enter the fray: our reader discussion forum
Search in:
Advanced
View:FlatThreaded
Page 1 of 2 (17 items)   1 2 Next >
Americans voted for Dubya TWICE.
by Anse

I can't really blame Obama. He's dealing with an electorate that has a track record of being completely irrational.

I was absolutely flabbergasted when Bush won reelection in '04. People blamed John Kerry, but how was it his fault? How could Americans look at the first term of the Bush administration and vote for the guy again?

The other thing to remember is that Americans seem to dislike one-party government. The Dems are still expected to hold and perhaps increase their majority in Congress. So a win for McCain is probably not going to translate into much in the way of conservative domestic policies anyway.

Re: Americans voted for Dubya TWICE.
by steambadger
I'm not sure what good an increased Democratic majority in congress will do; unless you have some reason to think they won't whimper and roll over for McCain the same way they do for Bush.
Re: Americans voted for Dubya TWICE.
by Split-S

I was absolutely flabbergasted when Bush won reelection in '04. People blamed John Kerry, but how was it his fault? How could Americans look at the first term of the Bush administration and vote for the guy again?

We voted for him again because it was so much fun watching you guys moping around in your flabbergastitude (I work on a university campus making it even sweeter, all those tears really warmed my heart.) Is it so hard to believe that a large portion of the country sees the world differently than you? Is that being irrational?

Re: Americans voted for Dubya TWICE.
by shusaku
"We voted for him again because it was so much fun watching you guys moping around in your flabbergastitude."

So, you're telling me you voted for the worst president in U.S. history in order to make others cry? Yes, that is the prime definition of being irrational.
Re: Americans voted for Dubya TWICE.
by rnb2
Democratic Capitalism only works if people vote their own here-and-now, in-real-life self-interest - it's the only way to keep the big money from steamrolling everything.

The Shrub won re-election based, primarily, on massive voter turnout against gay marriage in a few key states (coupled with "poor planning" in how the election was run in many of the same places). So, instead of voting their self-interest, people showed up to vote against gay marriage and for the people who made a big show of standing up against the on-rushing cataclysm.

That's the definition of irrationality right there, if you ask me. Congratulations on letting W and his band of incompetent idealogues flush the country down the drain so that you could feel more righteous than the next guy. Bang up job on that one. Well done, really - here's your cookie.
Re: Americans voted for Dubya TWICE.
by TheyCallMeBruce

shusaku:
So, you're telling me you voted for the worst president in U.S. history in order to make others cry? Yes, that is the prime definition of being irrational.

No, we voted for the best president in the last sixteen years for that reason.

Re: Americans voted for Dubya TWICE.
by amanasleep
By that logic you think he wasn't as good as his dad, but better than Clinton. Way to go out on a limb.
Re: Americans voted for Dubya, not once. They were jobbed
by The Real Slim K

It's important to keep these percentages in mind when we read someone like Bruce here extolling the greatness of George W. Bush. He is in the 33% some-odd percentile who believe such nonsense. Most of us--even the slower ones, have wised up, debacle by debacle by debacle.

Further, Kerry and Gore might not have been the best candidates, but it is at least highly debatable to say that the 'American people' voted Bush over them. In point of fact, mass irregularities cheapened the results of both elections. You can argue I suppose that the U.S. people did not care enough to protest (as say, elections are fixed in other countries, then overturned), but that would be blaming the victim. Millions and millions of votes in both those elections were never counted, and what happened in FLA 2000 and in Ohio 2004 will be studied as prime examples of voter supression and fraud for many many years.

Re: Americans voted for Dubya TWICE.
by Split-S

I was being a little tongue-in-cheek with that post. I don’t feel anymore self righteous than any college history professor:) No actually, it was just fun for me to see the truly self righteous fall.

I am a non-religious, pro-gay rights, pro-choice independent that tends to vote republican. There are many of us out there that you all neglect. We voted for Bush in 2004 not because of the gay rights issue (this is one of my main complaints about the party, and why I supported Giuliani) but for many other reasons, mainly the so called war on terror. Watching all the tears on campus was just icing on the cake. As far as my self interest, I never vote my self interest, I vote for what I think is best for the country. Maybe I was wrong, but I did what I thought was right. Oddly enough, my self interest was taken care of, the last eight years have been the best years of my life, finically I am doing well (far from rich, but very happy) and I don’t own a home so the housing bubble was perfect for me because it is a buyers market, hooray! As usual timing is everything.

Re: Americans voted for Dubya TWICE.
by mixtli
I think someone who is elected senator, does nothing for two years and then decides that he should run for president is displaying copious amounts of irrationality.
Re: Americans voted for Dubya TWICE.
by Anse

mixtli:
I think someone who is elected senator, does nothing for two years and then decides that he should run for president is displaying copious amounts of irrationality.

Obama has far more experience than Dubya did in 2000. My six-year-old nephew could perform the job of governor of Texas. It is just shy of being a figurehead position.

Re: Americans voted for Dubya TWICE.
by airjeff

Dear Split-S,

The fact that you to take so much pleasure in the misfortunes of others displays a lot about you. Perhaps you were a bully in grade school. If not, you were bullied in grade school. In any case, you're a nut job and need to grow up.

Re: Americans voted for Dubya TWICE.
by Momster
Funny...I think a Senator who did nothing in the Senate for 23 years (nothing he wasn't willing to throw overboard the second it got politically hot) and spent at least 4 years running for president (2000 & 2008) with total non-appearance this year in the Senate (while still drawing his salary) trumps all other forms of irrationality including those practiced by the people pushing shopping carts outside the Capitol building.
Re: Americans voted for Dubya TWICE.
by Split-S

A nut job? I'm just having a little fun, you take yourself too seriously. I was definitely not a bully, I've been pretty non-violent my whole life. And where did I say I was taking pleasure in the misfortunes of others? In 2004 I was just laughing at all those people that took themselves and their cause too seriously. It is not like I'm laughing at someone with one arm or cancer. These kids have it good, loosing an election is small potatoes, lighten up for gods sake. If growing up means I have to be some overly sensitive, wound up, miserable prick then I'll never grow up (just like the kid in the "tin drum")

Re: Americans voted for Dubya TWICE.
by shusaku
I can see where you're coming from. However, you do sound a little sociopathic :)

The housing bubble needed to burst, but if you think that's gonna help you in the long run, then you're wrong. Almost all our financial institutions made a lot of bad bets on real estate, and now they're all paying for them. We're probably gonna have another depression because of this.

That being said, you can't blame bush for causing this problem. Simply put, the housing markets were improperly regulated since reagan has been in office (the feds were basically insuring any bad bet made by a financial institution). Bush, Clinton, and Bush did nothing to alleviate the housing bubble; if anything Clinton benefited from the housing bubble as it caused a temporary boom in the economy.

On the other hand, you can blame bush for doing absolutely nothing about it. Kerry and Gore, during their respective campaigns, both argued in favor of financial reform. Both made the keen observation that the '90s boom was illusory and more meritocratic regulations needed to be put in place. Bush countered that Kerry wasn't really a vietnam vet and Gore was a nerd.

So yes, if you truly believed you were voting for the best candidate, then you either must've placed more "trust" in bush (by definition an irrational process that disrupts normal cognition), you "agreed" with his fiscal policies and wanted to inflict misery on others (a sociopathic irrational process), or you thought that electing an executive leader is not important. In any case, you're irrational. In the second case, you should seek psychiatric help. Seriously :)
Page 1 of 2 (17 items)   1 2 Next >
View as RSS news feed in XML