the brain owning rate in the US has been 49% for the last eight years. What would have happened it it has topped the 50 point mark?
2006-12-08 23:18:27 · 13 answers · asked by Nic 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Come on, my republicans friends... I know you can be a lot more biaised than that! what happened to the O'Reilley attitude?
2006-12-08 23:44:51 · update #1
If the voters in the Democratic primaries in 2004 had half a brain, they wouldn't have nominated the one man who could actually lose to George Bush.
2004 was an election that was the Democrats' to lose. And by God, they found the man for the job.
2006-12-09 00:17:14 · answer #1 · answered by Teekno 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
And the American lefts school yard name calling continues to be their only agenda! But I guess when their only solution is so repugnant to the American citizens, (Socialism and Appeasement) that they don't dare tell the truth in public...They actually have so few options. Isn't it amazing how often those they consider slow of wit see through their tissue of lies and fabrications?
2006-12-09 07:52:18 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Definitely,Bush will be the one among the remaining 49%.So obviously he cant became the President.
2006-12-09 09:59:40 · answer #3 · answered by DeadPool 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Agree with the concept but that`s really not a very nice way of putting it. Nobody could have for seen the future and who would figure that the president could of f--ked up THIS bad and it let to go this far (past the point of no return ) . This just proves no matter how good a system is, nothing perfect !!!
2006-12-09 07:27:03 · answer #4 · answered by hardhead 3 · 1⤊ 4⤋
You know, people with a brain tend to form cogent political arguments.
On the other hand, people such as yourself tend to make remarks so loathsome that even fellow liberals and Democrats kind of look a each other and say "people like him make the rest of us look bad, so let's disown the prick."
2006-12-09 07:26:15 · answer #5 · answered by askthepizzaguy 4 · 5⤊ 1⤋
Unfortunately yes because it is not the general population who decides. The government allots us the right to vote but not to chose who is president. It's all a show so we think we are deciding who runs the country. Everyone could have voted for the other guy but it still would have been Bush, just like when his brother runs for presidency he'll win even if no one wants him in office.
2006-12-09 07:22:39 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋
considering travelgate, filegate, monica, paula, jennifer, what is ...is, the largest tax increase in us history, lying under oath, the vince foster coverup, the montana land grab, the cattle futures fiasco, the health care fiasco, whitewater, etc.etc. etc. hopefully the answer is yes as the electorate would use it and learn from dreadful liberal mistakes.
2006-12-09 07:20:46 · answer #7 · answered by koalatcomics 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Yes but a better argument would be Clinton's 45% range, and that says more.
2006-12-09 08:52:15 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
And you are on the side with that brain, right?
2006-12-09 07:21:46 · answer #9 · answered by Bawney 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
No! I will never understand why anyone with two brain cells to rub together voted to re-elect him after his disastrous first four un-elected years.
2006-12-09 07:38:49 · answer #10 · answered by industrialconfusion 4 · 0⤊ 5⤋