Is there anyone here, who voted for Gore last time, and now is votiing for Bush?

I certainly voted for Bush last time.  This time, it will be Kerry.  If Kerry is overwhelmingly ahead, then Nader.

I did not vote last time. The choices were not something I liked and thought it would not matter. But after seeing W in action, I must vote for Kerry this time.

I voted for Nader last time and this time it will be Bush

I voted for the candidate who won last time  -- Gore --  and will vote Kerry this time.

I voted for Nader in 2000 (would have voted for Gore if I live in a state that mattered), will vote for Bush this time.

Read the constitution, Article II Section I.  Do you really want a popular vote?  There's a reason for the way that we have it.  Both Bush & Kerry are ignoring California since it's a near impossibility for Bush to win.  If it were a pure popularity contest then you would have the canidates spending time in only California, New York, Florida & Texas.  Do you really want to pick a president based upon the votes of only 4 states?

Kerry.

Will it matter, no.  

What is strange is that as a self proclaimed "international businessman", you would have supported Nader last time?  A profound socialist.

I guess I made the mistake of assuming that you were a capitalist.  Maybe you could explain to me how socialism and capitalism can co-exist?

If you still think Gore won Florida, check out all the independent recounts that were done by Florida newspapers post-election.  They all agreed that Bush really did win Florida and thus the general election.
 To say that Gore actually won is just an ignorant, dumb-ass statement not supported by the facts.

Mr bribite,

Corporatism is the combination of the worst of socialism and the worst of capitalism.

The GOP is totally for corporatism which privatizes profits and socializes risks.

Who had more votes?  total  from coast to coast?

We all know that GW should have backed off, said that my opponenent got more total votes and gone home, knowing that many more peoople voted against him than for him.


Any other choice was political.  Not national.

Not that we expect or ever get a presidential action from him.

Who would socialize everything?  Corporations work, they are owned by a cross section of Americans and foreign investors.  They are one of the main reasons the US has a 5.6% unemployment rate while france and germany suffer double digit unemployment rates well over double ours.  They are why the US has more productivity than the entire European Union.  The are why homeownership is at an all time high in the history of our country in 2004.  etc, etc.

I couldn't disagree  with your conclusion more.  I hold stock for example in Apple Computer, Microsoft, Marriott, etc..  Of course the profits are privatized (its called freedom), but explain the socializing risks?

Are you talking about propping up the airline industry after 9/11?  I don't agree with government bailouts, but we could ill afford the collapse of our airlines.  That one made sense to me.  The bailout of Chrysler worked out pretty well, Chrysler paid back the loan with interest, and continues to employ thousands... and make fine cars... and send me an occasional dividend check.

I am confused by your socializes risk comment.  Is your solution that the government handle everything and reap the profits?  If that is the case, you are a socialist too, and somewhat dense since socialism is failing everywhere or has already failed everywhere it has been tried.

Uh, yeah.  I thought that was the point of "majority rules"  - we have the Senate to protect the toothless flyover folk.

no Mr bribite

Corporatism means that profits are privatized and coroprate risks are socialized.

For example.  Union Carbide kills thousands in Bhopal, yet the cost of that reckless risregard for life is paid by society, not the corporation.

Or another example. so called tort reform will pass off the cost of mistakes by doctors and insurance comapnies to society rather than the corp.

This is the worst of all worlds.

the corp gets all the prfit, and you and I and the rest of society pay for the risks and crminal actions by coprs.

And it is probably a myth, anyway, that Gore won the popular vote.  Once Bush was declared the winner, they stopped counting the overseas absentee ballots, which favored Bush.  Add those uncounted votes and Bush very well may have won the popular vote too.

Stop listening to the lies of Rush and Hannity.

Hmmm, it seems as though W has forgotten some of his principles.
"When America uses force in the world, the cause must be just, the goal must be clear, and the victory must be overwhelming,'' said George W. Bush in 2000, when accepting his party's nomination.

My post simply stated that the Electoral College, not the popular vote, elects a president.  Do you not know this, or are you just ranting because you can't let the 2000 election go?

My post pointed out that nearly every post you make allows your foot to go a little deeper into your mouth. And since you love ex VP Al Gore so much, here is a link for you.


Here it is for you to peruse in your "Fuzzy" way.

Posted by CarlTheNeighbor , 9/9/2004 9:29:23 AM    

And it is probably a myth, anyway, that Gore won the popular vote.  Once Bush was declared the winner, they stopped counting the overseas absentee ballots, which favored Bush.  Add those uncounted votes and Bush very well may have won the popular vote too.

-- Modified on 9/11/2004 10:20:54 AM