Kerry or Bush? Which and why?

I am a 33 year old 98th percentile american living in NY. I am torn beyond belief, are you? I agree with mant that Bush is a mad man. I like my life though. Kerry seems like too much of a wimp to me.

I am sure there are millions like me.

Kerry or Bush? Which and why?

I am a 33 year old 98th percentile american living in NY. I am torn beyond belief, are you? I agree with mant that Bush is a mad man. I like my life though. Kerry seems like too much of a wimp to me.

I am sure there are millions like me.

Bush all the way. Can't trust Kerry, He changes his mind from day to day on what he thinks the crowd he is speaking to want to hear. one minutes he is against cutting taxes the next he states he is going to cut taxes. One minute he is for going to war the next he is against it. At least Bush takes a stand and sticks with it. ;)

Please, PUGDOG and I mean this with all sincerity. If you are expecting to come to some sound conclusion as to who to vote for this coming November by going to the RBR politics board, do us all a favor and don't vote.

Do your own research, your own thinking. Start not by what the politicians are saying to get your vote. Start with what your own core beliefs are and then see if any of the multitude of candidates fit your bill, be it Dem, Rep, Lib, Green, Soc, Comm, Natural, etc.

Speaking of not getting anywhere on this board. Morgan just lied to you. Research for yourself and you'll see.

I didn't read any lies in his response.

ngdmfm

If you are anti-abortion, his actions have been fully on your side.

If you think cutting taxes and trickle down economics works. So personal greed if you are in the 98% crowd would be a reason. The tax cuts have worked for the wealthy and corporations. Not for others though.

That is all I can think of.

Fiscal conservative? He's running huge deficits.

Small government conservative? He is increasing gov. Kerry would provide a divided government which would at LEAST slow things down a LITTLE. (the thing I fear most is one party, EITHER party, holding wh, senate and house. Not good, not good at all.)

He places faith and ideology over the facts of science. Condider this:

With more than 4,000 scientists, including 48 Nobel Prize winners, having signed a statement opposing the Bush administration's use of scientific advice, this election year is seeing a new development in the uneasy relationship between science and politics.

In the past, individual scientists and science organizations have occasionally piped up to oppose specific federal policies such as Ronald Reagan's Star Wars missile defense plan. But this is the first time that a broad spectrum of the scientific community has expressed opposition to a president's overall science policy.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/science/AP-Bush-Scientists.html



He has broken agreements with other countries (Kyoto, imposed illegal trade sanctions for political reasons, etc.). Add on the war actions, and he has squandered US worldwide political capital.

Ill planned and executed war in Iraq has overextended our military, and ignored the JUSTIFIED war and rebuilding in Afghanistan, and increased terrorist numbers in the middle east. What a recruiting boom this has been for those that "hate our way of life"! Then he tells us he "knows how to win this war". Yeah, and my dad knew where he was going in the car and we really had no need to stop and ask directions. Just trust him.


Reasons to vote for Kerry?

Roadie. Really a roadie, not a photo op MTBer. (kidding, mostly)

Sees complexity and trys to deal with it. Nuance. (and I have a long list of Bush flip flops if you want to bring that up).

History of bipartisan action (eg. with McCain helped to normalize relations with Vietnam.) I REALLY don't know how you can call the guy a wimp. He stood up to live fire by choice, he stood up to attacks when he got back for speaking his mind, he stood up to those that attacked him when he started the mia/pow stuff.

Now, does anyone believe the swift boat liars anymore? Read this http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=231

Also, consider that one of their main players accused Bush Sr. of bailing out early (coward) and causing the deaths of 2 men in WWII during his "hero" incident. These claims were made in 1988. Sound familiar? BTW, the dems did not touch this crap then OR in 1992. Bush refuses denounce the swift boat liars now.

Kerry has a history of making the right decision when things count. Not just in vietnam, but later in life. Consider this:

http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/sun/2004/feb/06/516309920.html

"Former U.S. Sen. Chic Hecht of Nevada is a staunch Republican, but he thanks his lucky stars for Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts.
On July 12, 1988, Hecht was attending a weekly Republican luncheon when a piece of apple lodged firmly in his throat.

Hecht stumbled out of the room, thinking he might vomit but not wanting to do it in front of his colleagues. Sen. Kit Bond, R-Mo., thumped his back, but Hecht quickly passed out in the hallway.

Just then, Kerry stepped off an elevator, rushed to Hecht's side and gave him the Heimlich maneuver -- four times.

The lifesaving incident made international news, and Dr. Henry Heimlich, who invented the maneuver in 1974, called Hecht to say that had Kerry intervened just 30 seconds later Hecht might have been in a vegetative state for life.

"This man gave me my life," the 75-year-old Hecht said Thursday.

Hecht said he was amazed that Kerry acted so quickly -- some people were assuming that he was having a heart attack.

"He knew exactly what to do," he said. "But a lot of people know what to do. They just don't size up the situation immediately."

"Only in America can this happen, where he's working against me to get me defeated and then saves my life," Hecht said."

History of investigation in the senate. That is his rep, not as a legislator, but rather as an investigator. A bulldog one. This comes from his days as a prosecuter. Tough on crime, but in a different way than flight suit boy is "tough". You know, looking at evidence and making a case based on facts? I think we could really use someone right now who has this skill.

I could go on, but that should get you started in THINKING about things. I do have to agree with thatsmybush. Why don't you go read both candidates websites, then come back and ask specific, and informed questions? Or heck, why not look at the last few months of archives here?

How about neither of them since they are really the same person anyhow - a cog in the beaurocratic political machine that turns out worthless political rhetoric upon command. I can do that to actually... vote for me. :D

Please, PUGDOG and I mean this with all sincerity. If you are expecting to come to some sound conclusion as to who to vote for this coming November by going to the RBR politics board, do us all a favor and don't vote.

Do your own research, your own thinking. Start not by what the politicians are saying to get your vote. Start with what your own core beliefs are and then see if any of the multitude of candidates fit your bill, be it Dem, Rep, Lib, Green, Soc, Comm, Natural, etc.

Speaking of not getting anywhere on this board. Morgan just lied to you. Research for yourself and you'll see.


Not looking to make a life decision based on a bicycle internet forum. I just need to know that there are as many confused people as I. I have never been so interested in a single vote before.

I would rather not vote for Bush but Kerry seems so weak. I believe Bush will be better for the economy. I believe Bush will keep fighting in Iraq. I believe if Kerry becoms president there will be more terrorist attack on the US to test the water. I believe Kerry will raise my taxes and cause interest rates to soar.

Not looking to make a life decision based on a bicycle internet forum. I just need to know that there are as many confused people as I. I have never been so interested in a single vote before.

I would rather not vote for Bush but Kerry seems so weak. I believe Bush will be better for the economy. I believe Bush will keep fighting in Iraq. I believe if Kerry becoms president there will be more terrorist attack on the US to test the water. I believe Kerry will raise my taxes and cause interest rates to soar.

PUG, like I said do your own research. But if you think Bush can do better with the economy with the last three and a half years to show the deficits, the expenditures, the tax cuts for the wealthy, the lagging job growth, the reduction of wages etc. then you probably cannot be saved.

If you think Kerry would not "move heaven and earth" as well to stop another attack at home then you probably cannot be saved.

If you have the economic wherewithal to see into the future about tax raises and interest rates than you should be working for Big Al Greenspan. But if you are part of the 98% as you say you are then you probably ought not to worry about it too much. Since Kerry has gone on record saying he would not raise your taxes. If he goes back on his promise you have the ability as the electorate to vote him out of office in a scant four years.

This is what I do know. The economy is not as good as it was four years ago. That the Bush admin own post 9/11 projections about the economy (including 7 million new jobs) is an absolute ghost of itself. The deficits and trade disparities are crippling this countries infrastructural needs. What we have seen is the greatest test of trickle down economics in the history of this nation. It is my belief that this test has failed once removed from a textbook on a macroeconomic scale.

It is funny despite claiming to be undecided you have nothing but good feelings about Bush and negative about Kerry despite evidence that would dispute your feelings. I wonder why that is...

Those that have beliefs they will not alter based on FACTS cannot be swayed. Faith based, not fact based. Arguing with faith is a waste of time.

Those that turn turn their backs on fact cause more problems for themselves and others than any other group in the history of the world.

Belief has its place, don't get me wrong.

----------------

Credo of Crash Davis


Annie: What do you believe in then?

Crash: Well, I believe in the soul. The cock. The Pu$$y. The small of a woman's back. The hanging curveball. High fiber. Good scotch. That the novels of Susan Sontag are self-indulgent, overrated crap. I believe Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. I believe there ought to be a Constitution Amendment outlawing Astroturf and the designated hitter. I believe in the sweet spot, soft-core pornography, opening your presents Christmas morning rather than Christmas eve. And I believe in long, slow, deep, soft, wet kisses that last three days...Goodnight. [He exits]

Annie (with a voice that could melt butter): Oh my.

I find your perceptions fascinating. Bush better for the economy? What would it take to convince you otherwise? A total, wheelbarrow full of dollars to buy a loaf of bread collapse? Bush has been horrible for the economy. Don't believe me? Look at the stock market. It's fallen and it can't get up. Look at the job market. Millions of jobs lost. And new jobs? Paying just a fraction of those that were lost. Taxes? So he cut federal taxes which, BTW, has brought us closer to bankruptcy than we've ever been before (remember how Clinton left us with the most solvent country in recent history. It took Bush less than 4 years to squander it). So, congratulations, that rebate check you were sent may have enabled you, a well to do citizen, to buy a new luxury item. But it has to be paid for by the vast majority of Americans who can't afford it. Instead of perhaps offering health care to millions of Americans, or really affordable prescription drugs to seniors, or not cutting veterans' benefits, or investing in better roads and bridges, or a viable railway system, or upgrading airports, or modernizing air traffic control to alleviate a dangerously overburdened, accident waiting to happen, system, or not threatening to cut funding to the one program that guarantees that terrorists will not drop a nuclear bomb on us- securing Russia's stockpile and paying their scientists to not develop bombs for rogue states, or installing the cutting edge technology that would allow every single container that enters our ports to be screened, or developing alternatives to oil sooner, or ensuring that every child gets a GOOD education (no better way to fight poverty than a good education), and that every good student, no matter how poor, can get a good college education, or just making this country a cleaner, more beautiful place, instead of all these things, Bush gave money to the very people who didn't need it. Are you really so disinterested in your country, so uncaring of your fellow Americans, especially those who aren't as prosperous as you, that you believe that your rebate check was the best use of our tax dollars?

Were you really doing so badly under Clinton? Because Kerry merely wants to roll back your tax burden to what it was under Clinton. And, as I'm sure you've noticed, interest rates have started to rise. Republicans cry bloody murder about how raising taxes will destroy our economy. Yet history proves them fantastically wrong. But they continue to sing the same old song.

You may think that Kerry is a wimp, but, apparently, that's not what the terrorists believe. Bin Laden has been quoted as saying that their goal is to get Bush re-elected because he is so easily manipulated into doing what they want. They consider him to make decisions that "feel good" to us, but in reality weaken us. And, based on the past few years, I'd have to say, emphatically, they're right. Bush has been beyond a disaster for this country. We're not safe in our cities. We're not safe anywhere there's any major infrastructure, or water supplies, or cargo or people. That's not my opinion. All you have to do is listen to his department of homeland security. Disaster. Hurricane W has devastated our country from coast to coast. From giveaways to the drug industry, at taxpayer expense, to losing almost every single ally we've gained from the second world war, GWB has sold out you and me and every other American EXCEPT for those few who are wealthy (and greedy) enough to buy his patronage.

So, Bush will keep us in Iraq. Fine. Kerry will bring the world into Iraq so that the costs, and risks, are shared by those who will benefit from a stable, peaceful Iraq. Right now, the only ones paying for it are you and me.

You're confused? To me, this is the easiest decision I've ever had to make. I suppose if all I cared about was my bank account growing, I might give Bush a consideration. But, then I'd have to ignore all the threats to my safety that I encounter, as a New Yorker, every day, or the fear that terrorists will breach Russia's almost non-existent security to obtain their coveted nuclear material or simply pay an out of work scientist to create it for them; and I'd still have to worry every time I flew on an airplane, or crossed a crumbling bridge, or...

I hope you get the idea.



I would rather not vote for Bush but Kerry seems so weak. I believe Bush will be better for the economy. I believe Bush will keep fighting in Iraq. I believe if Kerry becoms president there will be more terrorist attack on the US to test the water. I believe Kerry will raise my taxes and cause interest rates to soar.

I find your perceptions fascinating. Bush better for the economy? What would it take to convince you otherwise? A total, wheelbarrow full of dollars to buy a loaf of bread collapse? Bush has been horrible for the economy. Don't believe me? Look at the stock market. It's fallen and it can't get up. Look at the job market. Millions of jobs lost. And new jobs? Paying just a fraction of those that were lost. Taxes? So he cut federal taxes which, BTW, has brought us closer to bankruptcy than we've ever been before (remember how Clinton left us with the most solvent country in recent history. It took Bush less than 4 years to squander it). So, congratulations, that rebate check you were sent may have enabled you, a well to do citizen, to buy a new luxury item. But it has to be paid for by the vast majority of Americans who can't afford it. Instead of perhaps offering health care to millions of Americans, or really affordable prescription drugs to seniors, or not cutting veterans' benefits, or investing in better roads and bridges, or a viable railway system, or upgrading airports, or modernizing air traffic control to alleviate a dangerously overburdened, accident waiting to happen, system, or not threatening to cut funding to the one program that guarantees that terrorists will not drop a nuclear bomb on us- securing Russia's stockpile and paying their scientists to not develop bombs for rogue states, or installing the cutting edge technology that would allow every single container that enters our ports to be screened, or developing alternatives to oil sooner, or ensuring that every child gets a GOOD education (no better way to fight poverty than a good education), and that every good student, no matter how poor, can get a good college education, or just making this country a cleaner, more beautiful place, instead of all these things, Bush gave money to the very people who didn't need it. Are you really so disinterested in your country, so uncaring of your fellow Americans, especially those who aren't as prosperous as you, that you believe that your rebate check was the best use of our tax dollars?

Were you really doing so badly under Clinton? Because Kerry merely wants to roll back your tax burden to what it was under Clinton. And, as I'm sure you've noticed, interest rates have started to rise. Republicans cry bloody murder about how raising taxes will destroy our economy. Yet history proves them fantastically wrong. But they continue to sing the same old song.

You may think that Kerry is a wimp, but, apparently, that's not what the terrorists believe. Bin Laden has been quoted as saying that their goal is to get Bush re-elected because he is so easily manipulated into doing what they want. They consider him to make decisions that "feel good" to us, but in reality weaken us. And, based on the past few years, I'd have to say, emphatically, they're right. Bush has been beyond a disaster for this country. We're not safe in our cities. We're not safe anywhere there's any major infrastructure, or water supplies, or cargo or people. That's not my opinion. All you have to do is listen to his department of homeland security. Disaster. Hurricane W has devastated our country from coast to coast. From giveaways to the drug industry, at taxpayer expense, to losing almost every single ally we've gained from the second world war, GWB has sold out you and me and every other American EXCEPT for those few who are wealthy (and greedy) enough to buy his patronage.

So, Bush will keep us in Iraq. Fine. Kerry will bring the world into Iraq so that the costs, and risks, are shared by those who will benefit from a stable, peaceful Iraq. Right now, the only ones paying for it are you and me.

You're confused? To me, this is the easiest decision I've ever had to make. I suppose if all I cared about was my bank account growing, I might give Bush a consideration. But, then I'd have to ignore all the threats to my safety that I encounter, as a New Yorker, every day, or the fear that terrorists will breach Russia's almost non-existent security to obtain their coveted nuclear material or simply pay an out of work scientist to create it for them; and I'd still have to worry every time I flew on an airplane, or crossed a crumbling bridge, or...

I hope you get the idea.

All good statements. There is no denying the Bush - Binladen connection. Schools? Healthcare? - I dont see any short term improvments possible regardless of who is in office. I am pro choice, which Bush is not. During the clinton years I did fine financially, but not as well as I am doing now. Is that an effect of the President or is it just my self motivation, who know. Just concerned that many will make a purely emotional decision vs. a decision with a solid foundation.

By the way, I work on Wall St. and have for the past 7 years.

I find your perceptions fascinating. Bush better for the economy? What would it take to convince you otherwise? A total, wheelbarrow full of dollars to buy a loaf of bread collapse? Bush has been horrible for the economy. Don't believe me? Look at the stock market. It's fallen and it can't get up. Look at the job market. Millions of jobs lost. And new jobs? Paying just a fraction of those that were lost. Taxes? So he cut federal taxes which, BTW, has brought us closer to bankruptcy than we've ever been before (remember how Clinton left us with the most solvent country in recent history. It took Bush less than 4 years to squander it). So, congratulations, that rebate check you were sent may have enabled you, a well to do citizen, to buy a new luxury item. But it has to be paid for by the vast majority of Americans who can't afford it. Instead of perhaps offering health care to millions of Americans, or really affordable prescription drugs to seniors, or not cutting veterans' benefits, or investing in better roads and bridges, or a viable railway system, or upgrading airports, or modernizing air traffic control to alleviate a dangerously overburdened, accident waiting to happen, system, or not threatening to cut funding to the one program that guarantees that terrorists will not drop a nuclear bomb on us- securing Russia's stockpile and paying their scientists to not develop bombs for rogue states, or installing the cutting edge technology that would allow every single container that enters our ports to be screened, or developing alternatives to oil sooner, or ensuring that every child gets a GOOD education (no better way to fight poverty than a good education), and that every good student, no matter how poor, can get a good college education, or just making this country a cleaner, more beautiful place, instead of all these things, Bush gave money to the very people who didn't need it. Are you really so disinterested in your country, so uncaring of your fellow Americans, especially those who aren't as prosperous as you, that you believe that your rebate check was the best use of our tax dollars?

Were you really doing so badly under Clinton? Because Kerry merely wants to roll back your tax burden to what it was under Clinton. And, as I'm sure you've noticed, interest rates have started to rise. Republicans cry bloody murder about how raising taxes will destroy our economy. Yet history proves them fantastically wrong. But they continue to sing the same old song.

You may think that Kerry is a wimp, but, apparently, that's not what the terrorists believe. Bin Laden has been quoted as saying that their goal is to get Bush re-elected because he is so easily manipulated into doing what they want. They consider him to make decisions that "feel good" to us, but in reality weaken us. And, based on the past few years, I'd have to say, emphatically, they're right. Bush has been beyond a disaster for this country. We're not safe in our cities. We're not safe anywhere there's any major infrastructure, or water supplies, or cargo or people. That's not my opinion. All you have to do is listen to his department of homeland security. Disaster. Hurricane W has devastated our country from coast to coast. From giveaways to the drug industry, at taxpayer expense, to losing almost every single ally we've gained from the second world war, GWB has sold out you and me and every other American EXCEPT for those few who are wealthy (and greedy) enough to buy his patronage.

So, Bush will keep us in Iraq. Fine. Kerry will bring the world into Iraq so that the costs, and risks, are shared by those who will benefit from a stable, peaceful Iraq. Right now, the only ones paying for it are you and me.

You're confused? To me, this is the easiest decision I've ever had to make. I suppose if all I cared about was my bank account growing, I might give Bush a consideration. But, then I'd have to ignore all the threats to my safety that I encounter, as a New Yorker, every day, or the fear that terrorists will breach Russia's almost non-existent security to obtain their coveted nuclear material or simply pay an out of work scientist to create it for them; and I'd still have to worry every time I flew on an airplane, or crossed a crumbling bridge, or...

I hope you get the idea.

Was the idea that you are a windbag? :D

Those that have beliefs they will not alter based on FACTS cannot be swayed. Faith based, not fact based. Arguing with faith is a waste of time.

Those that turn turn their backs on fact cause more problems for themselves and others than any other group in the history of the world.

Belief has its place, don't get me wrong.

----------------

Credo of Crash Davis


Annie: What do you believe in then?

Crash: Well, I believe in the soul. The cock. The Pu$$y. The small of a woman's back. The hanging curveball. High fiber. Good scotch. That the novels of Susan Sontag are self-indulgent, overrated crap. I believe Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. I believe there ought to be a Constitution Amendment outlawing Astroturf and the designated hitter. I believe in the sweet spot, soft-core pornography, opening your presents Christmas morning rather than Christmas eve. And I believe in long, slow, deep, soft, wet kisses that last three days...Goodnight. [He exits]

Annie (with a voice that could melt butter): Oh my.


Dr. Hoo after reading that me and my wife have decided to watch that on DVD.

Oh My...

Hopefully followed by garters, candles and a bubble bath. but I digress...

would rather not vote for Bush but Kerry seems so weak. I believe Bush will be better for the economy. I believe Bush will keep fighting in Iraq. I believe if Kerry becoms president there will be more terrorist attack on the US to test the water. I believe Kerry will raise my taxes and cause interest rates to soar

If that's what you really think, in sharp contrast to the actual facts that are not hard to know, (as other's have pointed out in some detail above) then it is obvious that the Neocon spin-machine has done its job well.

I hope you don't take this the wrong way because it's an honest criticism and not an attack: you may be smart and/or lucky enough to have done well on Wall St., but it seems that otherwise (so far) you're not too smart.

If that's what you really think, in sharp contrast to the actual facts that are not hard to know, (as other's have pointed out in some detail above) then it is obvious that the Neocon spin-machine has done its job well.

I hope you don't take this the wrong way because it's an honest criticism and not an attack: you may be smart and/or lucky enough to have done well on Wall St., but it seems that otherwise (so far) you're not too smart.

The idea is not to give your opinion of me, a person you will never meet. The idea is the see what is really swaying the average Amercan voter. The current polls calim a close race. I dont believe it is truly that close and I dont think it is going to be that tight as we get closer to November.

I'm sure landing on Wall St. was all luck. The next time I am on Bloomberg televison, i'll drop you a PM and you can form your own decsion. The importance of offering the location of my job is to demonstrate that I am in the single most bleeding wound of Bush's error, the 1 billion dollar per day injury he has basically ignored.

I find your perceptions fascinating. Bush better for the economy? What would it take to convince you otherwise? A total, wheelbarrow full of dollars to buy a loaf of bread collapse? Bush has been horrible for the economy. Don't believe me? Look at the stock market. It's fallen and it can't get up. Look at the job market. Millions of jobs lost. And new jobs? Paying just a fraction of those that were lost. Taxes? So he cut federal taxes which, BTW, has brought us closer to bankruptcy than we've ever been before (remember how Clinton left us with the most solvent country in recent history. It took Bush less than 4 years to squander it). So, congratulations, that rebate check you were sent may have enabled you, a well to do citizen, to buy a new luxury item. But it has to be paid for by the vast majority of Americans who can't afford it. Instead of perhaps offering health care to millions of Americans, or really affordable prescription drugs to seniors, or not cutting veterans' benefits, or investing in better roads and bridges, or a viable railway system, or upgrading airports, or modernizing air traffic control to alleviate a dangerously overburdened, accident waiting to happen, system, or not threatening to cut funding to the one program that guarantees that terrorists will not drop a nuclear bomb on us- securing Russia's stockpile and paying their scientists to not develop bombs for rogue states, or installing the cutting edge technology that would allow every single container that enters our ports to be screened, or developing alternatives to oil sooner, or ensuring that every child gets a GOOD education (no better way to fight poverty than a good education), and that every good student, no matter how poor, can get a good college education, or just making this country a cleaner, more beautiful place, instead of all these things, Bush gave money to the very people who didn't need it. Are you really so disinterested in your country, so uncaring of your fellow Americans, especially those who aren't as prosperous as you, that you believe that your rebate check was the best use of our tax dollars?

Were you really doing so badly under Clinton? Because Kerry merely wants to roll back your tax burden to what it was under Clinton. And, as I'm sure you've noticed, interest rates have started to rise. Republicans cry bloody murder about how raising taxes will destroy our economy. Yet history proves them fantastically wrong. But they continue to sing the same old song.

You may think that Kerry is a wimp, but, apparently, that's not what the terrorists believe. Bin Laden has been quoted as saying that their goal is to get Bush re-elected because he is so easily manipulated into doing what they want. They consider him to make decisions that "feel good" to us, but in reality weaken us. And, based on the past few years, I'd have to say, emphatically, they're right. Bush has been beyond a disaster for this country. We're not safe in our cities. We're not safe anywhere there's any major infrastructure, or water supplies, or cargo or people. That's not my opinion. All you have to do is listen to his department of homeland security. Disaster. Hurricane W has devastated our country from coast to coast. From giveaways to the drug industry, at taxpayer expense, to losing almost every single ally we've gained from the second world war, GWB has sold out you and me and every other American EXCEPT for those few who are wealthy (and greedy) enough to buy his patronage.

So, Bush will keep us in Iraq. Fine. Kerry will bring the world into Iraq so that the costs, and risks, are shared by those who will benefit from a stable, peaceful Iraq. Right now, the only ones paying for it are you and me.

You're confused? To me, this is the easiest decision I've ever had to make. I suppose if all I cared about was my bank account growing, I might give Bush a consideration. But, then I'd have to ignore all the threats to my safety that I encounter, as a New Yorker, every day, or the fear that terrorists will breach Russia's almost non-existent security to obtain their coveted nuclear material or simply pay an out of work scientist to create it for them; and I'd still have to worry every time I flew on an airplane, or crossed a crumbling bridge, or...

I hope you get the idea.

As much as I would like to read this post, I have difficulty reading these types of run on sentences.

Next time could you shorten your paragraph structure to five or six lines to create ease of reading for these old eyes?

Kerry or Bush? Which and why?

I am a 33 year old 98th percentile american living in NY. I am torn beyond belief, are you? I agree with mant that Bush is a mad man. I like my life though. Kerry seems like too much of a wimp to me.

I am sure there are millions like me.

So we are to read the above as a question of what is "really swaying the American voter", or just that you yourself are in a dilemma as to whom to vote for? I must have misunderstood.(?)

But rather than argue semantics, I will just say that given what you've mentioned, that:

I am in the single most bleeding wound of Bush's error, the 1 billion dollar per day injury he has basically ignored.

...and taking let's say a 'lowest common demoninator' view and ignoring K's strengths, do you think it probable that K could or would do much worse? Perhaps he could inflict a $1.5 or $2 billion a day bloodletting? With even more monstrous national and trade deficits, and even greater job losses, business failures, bankruptcies? How? And why?

Do you think it very likely that K would pander as much or more to the corporate welfare interests as GWB has done? With the kind and size of tax cuts unleashed on the American public in a time of national conflict, which has never been done previously in U.S. history? And could or would K possibly do any more serious damage to the world's confidence and trust in the U.S., and world stability in general, than GWB has done already, (which as you know has a great bearing upon foreign investment in the U.S., as well as upon oil prices)?

And that's just some of the economic issues.

I fail to see the quandary you speak of. I think it would be a no-brainer whether the Dems were running Kerry/Edwards or Donald Duck & Pluto.

So we are to read the above as a question of what is "really swaying the American voter", or just that you yourself are in a dilemma as to whom to vote for? I must have misunderstood.(?)

But rather than argue semantics, I will just say that given what you've mentioned, that:



...and taking let's say a 'lowest common demoninator' view and ignoring K's strengths, do you think it probable that K could or would do much worse? Perhaps he could inflict a $1.5 or $2 billion a day bloodletting? With even more monstrous national and trade deficits, and even greater job losses, business failures, bankruptcies? How? And why?

Do you think it very likely that K would pander as much or more to the corporate welfare interests as GWB has done? With the kind and size of tax cuts unleashed on the American public in a time of national conflict, which has never been done previously in U.S. history? And could or would K possibly do any more serious damage to the world's confidence and trust in the U.S., and world stability in general, than GWB has done already, (which as you know has a great bearing upon foreign investment in the U.S., as well as upon oil prices)?

And that's just some of the economic issues.

I fail to see the quandary you speak of. I think it would be a no-brainer whether the Dems were running Kerry/Edwards or Donald Duck & Pluto.

To me it is as clear as "Kerry/Edwards or Donald Duck & Pluto." Thats the problem. Interest rates are so low. Everyone I know in the banking industry is still getting 6 and 7 figure bonuses. But the cop on the corner cant get an extra 45 cents per hour.

-Banks will give mortgages to anyone good credit bad credit- no matter.
-Home values are astronomical (How many people do you know have a home that has tripled in value in the past 2 years, but cant move to another home because it is too expensive? We are going to have some f-ed up school districts and neighborhoods in the future)
-Personal credit card debt is out of control.
-Detriot has been giving consumers free money for automobiles for the past 4 years.
-UAW union delagates cant get the workers a raise.
-The religous right is making steps to control the media. -Bush driven.
-City and Federal taxes are low, costs to run citys properly are up.
-Property tax is high, but my garbage man cant pay his co-pay for a prescription for his kids.

You may think its a no brianer, I may think its a no brainer, but the polls are showing a close race. I feel to hear what people are thinking by using the power of anonymity - an internet forum is valuable information. Watch the stock market for the next 3 months, you are going to see a lot of red. Interest rates up 50 basis points this summer alone = less spending. There is no doubt Bush is a mad man. There is no doubt we are coasting on economic fumes. Is there a repair in sight?

I'm not in the top percentile, but DO believe trickle down economics work. Why, well it's easy. I just looked at the results from my last tax returns. I don't believe everything the swift boat folks said (though I do believe some) :rolleyes: , but do believe Kerry is a complete traitor to the armed forces, and should have been prosecuted by Courts Martial in 1971. I don't like how Iraq is going, but also don't like the Kerry "I don't support it" oh wait, "I do support it" oh, wait, geez, what am I supposed to say today? I don't like the fact that a combination of all time highs in productivity, increased efficiencies from the tech sector, and the fact that our standard of living requires higher wages is supposed to mean that Bush is "anti-economy". I don't like the idea of John Kerry being politically funded on the dollars from his crass wife's late husband - the late John Heinz (who detested Kerry, and who is probably rolling over in his grave right now). I don't like 9/11, but also have to give some credit to Bush for inheriting the refuse caused by Slick Willy, with reference to a gutted military, poor intelligence organization, and a lost focus.

So, let's make it easy. Those of you who have the "OPINION" that the facts say one thing, please recall that those same facts are interpreted very differently from some other (relatively) cogent people.

I'll tell you flat out wmhjr, that's one of the dumbest statements I've seen around here, (right up there with the likes of bill105 and Morgan), and is straight out of the Official Neocon Brainwashing Manual. Not to mention that every one of your points have been decisively shot down so often that they resemble a poor imitation of Swiss cheese.

Be a good noob and just lurk-a-while, hmm? You might learn something to cure your blind allegiance to such dopey fallacies. And it might help to occasionally try to watch something besides Fox News.

Kerry. Bush as a lame duck President really truly scares me.

I'm not in the top percentile, but DO believe trickle down economics work. Why, well it's easy. I just looked at the results from my last tax returns. .

That trickle down theory only works if you took that extra money and hired someone to work for you, or invested in a start up venture.

Getting a few dollars back on your income tax does not mean trickle down economics work. ONLY the reinvestment of the money would make it a viable theory. Unfortunatly as we have seen all too often, companies and those in power would rather have profits over investment. Rendering trickle down economics moot.

That trickle down theory only works if you took that extra money and hired someone to work for you, or invested in a start up venture.

Getting a few dollars back on your income tax does not mean trickle down economics work. ONLY the reinvestment of the money would make it a viable theory. Unfortunatly as we have seen all too often, companies and those in power would rather have profits over investment. Rendering trickle down economics moot.


At the individual level... aside from the net loss of purchase power of the average income, and aside from lost income from "job reassignment" after loss of job, I wonder how much "surplus" income is going toward paying off consumer debt or going into savings for a war chest (lest financial castastrophy strike (again)). My wife and I seem to be spending less and less money. My point is, I think there is less available to trickle down these days.

Also, I am currently on a trip in Europe, and I am amazed at how far the dollar has slid- the worst I have ever seen.

And AJS, your response is the most ridiculous response I've seen. Show me the facts. Show me where ANY of my points have been shot down. For the record, I'm not a huge GW supporter. I'm frankly just more opposed to Kerry than I am unhappy with GW.

So, if you would like to debate facts rather than hurl insults, I'm OK with that. I have no beef with people who don't agree with my opinions. I just don't like it when people represent their opinions as facts. Debating the interpretatino of those facts is cool - part of what this country is all about. Otherwise, I suggest you adopt lurking yourself. It would be quite beneficial.

I'll tell you flat out wmhjr, that's one of the dumbest statements I've seen around here, (right up there with the likes of bill105 and Morgan), and is straight out of the Official Neocon Brainwashing Manual. Not to mention that every one of your points have been decisively shot down so often that they resemble a poor imitation of Swiss cheese.

Be a good noob and just lurk-a-while, hmm? You might learn something to cure your blind allegiance to such dopey fallacies. And it might help to occasionally try to watch something besides Fox News.

And AJS, your response is the most ridiculous response I've seen. Show me the facts. Show me where ANY of my points have been shot down. For the record, I'm not a huge GW supporter. I'm frankly just more opposed to Kerry than I am unhappy with GW.

So, if you would like to debate facts rather than hurl insults, I'm OK with that. I have no beef with people who don't agree with my opinions. I just don't like it when people represent their opinions as facts. Debating the interpretatino of those facts is cool - part of what this country is all about. Otherwise, I suggest you adopt lurking yourself. It would be quite beneficial.

wmhjr,

please go easy on ajs. he can hardly type with the noise of all those black helicopters plus they didnt let him out of his cell into the yard yesterday till 2p.

The problem with the economy will get nothing but worse. It's really a simple problem. We in the US have a high standard of living (No, I don't want to get into a debate about homeless, etc). I'm talking about Middle America. However, that standard was built upon a large manufacturing force in an industrial economy. Unfortunately, we now have three factors working against us. First, technology has increased efficiency such that it frankly takes far less to do far more. Instant translation into lost jobs as that technology becomes maintstream. Examples? Engineering drawings automatically converted to cutting plans for automated plasma cutters on the shop floor - that means more jobs are lost than are gained. Second, our standard of living (own your own house, 2 kids, 2 cars, everyone goes to college, etc). How do we compete with low cost country sourcing when we've got much higher expectations? Finally, we seem to insist that we want a free economy BUT we don't want to deal with either of the first two issues. Too much old Union based philosophy. I don't have the answers, but neither does John Kerry.

At the individual level... aside from the net loss of purchase power of the average income, and aside from lost income from "job reassignment" after loss of job, I wonder how much "surplus" income is going toward paying off consumer debt or going into savings for a war chest (lest financial castastrophy strike (again)). My wife and I seem to be spending less and less money. My point is, I think there is less available to trickle down these days.

Also, I am currently on a trip in Europe, and I am amazed at how far the dollar has slid- the worst I have ever seen.

Show me the facts. Show me where ANY of my points have been shot down.

Clue: Avail yourself of this site's search function.

For the record, I'm not a huge GW supporter. I'm frankly just more opposed to Kerry than I am unhappy with GW.

Looks like yours is the new "moderate Republican" mantra: "Gee, I'm not that crazy about GWB, but he's better than K." A convenient way to avoid responsibility for supporting a megalomaniacal dry drunk and his pathological minions?

Meanwhile, shouldn't we discuss pugdog's more cogent questions/arguments, as his were the original topic(s) of this thread? (Which I will hopefully have time to do after my 22 mile "sprint" ride today - if it doesn't rain - AGAIN! :mad: )