangerous(perhaps more so)for my country(britain)

so solely for following through the war on terror to the end,i would prefer Bush to win

for all his domestic failings and his apparent lack of grace and political skill,at least he has had the courage to stand up to maniacs like saddam hussein and osama bin laden...unlike Clinton who was to busy getting his weapon of dress destruction fired up to bother about world terrorists

lets not forget that sept 11th was planned while Clinton was in charge...so its obvious his do-gooder attitude was not going to prevent or discourage maniacs

the rise in liberal attitudes nowadays seems to coincide with an attitude of "look after number one"...

america has also long been guilty of looking after its own interests and so has a responsibility to the countries it has exploited and left to waste...and if this means the first stage is ridding those who vent thier anger by flying planes into building then so be it

BUSH FOR PRESIDENT

TO MANY PEOPLE ON THIS FORUM HAVE BEEN READING FAR TO MANY MICHAEL MOORE BOOKS

they need to be told the truth

MICHAEL MOORE IS A LYING LIBERAL IDIOT

hungarian kid wrote:

I mean John Howard has survived what? Two elections now? I mean when he came to Lismore (where I used to live) people where trying to kill him, but when went to a town full of upperclass, self-centred, immoral bastards, they all shook his hand.

Maybe, but I bet they counted their fingers afterwards!

hungarian kid wrote:

Mark Lathan will get this election (whenever it will be) he is the lesser of two evils in a sense. But anythings better then John Howard methinks, maybe not George Bush but hes an exception.

Well, I might for once vote for Labour (I normally vote Greens) but as I live in the Newcastle area it really doesn't matter what I vote, a labour candidate will get in. I hate "safe" seats, because it means when it comes to allocating resources, your area doesn't get much.

the anomaly wrote:

im of the opinion that to withdraw from the war on terror as john kerry would inevitably have america do...it would not only be dangerous for america but it would also be dangerous(perhaps more so)for my country(britain)

History will tell. Some experts say that this war will increase terrorism. We'll see.

Quote:

unlike Clinton who was to busy getting his weapon of dress destruction fired

Weapons of ass destruction

Quote:

lets not forget that sept 11th was planned while Clinton was in charge...so its obvious his do-gooder attitude was not going to prevent or discourage maniacs

Not exactly. Clinton was the one who issued a killing order against USAma Bin Laden.

issuing a killing order and actually doing something about it are 2 completely different things