What will it be for the next 4 years?

Day to day, down the street and around the world
Locked
User avatar
Joseph
Editor
Editor
Posts: 14186
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2003 2:29 pm
Title: I wanna be Captain Kirk
Location: Here... no, there...

Post by Joseph » Sat Nov 06, 2004 2:23 pm

All it proves to me are the intelligent, enlightened and morally viable states voted for Kerry. The "gun totin' kill everythig that ain't american and half of what" states voted for a murderer.

User avatar
Wanderon
Posts: 710
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2004 3:13 pm
Location: Valley of the Sun AZ USA

Post by Wanderon » Sat Nov 06, 2004 3:53 pm

Actually its not quite that simple-altho clearly the rural vote was the key for cagey conservatives vs looney liberals take a gander at the county by county map here:

Election Maps
Not all those who wander are lost...

User avatar
Drachir
Posts: 35
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2004 5:20 pm

Post by Drachir » Sat Nov 06, 2004 5:20 pm

So the typical Kerry-voter is:
18-29 year old Jewish or Atheist Black or Latino woman

Typical Bush-voter:
60+ year old White Protestant male

:?
[url=http://www.godhatesfigs.com/]God hates [color=green]Figs[/color], Proof![/url]

"... God sent the Israelites out into the wilderness for 40 years solely to keep them away from fig trees so they could cure their terrible fig dependence..."

User avatar
Wanderon
Posts: 710
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2004 3:13 pm
Location: Valley of the Sun AZ USA

Post by Wanderon » Sat Nov 06, 2004 6:46 pm

Actually Bush did very well with Catholics also in spite of the fact that Kerry was Catholic and Bush won in every age group except 18-29 I believe so 30+ is more accurate than 60 +...
Not all those who wander are lost...

User avatar
Drachir
Posts: 35
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2004 5:20 pm

Post by Drachir » Sat Nov 06, 2004 7:17 pm

Based it on the Exit Poll at the site you posted:
http://www.electoral-vote.com/images/exit-polls.gif

Age 30-44: Bush a bit ahead
45-59: about even
60+ : Larger difference
Catholics: also about even, although Bush takes the lead

Just found it odd that 'Jewish' and 'No religion' showed such a strong preference for Kerry (must be a vote anti-Bush and not pro-Kerry).
[url=http://www.godhatesfigs.com/]God hates [color=green]Figs[/color], Proof![/url]

"... God sent the Israelites out into the wilderness for 40 years solely to keep them away from fig trees so they could cure their terrible fig dependence..."

User avatar
Wanderon
Posts: 710
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2004 3:13 pm
Location: Valley of the Sun AZ USA

Post by Wanderon » Sat Nov 06, 2004 7:51 pm

Could be- IMO that was one reason Bush won becuase the majority of his supporters were actually supporting him while a majority or at least a large number of Kerry supporters were just voting against Bush-

I also felt Kerrys campaign was too much anti-Bush rhetoric and not enough pro Kerry/ pro democratic message...they hung their campaign on people wanting to change direction but never really gave them a solid direction to change to I thought.

Altho much of it was also trying to beat an incumbent in wartime- an uphill battle for any challenger.

I am VERY glad it turned out the way it did and I am hoping for the best as far as "healing the divide" goes - so far Kerry is about the only democrat gracious enough to suggest its time to put it behind and work together- Edwards is of course still running his own presidential campaign (which is doomed for failure I hope) altho I heard Billy Boy told democrats to stop whining too...:)
Not all those who wander are lost...

User avatar
Joseph
Editor
Editor
Posts: 14186
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2003 2:29 pm
Title: I wanna be Captain Kirk
Location: Here... no, there...

Post by Joseph » Sat Nov 06, 2004 8:33 pm

Wanderon wrote:Could be- IMO that was one reason Bush won becuase the majority of his supporters were actually supporting him while a majority or at least a large number of Kerry supporters were just voting against Bush-
Agreed.
I also felt Kerrys campaign was too much anti-Bush rhetoric and not enough pro Kerry/ pro democratic message...they hung their campaign on people wanting to change direction but never really gave them a solid direction to change to I thought.
Agreed.
Altho much of it was also trying to beat an incumbent in wartime- an uphill battle for any challenger.

I am VERY glad it turned out the way it did and I am hoping for the best as far as "healing the divide" goes - so far Kerry is about the only democrat gracious enough to suggest its time to put it behind and work together- Edwards is of course still running his own presidential campaign (which is doomed for failure I hope) altho I heard Billy Boy told democrats to stop whining too...:)
Most of the world is very unhappy. GWB does not speak for me, my values or the rest of the "free world". US policy has always been a problem. America was basically a neutral country until WWII. They would have been quite content to let the rest of the world fight the Nazis alone and would not have entered WWII if Japan hadn't attacked (highly justifiable too...).

Since then, America has become a blood thirsty Rambos, sticking their nose in everyj place they don't belong and the blood of countless innocents is on Washington's hands. Do I blame the American people for this? No. I blame the White House. GWB is not who the people wanted. 60% of those eligible voted and of that 60%, 51% voted for Bush. Only about 30% of the nation actually wanted him in office.

Lastly, congrats to GB Sr on his 5th term.

User avatar
Wanderon
Posts: 710
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2004 3:13 pm
Location: Valley of the Sun AZ USA

Post by Wanderon » Sat Nov 06, 2004 10:30 pm

Well there is no definitive way to know who the non-voters wanted - this is the first time I EVER voted and in all the years I was eligible to vote and did not (36 years which would have been 8 other presidential elections if my math is correct) I really had no opinion on a choice and simply did not care enough to even look at the issues. I suspect many non voters in this country are the same. (the trouble with America today is apathy but who cares syndrome) The last time I was at all embroiled in a campaign was 1960 when it was part of my jr high curriculum to do so and I was 100% behind JFK at the time but views tend to be rather shallow at that age.

BTW don't you mean GB Sr's 3rd term? I would hardly link him to Billy Boys 2 terms...
Not all those who wander are lost...

User avatar
Joseph
Editor
Editor
Posts: 14186
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2003 2:29 pm
Title: I wanna be Captain Kirk
Location: Here... no, there...

Post by Joseph » Sun Nov 07, 2004 1:58 am

Wanderon wrote: BTW don't you mean GB Sr's 3rd term? I would hardly link him to Billy Boys 2 terms...
Actually, I was refering to Ronnie's.

User avatar
Ewen Brown
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 4935
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 9:14 pm
Location: stalking tink to catch his invisible martian antenas at work
Contact:

Post by Ewen Brown » Sun Nov 07, 2004 2:11 pm

maybe you should ask yourself why is it that so many people don't care to vote.. i suspect there is a reason for this lack of caring about looking at the issues
stupidity causes violence

[url=http://www.winterwind-productions.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=3071#3071]Swedish Snow Glaciers and Fjords[/url]

User avatar
Joseph
Editor
Editor
Posts: 14186
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2003 2:29 pm
Title: I wanna be Captain Kirk
Location: Here... no, there...

Post by Joseph » Sun Nov 07, 2004 2:15 pm

Apathy and ignorance get my vote for why people don't vote. Oh, and having no faith in governments & politicians in general.

I vote because, well, if I didn't the wrong lizard might get into office.

User avatar
Wanderon
Posts: 710
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2004 3:13 pm
Location: Valley of the Sun AZ USA

Post by Wanderon » Sun Nov 07, 2004 2:31 pm

That was my view as well- that any politician that got beyond city council probably owed his soul to someone and that in the end they all do the same thing and one is much the same as the other. For many years I was too busy with the party life to be bothered and then for several years I was too busy with getting my life together WITHOUT the party to bother.

In the end it was probably XM radio that brought me into the "loop" becuase news and talk shows make the time go faster driving back and forth between Phx and LA and as a businessman it soon became obvious to me that there WERE differences between the parties and that in order to protect my own interests I better figure out who has the better plan- in my case the primary issue being the economy and how it effects me and my business.

(Prior to getting XM last winter I listened primarily to music on tape or books on tape since there is extremely limited radio coverage out in the boonies between Phoenix and LA and was thus able to ignore most of the so called "news" and remain blissfully ignorant.)
Not all those who wander are lost...

User avatar
Joseph
Editor
Editor
Posts: 14186
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2003 2:29 pm
Title: I wanna be Captain Kirk
Location: Here... no, there...

Post by Joseph » Sun Nov 07, 2004 2:34 pm

I've always agreed with the sentiment that anyone who wants to lead is the last one that should be allowed to lead.

User avatar
D. Sauzi
Posts: 4845
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 11:43 am
Location: :niotacoL

Post by D. Sauzi » Sun Nov 07, 2004 5:48 pm

Ewen Brown wrote:maybe you should ask yourself why is it that so many people don't care to vote.. i suspect there is a reason for this lack of caring about looking at the issues

i suppose it has to more to do with the system, and the candidates always being white, somwhat rich, men of around age 55.


on the campaign, i agree with wanderon that kerry was busy too much with anti-bush rhetorics. he should've laid out his own plans more, on the other hand, he had enough to say about the bad things bush did, still that shouldnt be a reason to vote him, the anything better than bush argument is one that i like somewhat too, but it's not something to win a campaign with, if thats your only point of view then who knows what kind of monster you'll unleash. (though i think he wouldn't have been that bad, he should ahve said it...)

let's just hope bush does indeed brige the US of A with the world again, to do that he'll have to stop warring after Iraq is somewhat stable, i suppose. And although it might sound kind of anti-social, but he did move terrorism from the USA to Iraq, of which is something to be said for.

and to Josan, that's an everholding truth, but on the other hand, pushing someone in that position that doesnt want to lead, might well be either undecisive, lazy or haven't got enough heart for actions that have to be taken. On the other hand, you definitely shouldnt have that fellow who was still playing with plastic soldiers in secondary school...
"anyway, smoke orcs if so take eyes if right points left xy."

monard
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 1:06 am

Post by monard » Fri Nov 12, 2004 1:19 am

Josan wrote:I've always agreed with the sentiment that anyone who wants to lead is the last one that should be allowed to lead.
Perhaps that should apply to board moderators/admin as well? :D

Bush won because he had more support. Kerry really had nothing to offer except not being Bush, but that would never be enough to unseat a sitting president who hasn't made any major mistakes.

And before someone posts the same vile rhetoric about how stupid americans are and how badly the war in Iraq is going, the facts are that Americans are fairly intelligent and Iraq is going pretty well.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests