PDA

View Full Version : It was bad in 2000, it's worse in 2004...what about 2008?



PhinPhan1227
08-18-2004, 02:12 PM
The election in 2000 was close, divisive, contestable, and it sponsored hard feelings at best, and hatred at worst from the losing half of the country. So far, the 2004 election is making that one look like a polite sharing of opinions. Regardless of which side wins, if 2008 is similar step in the wrong direction, I could see actual violence resulting. Kerry or Bush, whichever side wins the losing side is going to spend 4 years complaining/mulling/seething about it. If Bush wins, even if he once again embraces his moderate roots, there's so much bad feeling that half the country will hate him no matter what. And Kerry being pretty much the polar opposite of Bush, I can't see him inspiring any better feelings from the Right. What is it going to take to get a moderate choice? What is it going to take to get a Lieberman, or a McCain, or BOTH? The small hope I hold on to is the likely choice of candidates we will be seeing in 2008. If Bush wins there won't be an incumbant VP to run, so that leaves an opening for McCain to win the Republican nomination, and Lieberman the Dem.. Conversely, if Kerry wins I see his Presidency being so "milktoast" that I don't know that he would be a serious threat to a Presidential bid by McCain, and/or a strong move by Lieberman to run a cross PArty ticket in opposition. This is my fervent hope and prayer. The alternative could be a scenario of Hillary running against whatever hard right winger is put forward to follow Bush, or Kerry eunning for reelection aghainst some hard right winger. That scenario really does leave a strong possility of our election process facing challenges it has not seen in more than 150 years.

baracuda
08-18-2004, 02:34 PM
I'm personally sick of all the talk, backstabbing, lying, manipulation, theivery, and downright juvenile virtiol from both sides of the fence. It's the partisan politics and political corruption of the Government as a whole that keeps more then 50% of the eligible voters at home on election day. As a person you can only absorb so much negativity before you simply throw your arms in the air and say screw it.

Bottom line is that government is big business. It's not about what's best for America but about how much power and money one team can accumulate. Politicians don't want to get elected to serve, they want to be served. It's all about the money.

Furthermore, I laugh at the stupidity of people who contribute to campaigns of national candidates. Nothing like giving money to an unworthy cause. If people really wanted to get these guys attention you'd stop contributing to their campaigns and when they run out of money they'd have to actually go out and get a real job. When the money of special interests and kickbacks from countless sources goes away you'll then discover the true servant politician. But as it is right now you have nothing but money hungry fools running our affairs.

"We have the government we deserve".

PhinPhan1227
08-18-2004, 03:57 PM
One disagreement...I'd say "power hungry", rather than "money hungry". These guys would make more cold hard cash by staying in the private secotr.

Kencoboy
08-19-2004, 03:23 AM
The problem is and has been for a long time is the political system keeps the real moderates like McCain and Lieberman from winning their parties nomination or even competing for it. Or wanting it. I'm not a conspiracy nut, but I swear I hear the same old moderate BS from each side to get elected year after year after year so that once they hold office they do whatever the hell they want. It is no coincidence to me that Bush and Kerry were both members of the Skull and Bones society at Yale, which a few believe is kin to the Illuminati. I would like to think that crap can't happen, but I'm not so sure anymore. We all would like to see an honest man take charge of this country and fix it, but any honest man stays far far away from the madness that is Washington D.C.. Moreover, does anyone really think that the powers that be would actually let the mess be cleaned up. Money is power, and the people that control the money are the most powerful in our society, specifically Congress and to a lesser extent our Government as a whole.

I agree. The country is divided along political lines for many different reasons and generally when this has happened in our history violence will occur. The real question is how drastic the violence will be and what will be the result. I believe the longer the War on Terrorism lasts (which will be forever) the more the country moves toward a new peace movement similar to the one in the Sixties - and with that will come violence. It's a damn shame this seems to happen, especially in a "democracy", but that's how cultures change, and we are due!!!

PhinPhan1227
08-19-2004, 08:24 AM
I doubt we see a peace movement like the 60's. I just HAVE to believe that people aren't that stupid. It took the stiffling "Leave it to Beaver" environment of the 50's to bring about the 60's.

MikeO
08-19-2004, 09:31 AM
I know it has sunk to an all-time low when Bill O'Riely is even saying going after Kery and "vietnam" and what happened over there and what-not, is taking american politics to a bad place and to an all time new low!

Coming from a guy as far right as him this actually carries some weight.

PhinPhan1227
08-19-2004, 09:54 AM
I know it has sunk to an all-time low when Bill O'Riely is even saying going after Kery and "vietnam" and what happened over there and what-not, is taking american politics to a bad place and to an all time new low!

Coming from a guy as far right as him this actually carries some weight.


I agree...it's not important. Now, what he did when he got BACK from Vietnam....THAT is important.