Clinton or Bush?

[Takingsunday21]

Just curious who you would vote for? CNN may conduct this poll and it got me thinking.

Takingsunday21 Reviewed by Takingsunday21 on 08-11-2005. Clinton or Bush? Just curious who you would vote for? CNN may conduct this poll and it got me thinking. Rating: 5

[amsterdam]

Bush!

dosent matter,they will never face each other.McCain in '08

[ermitonto]

Neither. I don't support Republicrats.

[Canadabis]

I picked bush, but i voted Nader like 15 times. I cant believe they let a Canadian do that, meh.

Seriously though, destabilizing the U.S. is allowing hteings like hte E.U. and the Chinese to grow and increase trade, and more trade and more competition is great for everyone except America. So George Bush is "good" for the world by enabling change, but is really "bad" right at this moment, the thing im more concerned about is democrats winning pretty easily after bushs term, and having so much to clean up; more then they probably can in a single term; allowing the republicans to win maybe 2 more in a row after the next democrat term, meaning htat when these old superior court judges retire it WILL BE REPUBLICAN HARDLINERS who get to pick the next ones. That will allow one or two constitution changes thats bad folks, abortion-gone, drugs-nixon prison times, guns-for everyone, anti american protests-gone, anti establishmentalism-labelled too destablising/dangerous to continue FOR YOUR OWN GOOD
So really Bush is only the precurser for a looooooooooooooooooong trend of destablizing policy changes.

[Takingsunday21]

That's a nice theory, but I don't see why we would have to have a Republican after the next Democrat? I get what you mean for the next president being a Democrat but why would America vote in another Republican after we get a Democrat in?

[Canadabis]

Well the way I look at it, the status quo will be like the Vietnam war, it becomes an inherited problem, makes anyone involved look bad. So after Bush people will be sick of Republicans, enough to vote in a Democrat, now this poor obeese black lesbian (ok ok white middle aged man of wealth from an ivy league school) will be stuck with a very badly losing war, economic dificulties, trade problems etc, and a supreme court that is probably going to be a little combative, so im thinking that will lead to a good try, maybe even a very effective term, but public opinion will be easily spun by images of an even more fucked up war/scandal etc that has been laid in Bush's last term in office. So after this term of progress and improvement (thats the "best" case scenario) the people will most likely be very upset with whats going on, it will be on paper worse then in Bush's time, then in come the republicans with promises of stability, tough stance on issues, America first yadda yadda in goes George Bush junior-junior (whatever, you know what I mean, all out republican) and the real damage that will be done is that in that term, in 2012-2016 all the supreme court judges pending retirement will retire, being replaced by republican friendly hard liners, setting the stage for constitution changes over the next few years to set up multi term presidencies (tehre are precedents in the past) abolishment of some rights and freedoms, for everyones safety etc.

[mellow mood]

i still cant beleive how someone can vote for Bush

**sigh**

[Takingsunday21]

Alright, I see what you're saying now Canada, but it took a Clinton (democrat) to clean up the last Bush's mess and it will take another. Bill Clinton was a great president until he lied under oath. If the next Democrat cleans up after Bush and doesn't pull anything stupid I think we could pull out with another following him.

[mellow mood]

i think americans will vote again for Bush in the next election


i think im gonna cry

[ezjim]

Neither. I don't support Republicrats.

you got it dude they are no more than oposames ...other than a couple petty social diferances of opinion they are exactly the same