I think that is pretty fair. The young voter turnout will likely ruin Bush's chances for re-election, considering how close the polls are and how new voters are not counted in them.
I predict accusations of fraud, thrown at either side... And a recount, of course... Now that it's happened once, it will happen always...
I don't know about "always", but I agree that this election will not end tomorrow. Regardless of who wins, there needs to be major reform regarding the way elections are conducted. Not a lip service to those who feel disenfranchised, like the Help America Vote Act, but MAJOR REFORM. Here are a few of the changes that I think need to be made before the 2008 election, regardless of who wins: 1. We need a constitutional amendment finally ending the electoral college, so that the person who gets the most votes actually becomes president. I know that the common wisdom is that the small states would never vote for such an amendment, but polls have shown that even residents of smaller states would favor abolishing the electoral college. If nothing else, getting rid of the electoral college would eliminate a lot of litigation. As close as the elections were, there is almost no disagreement that Kennedy beat Nixon nationwide, and Gore beat Bush nationwide. 2. We need national standards for how elections are going to be conducted. No more punch-cards in poor counties and electronic voting in rich counties. Whatever the standard is, it should be uniform throughout the nation.
do you favor moving completely away from our state based system? Maybe we should go back to pebble voting hehe we really need this election to end tomorrow..
The election is staged, so whoever wins is in the hands of the people who control the election, not the people. Personally, I think more people will be voting for Kerry, as the polls do not take into consideration the millions of people that have registered to vote in the past several months. I could care less which of these fraudulent Skull & Bones' cousins wins. But if I had to make a prediction, I would say Kerry. Kerry seems to be favored more by the global-elite and was even endorsed by the super-secret Bilderberger Group as well (they also selected Edwards to be Kerry's running mate). They see Kerry as more of a "team player".
Such angst! I understand your disillusionment with our current political system/climate, but the way you so reliably pretend that these two candidates offer the same position forces me to question any rationality you offer. I am very aware of all the 'connections' you see shared by our two major-party candidates, but if that blinds you to the countless differences in these two men then I have little alternative but to assume you are just as blinded by propaganda as anyone else. That, or you harbor so much discontent that you purposefuly pretend to be blind in order to vent. I don't think Kerry is going to save the world any time soon, but I think Bush has the potential to destroy it.
How do they significantly offer different positions on: Open borders Spending The War in Iraq The War on Drugs The Patriot Act/civil liberties ???? Of course they differ on the issues they use to rally the brainwashed minions, like abortion and stem cells. But on the REAL ISSUES, they are frighteningly alike. Now, it's your turn to explain how Bush and Kerry differ on the issues I listed above. THEN you can continue to berate me with your ignorant nonsense.
Here's mine, sorry the colors are backwards. Red = Dem, Blue = Rep. Kerry 299, Bush 238, 1 abstain (From WV) Also, does anyboady know which program Kandahar used to make his map? Peace, Alex
I just found a map of the United States and colored in the states with MS Paint. I noticed our maps are identical...wow! I forgot about the abstention in West Virginia.
Anyone who actually believes that is just plain intellectually lazy. These candidates are as different as any have been since 1984. This election matters more than any since 1968.
First if you don't think abortion and stem cells are real issues then I guess we have to disagree on that. Open borders: Kerry has come out a number of times promising to stregthen our borders and criticizing Bush for not doing more in this area. He wants to crackdown on illegal hiring (which republicans favor - under the table - they need someone to clean there houses and pick their crops). He supports streamlined temporary work visas. Bush oposses these as rewarding illegal behavior. http://www.vdare.com/sailer/bush_kerry_debate.htm http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/homeland_security/ War in Iraq: Kerry was an avid anti-war protester. He has been in war and he has seen it's destructive effects. We can not leave Iraq in it's current state... but I suspect Bush may invade Iran as well. I sincerely doubt Kerry would. He is attempting to appear more conservative on war than he really is, as all candidates try to appeal to the middle country - it's the only way to win votes. If you do not understand this then you must be very new to politics. Spending - Kerry supports a rollback of tax breaks to those who make over $200,000. He supports closing loopholes which give companies tax incentives to move offshore. He supports elevated spending for education and social security and healthcare and balsts Bush for waging a war that costs a billion dollars a week. War on Drugs - although the laws have gotten more lenient in the last four years prosecutions are up from the Clinton term. Bush order Federal officials to raid grow coops in california who distribute pot to legal recipients. He has implemented very strict enforcement of the law, while Clinton supported loose enforcement of the law. Kerry can not go on TV and tell people he's going to be easy on drugs. Most American's don't support that stance, but he ran with a whole lot of hippies in his day and I think his policies will reflect this background. On the Patriot Act: Again Kerry can not appear to be easy on terrorism or he will not win. "We must always remember that terrorists do not just target our lives - they target our way of life. I believe in an America that is safe and free, and I will protect our personal liberties as well as our personal security. " - Kerry For more on patriot act follow this link... http://talkleft.com/new_archives/007815.html Questions?
No, I think some people just have difficulty thinking critically, so they buy into all the talking points they hear on CNN and FOX News. I can't tell you how many times I've heard the chorus line which is your last sentence. Perhaps you should look into who actually controls the elections and owns many of these voting machine companies that we place so much faith in.
There will probably never be a change in the Electoral College. It would take states who benefit greatly from it to vote it out to get the 2/3 majority needed. I think we need to radically change the way the campaign season is handled to eliminate the need for the money that is raised. Perhaps limiting the length of the season or the amount of tv time that can be purchased. I know that I am suggesting limitations on the 1st Amendment (it hurts me to suggest it), but around $4 billion has been spent on all sides on this campaign. This must be changed to curtail special interests from buying candidates and elections. Simply trying to regulate the money after it is raised will not work. These guys will always find a way around the rules. We must eliminate the need to raise this much money for campaigns. Oh, by the way, Kerry will win by about 3-4% of the popular vote and receive about 280-285 electoral votes, in my opinion.
Well THE most important issue is freedom, and they both are against it. The patriot act is proof enough of that.