Once, you can understand, but again, after four years of him? Are we that stupid?
2007-07-10 07:49:06 · 32 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
In a word - Al Gore and John Kerry.
2007-07-10 07:52:12 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 1⤋
Regardless of how one feels about Bush, if you want to look at things objectively the Republicans had a better strategy in the 2004 election.
First, Republicans banded together during the election despite thier differences and supported Bush showing a united front. On the other hand you had the Democrats saying anybody but Bush. That didn't help thier case.
Secondly, the Republicans had a very succesful media campaign painting Kerry as a "Flipper" and that seemed to work. It goes without saying that Ralph Nader entering the fray made things worse, Because of the Dems "Anybody but Bush" mantra there were dems that voted for Nader rather than Kerry, and in short a vote for Nader was a vote for Bush, because Nader never had a shot.
Another thing that I think worked, was the Repubs making gay marriage an issue. There were probably many people that disliked Bush, but agreed was gay marriage was wrong, and voted for him based on that and not the issues. That's what I think.
2007-07-10 08:09:06 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
I think the only main reason we (not me because I voted for Kerry as a protest vote) re-elected Bush was because we were at times of war. If I recall right, no President has ever lost an election during war time. We didn't re-elect him because he was a good candidate but because we seriously thought he could really change the course in Iraq. His re-election proved us all wrong. I don't think the average American voter is stupid, I think we're afraid of making a change. I understand that fear (and the duopoly obviously play the fear card) but I think we're so fed up it's amazing. The first time in my life I've seen the average voter pissed off (not mad but outraged). To my fellow Americans, don't listen to what the duopoly tells you, do your homework on all the candidates and then decide which one represents you the best. The whole wasted vote symptom and lesser of 2 evils symptom are just plain fear tactics. I don't care if you vote Democrat, Republican, Independent or third party but don't be afraid to vote with your heart. I don't know why but I think we can still save our country and for once and for all we can show the duopoly who's boss. Thanks and don't fear change!
2007-07-10 10:06:01 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Gore won the first election, but because of the electoral process loss the critical state of Florida. If Gore would have won his home state of TN we would not be having this discussion. I also think the fact that Kerry did not come out strong enough against Bush and therefore appeared weak. Weak leaders are rarely elected. Hence, GW Bush was elected twice! Whether or not we are better off with Bush instead of Gore or Kerry is another question.
2007-07-10 08:34:10 · answer #4 · answered by Caleb 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
People vote based on Party. Republicans vote for republicans and democrats vote for democrats (on average) that is how Bush was re-elected. Why very few will cross over to the other party when they disagree with their original party of choice is beyond me. I don't care what a person is, if they support the same things I would support, then ta da! They get my vote. Its possibly because people are ignorant about the issues or too lazy to research them so they just stick with their same ole-same ole.
I am a serious advocate of some sort of intelligence test requirement. If you are ignorant about US history, if you are ignorant about what the current issues you are voting on are, and if you can't understand the wording of a question put to a vote, then I don't care if you are 18, you shouldn't be allowed to vote. Uneducated voting is just about as dangerous as drunk driving, maybe more so... look how many people have died in this war because of ignorant or closed-minded voting.
2007-07-10 09:03:38 · answer #5 · answered by elliecow 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It was actually the DNC that wanted him to win. They knew that Hillary couldn't win last time and they didn't want to run a strong candidate because they wanted her to be the '08 nominee. They couldn't run her against a Democratic incumbent. The DNC knew they could kick around GWB for 4 more years and possibly gain control of the congress in the process. Then, put Hillary in the White House and have complete control. In other words, the DNC took a dive in the 04 presidential election.
2007-07-10 08:23:59 · answer #6 · answered by Rusty G 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Questions like this and the answers posted show how polarized this country is. One side can't help but not comprehend anything from the other side. What is lost in the middle of this is the issues that matter to all Americans. We need to stop talking about homosexuality, abortion, affirmative action, and welfare, but about the war on terror, health care, jobs, education, and energy sources, things that a lot of Americans feel the same about. Politicians need to stop inflaming and dividing, but healing and uniting,
2007-07-10 09:02:54 · answer #7 · answered by LaLyLoo 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
We "The People" did NOT elect GW Bush. Dibold voting machines and the Supreme court did. People should have been screaming in the streets about both of those elections. Both were stolen from the American people by Corp. America who BTW are the only ones benefiting from Bush's decisions. The 25% that support him now, are probably mentally blinded by the God issue, they bought it. He's no more "saved" then the criminals he assists.
2007-07-10 09:03:57 · answer #8 · answered by ms4womensrights 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
The first election the popular vote (i.e. we) voted for Al Gore. Gore lost because he had fewer electoral votes. So we really only voted for Bush once and sadly he was actually better than his Democratic competition last time around. So stupid...No. We just got shafted once and this 2 party system limits how many candidates that are feasible to vote for.
2007-07-10 07:56:42 · answer #9 · answered by Kej 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
so many times in American history, if we just gave the other guy a little longer they complete what they start and it would be short-sided to cut them off at the knees. I completely believe at the time of the reelection the Iraq war, with competent leadership and planning, could've been turned around for the better.
Also, who wanted to vote for Kerry? There were two kinds of votes in the 2004 election, For Bush and against Bush, noone cared about Kerry
2007-07-10 07:54:21 · answer #10 · answered by Jon 4 · 3⤊ 2⤋
The first time, we didn't, The Supreme Court did. The second time it was to avoid a devil we did not know: Teresa Heinz Kerry. Laura Bush is much more lovely don't you think?
2007-07-10 08:29:18 · answer #11 · answered by KAO 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋