Should Kerry really be President?

B_Stronzo

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2005
Posts
4,588
Media
0
Likes
130
Points
183
Location
Plimoth Plantation
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
brainzz_n_dong said:
That a poll's results were shown (I'M SHOCKED) wrong doesn't mean there is a vast right-wing conspiracy at work behind the scenes making it so.

I simply present the article by way of URL. Make of it what you will. :smile:
 

mindseye

Experimental Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2002
Posts
3,399
Media
0
Likes
15
Points
258
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Shelby said:
If, with all of his money, he wasn't smart enough to lawyer up and successfully contest an election he actually won, then hell no he shouldn't be President.

Too stupid.


Oh, bullshit. Thrice bullshit:
  1. Having money to afford a legal challenge should not be a qualification for president.
  2. Suggesting that of the two candidates, Kerry "wasn't smart enough". . . bwahahahahaaaaaa.
  3. And if Kerry had mounted a legal challenge, Shelby, you're exactly the sort of person I'd expect to attack him for doing so.
 

B_NineInchCock_160IQ

Sexy Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2006
Posts
6,196
Media
0
Likes
40
Points
183
Location
where the sun never sets
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
Stronzo said:
....... and this, dear NineInch, you'd consider a "bad thing"?

Popularity should not a president make. Ability ought to.

Most people of thought and consideration with whom I spoke, no matter what their geography, were pro-Kerry during the last elelction. You assume middle America was blanketly pro the war monger. I think that's a bit of a generalization.

Wow, way to go completely off-topic to rebutt something I said that was relevant with something else completely unrelated. Maybe George Bush is an idiot and a horrible president, maybe Kerry would have made a better president, that has nothing to do with either what I said or what your original post was.
I'm quite sure that the people whom you spoke to were not a representative sampling of the American populace. More than likely they were just a collection of your like-minded friends. Or else posters on this board, who are overwhelmingly liberal. Even the most liberal polling agencies out there when conducting polls on the popularity of either cantidate before the election never found Kerry to be ahead by more than a few percentage points... and in the weeks and days leading up to the election he was consistently trailing Bush, whose approval rating at the time was way above what it has dropped to these days. are you implying those were all fixed, too? By your own anti-democratic assertions, which I may agree with myself, popular does not necessarily equal what is good or what is right. So why do you, in the very next paragraph, start backpedaling and try to prove that Kerry was in fact more popular? Didn't you just say he didn't have to be? Is it really so important to you to believe that he was, in spite of your articulated "sour grapes" attitude that it shouldn't matter?
 

brainzz_n_dong

Just Browsing
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Posts
226
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
161
Age
34
Stronzo said:
I simply present the article by way of URL. Make of it what you will. :smile:

Being more than just a little disingenuous there. The article has conspiracy theories hanging from it like snakes from Medusa's head.

Repubs fan the flames of certain issues that they use to appeal to their base. Dems do the same thing. RFK's article is but the latest flogging of this ghost, certainly not the last.
 

Freddie53

Superior Member
Gold
Joined
Nov 19, 2004
Posts
5,842
Media
0
Likes
2,609
Points
333
Location
Memphis (Tennessee, United States)
Gender
Male
The story about Ohio has been circling around now for a while. It is not new to this thread.

No one contested Arkansas's results either. And I'm sure there was no conspiracy. It is just that the person in charge of the elections for the county that Little Rock is in was a total incompetent person whome both the Democrats and the Republicans all denounced as the same thing happen in the previous two elections.

But in Little Rock, thousands finally left the long lines. Some thought that the closing of the polls meant that if you hadn't voted then you couldn't vote. The rule is if you are in the line it doesn't matter when you get to vote (if you were in the line) The deal though is Little Rock is primarily Democratic. The loss of votes here did make a difference. Perhaps enough to through the election here. Though in this particular election Kerry would have needed more than Arkansas's votes to win.

My point is that there are all kinds of glitzhes in elections. Some are conspiracies and some just happen. They still affect the outcome of who gets elected.

Every one rejoiced when that person finally left office.
 

B_Stronzo

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2005
Posts
4,588
Media
0
Likes
130
Points
183
Location
Plimoth Plantation
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
brainzz_n_dong said:
Being more than just a little disingenuous there. The article has conspiracy theories hanging from it like snakes from Medusa's head.
Not disingenuous in the least. I asked you to make of it what you will and you did. See?

Repubs fan the flames of certain issues that they use to appeal to their base. Dems do the same thing. RFK's article is but the latest flogging of this ghost, certainly not the last.

Yeah but "Repubs" (largely in the form of fatty Limbaugh) were the first to initiate slash and burn all out attacks of this form. High time the Repugs got a bit of their own back.:cool:
NineInchCock said:
Wow, way to go completely off-topic to rebutt something I said that was relevant with something else completely unrelated.
Yea, well I get to it's my thread.:biggrin1: In politcs you guys have shown us it's dog-eat-dog dude.
 

B_Stronzo

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2005
Posts
4,588
Media
0
Likes
130
Points
183
Location
Plimoth Plantation
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
NineInchCock_160IQ said:
I'm quite sure that the people whom [sic] you spoke to were not a representative sampling of the American populace.
OH, but yours were? You fuckwad, cut the shit.

More than likely they were just a collection of your like-minded friends.
Do you don't have the vaguest clue who I know you pip squeak.


Or else posters on this board, who are overwhelmingly liberal.

Ooooooooooooooooo speaking of "sour grapes"... is your vast intellectual acumen that keeps you here or simply that banana forté between your legs:33:

Even the most liberal polling agencies out there when conducting polls on the popularity of either cantidate before the election never found Kerry to be ahead by more than a few percentage points... and in the weeks and days leading up to the election he was consistently trailing Bush, whose approval rating at the time was way above what it has dropped to these days.
Dude! Stop watching ABC nightly news!!! Now!!!!

are you implying those were all fixed, too?
I've not asserted anything was 'fixed'. I posted a URL to which you appear to take singular umbrage.

By your own anti-democratic assertions, which I may agree with myself,...
Oh the fuck you do.

popular does not necessarily equal what is good or what is right. So why do you, in the very next paragraph, start backpedaling and try to prove that Kerry was in fact more popular?
What you call 'back-peddling' I call objective reality. You say "toe may" toe" and I say "toe mah' toe".:biggrin1:

Didn't you just say he didn't have to be?
No.

Is it really so important to you to believe that he was, in spite of your articulated "sour grapes" attitude that it shouldn't matter?

What the fuck does this sentence mean? It's convultion has me stimied.
 

B_NineInchCock_160IQ

Sexy Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2006
Posts
6,196
Media
0
Likes
40
Points
183
Location
where the sun never sets
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
Stronzo said:
Not disingenuous in the least. I asked you to make of it what you will and you did. See?



Yeah but "Repubs" (largely in the form of fatty Limbaugh) were the first to initiate slash and burn all out attacks of this form. High time the Repugs got a bit of their own back.:cool:
Yea, well I get to it's my thread.:biggrin1: In politcs you guys have shown us it's dog-eat-dog dude.
you guys? So anyone who doesn't agree with you completely is automatically "you guys"? Let me guess... you think I'm a Republican? That's rich. My dad thinks I'm a flaming liberal.

Sometimes I feel like the only rational open-minded person in the room.



and... after reading your next post... and realizing this is completely beneath me... but also realizing that some idiots cannot be talked to like intelligent human beings. You're an asshole Stonzo. Go fuck yourself you egomaniacal halfwit dipshit. You're not half as cute as you think you are, either. I'd tell you to get your head out of your ass if I thought my advice would penetrate the flabby layers of your own assmeat your ears are currently buried in.
 

B_Stronzo

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2005
Posts
4,588
Media
0
Likes
130
Points
183
Location
Plimoth Plantation
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
NineInchCock_160IQ said:
My dad thinks I'm a flaming liberal.
:eek: Not really? Tell me you're joking.


and... after reading your next post... and realizing this is completely beneath me... but also realizing that some idiots cannot be talked to like intelligent human beings. You're an asshole Stonzo.
Love you too honey.

Go fuck yourself you egomaniacal halfwit dipshit.
At a boy! I knew you had it in ya! (or ought to....:rolleyes:)

You're not half as cute as you think you are, either.
You mean they're all lying??:redface: Quel dommage.

I'd tell you to get your head out of your ass if I thought my advice would penetrate the flabby layers of your own assmeat your ears are currently buried in.

That was quite well constructed. Well done.


dude? NEVER take what I say without that proverbial grain of salt. Makes you look too easy. :wink:
 

B_big dirigible

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Posts
2,672
Media
0
Likes
12
Points
183
Sexuality
No Response
NineInchCock_160IQ said:
Sometimes I feel like the only rational open-minded person in the room.

A lot of people make that mistake. Just about all of them are wrong - as per this thread.

Not to feel bad, Rene Descartes dropped the same clanger, and he was pretty smart. (See the first few paragraphs of "Discourse on Method", particularly if you suffer from insomnia).

But back on topic. Those following the antics of the latest embarrassment from the Kennedy dynasty might be interested in the Mystery Pollster's take on it,

http://www.mysterypollster.com/main/2006/06/is_rfk_jr_right.html

Beware that the MP makes some errors of his own, particularly re. his notion that the Great American Voter is in some sense a Gaussian variable.
 

RideRocket

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2005
Posts
3,009
Media
0
Likes
49
Points
268
Location
Arlington, VA, USA
Sexuality
80% Straight, 20% Gay
Gender
Male
Stronzo said:
Then check again. Perhaps, oh contrary one, you should read the link before you spout? Just a suggestion:rolleyes:

For your information, I did read the article. My point is that here is another article (2 years later!) about how the election was "stolen." Both parties have histories of tampering/attempting to tamper with the voting process.

As your article points out in the conclusion:
"American history is littered with vote fraud -- but rather than learning from our shameful past and cleaning up the system, we have allowed the problem to grow even worse. If the last two elections have taught us anything, it is this: The single greatest threat to our democracy is the insecurity of our voting system. If people lose faith that their votes are accurately and faithfully recorded, they will abandon the ballot box. Nothing less is at stake here than the entire idea of a government by the people."

The issue isn't who shoulda/woulda/coulda won the election, it's the lack of reform that's taken place to prevent future instances of people getting disenfranchised.
 

B_Stronzo

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2005
Posts
4,588
Media
0
Likes
130
Points
183
Location
Plimoth Plantation
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
RideRocket said:
For your information, I did read the article. My point is that here is another article (2 years later!) about how the election was "stolen." Both parties have histories of tampering/attempting to tamper with the voting process.

The issue isn't who shoulda/woulda/coulda won the election, it's the lack of reform that's taken place to prevent future instances of people getting disenfranchised.

See now? I have my 'information'. Thanks.

When you explain yourself and take things from a considered place of address I listen to you.

Again, for me, (since I get to react to my own thread) I think Bush would have sold his soul to the devil (perhaps even beezebub rejected him as too heinous) to be re-elected. Nothing surprises me in this country in this day.