The XMEN Clan Forums

As there seemed to be some desire for a thread like this over in the Election 2004 Poll thread, I figured I'd make one.<br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Rules:</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>Thou shalt not flame other posters.<br><br>Thy opinions must be expressed as such, preferably with [opinion] tags around the paragraph or sentence. <br><br>Points argued as fact must be linked in a satisfactory manner. <br>EXAMPLE: Saying that Candidate X has sexual relations with sheep is a fact simply because you read it on BillyBob's House-O-News and linked it isn't good enough. Points argued as fact should have two sources verifying it... preferably from two different news sources. (Something that both Fox and CNN agree on is very likely fact, unless it's a massive conspiracy no one has a chance of cracking, like that one about The Gipper being an alien or something.)<br><br>Those who make accusational points <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>CANNOT</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> ask others to prove the negative of that point. <br>EXAMPLE (important stuff in bold):<br>"Candidate X shot my dad!"<br>"Are you nuts?"<br>"No, he did. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Find me something that says he didn't!</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>Corollary to above rule: If you assert a point, it's <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>your</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> job to come up with the proof of that point, not everyone else's.<br><br>----<br><br>If this thread gets out of hand (ie: rules above, particularly the first one, are broken more than a couple of times), it's locked. <p></p><i></i>

I'll start off.<br><br>I'm voting for Kerry. Not because I <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>want</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> to.<br><br>[opinion]<br><br>To clarify the above, I should say that I'm not exactly displeased with Bush himself. He's a personable guy, stands up for what he believes in, and that's a lot more than you'll get from most politicians these days.<br><br>No, it's not Bush I don't like... it's his <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>cabinet</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->. Everything I see tells me they push Bush around, or at least <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>lead</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> him around. This is hard to quantify, because I don't have specific records or transcripts, which is why all of this is my opinion.<br><br>But the end result is that I dislike his cabinet so much that I'd vote for the other guy just to get <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>them</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> out of office. So while I fall under the 'anybody but Bush' category of voters, I'm more accurately pigeonholed as a 'anybody but Bush's cabinet' voter. I'm at the point where I think that Kerry can't <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>possibly</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> bring in a set of people that are any worse than the current sitting Cabinet members, which is, quite frankly, not a place I want to be.<br><br>[end opinion] <p></p><i></i>

I'm dubbing this election year as "The Lesser of Two Evils." I like what ya said about Bush though. I do think he's a good man, but his cabinet on the other hand....<br><br>Kerry might as well start making grand pitches such as, "every american citizen shall have free ice cream on Fridays." I mean he's promising everything under the sun yet he doesn't detail his plans.<br><br>The thing I'm really getting sick of is the media coverage of both candidates military history & records. C'mon, focus on the issues instead of "breaking news" events such as Bush went a.w.o.l. for 1 week and Kerry actually commanded a toy pez dispenser vs. a swift boat. It gets old. What happened in the past is in the past. I'd like to see it focused on what is going to happen now and the future.<br><br>While I agree that habits, rumors, etc., of their past can be somewhat significant, one cannot deny that we elected a b.s. artist not too long ago and he dished out the bull right in our faces. <p></p><i></i>

The problem with electing someone (not just a president...) who follows the polls is that he (or she) then always makes the "safe" choice. Safe choices, as you should know, almost never are, and a day of reckoning comes sooner or later.<br><br>For example, dealing with Social Security budgets is not a fun thing. Ignoring the problem until it's no longer on your plate, while making enough noise about it to get the senior vote, is what we've been seeing repeatedly over the years. Same for the deficit. Same for so many problems.<br><br>IMO, this was Clinton and this is Kerry. This is not Bush. <br><br>I will agree that if he's getting bad information or advice, the decisions he makes are not going to be, shall we say, optimal. There are certainly decisions that he's made that I'm not pleased with. But then there are things that he does that I think are very good. His heart, I believe, is definitely in the right place.<br><br> <p><!--EZCODE IMAGE START--><img src="http://www.xmenclan.org/xmengambit.gif"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END--><br>XMEN member<br>Card-carrying DTM<br>OKL Fish-napper<br><br>Though a program be but three lines long, someday it will have to be maintained.<br><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em> The Tao of Programming</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--></p><i></i>

Bush take responsibility for his actions, and tries to inspire confidence in his country by being bold in his actions. This boldness is unfortunatly misinterpeted by many as an arrogance. What does it really matter who his Cabinet is, (although I do not like several of his Cabinet) the final decision rests with him.<br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.georgewbush.com/nineinnings/ ... <!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br>Okay I know this video is from the Bush reelection site and is made to endear the President to the people watching but think of this. The Secret Service, Local Police and every other law agency involved probably advised him against this but he did it in order to inspire the nation, not further his Presidency. <p></p><i></i>