If you were a terrorist and you could vote, who would you vote for? Democrat or Republican? Rudy, Hillary, etc

Question

What party, who and why? If I were a terrorist I would vote for Dennis Kucinich.
I welcome real terrorist and pretend terrorist answers, you need not reveal yourself.

Answer 1

Praise ALLAH!!!!
A good question! But an easy one!!!! NO?

We support the democratic party of the evil USA!
Yes! They make it easy to bomb you infidels, cut throats, stone women!
ALLAH AKBAR! Praise ALLAH for Howard Dean, Harry Reid, Ted Kennedy, John Kerry!!!

One day we shall speak in your Democratic congress and thank you!
.
.
.
.
Then we kill you too.

Answer 2

Of course a terrorist would want someone who is weak on terrorism...ie a liberal. I think that Obama would be preferred because he would be a big pu$$y. Hillary would change with the political pulse, so may actually be tough on terror from time to time. On the republican side, McCain is as bad as Hillary as far as playing for the votes.

lil me...you are either naive or just do not want to admit that the libs are weaker on terror, so terrorist would prefer them.

tony...you are right (with the candidates out there right now) only an idiot would vote for a democrat...on the other hand, so would a terrorist.

hypofocus...you are funny. The tape came out and SLAMMED Bush, but you liberals do not want to admit that bin Laden did not intend to help Bush in the election. An egomaniac like that would actually think that people would listen to him. Of course, liberals would not want to admit that terrorists wanted a pu$$y (Kerry) in office. Use a little common sense.

crabby...do you smoke crack? Let's forget the maniac ranting about the war...we would not agree on that no matter what, but DEMS...PROTECT OUR BORDERS??? If not for the true conservatives in Congress, the dems would have the borders open and a flood of immigrants (both the newly legal and new illegals rushing to get in for the next round of amnesty). This flood would be more damaging than any Tsunami. Dems...protect the border...ROFLMAO

Answer 3

you comprehend it is laughable that some people who do no longer even stay in prevalent/caucus states think of that they have a clue approximately what the excuses are and why the Republicans are vote casting the way that they do. if actuality learn that they are vote casting for Hillary. She is with the aid of a techniques the weakest link and that they want her to win the Dem.prevalent. So MCain can waft into the white abode. nevertheless no longer clean? merely google Rush Limbaugh and all the comments and links what he reported are going to pop up the place he specifically mapped out the plan...its spoke of as learn for your self... definite, it is rather pathetic of the republican occasion to have some contributors execute this plan yet you comprehend what? They did. a minimum of in Texas. Too undesirable it wasn't sufficient. the reason Hillary is at the back of in all the caucuses is via the fact she does not have the supporters that she thinks she has...think of approximately it... if she became into rather maximum well known in the favored vote, why does not those self same electorate come back to assist her in the caucuses??? i comprehend the Clinton sheep are not that sharp although this is no longer rocket technology...they do no longer look to be helping her in the caucuses because of the fact "they" do no longer somewhat exist. era. Sabotage at its optimal...even though it won't paintings :) OBAMA 08!!!

Answer 4

From pure practical perspective, retaining Bush's administration in power definitely maximizes benefits for terrorist oraganizations. This is not because of similar values or anything of that nature, it's the administration's incompetence and utter lunacy that help terrorists' causes.

Ideologically, however, islamic terrorists are far right, much more right than Bush or any candidate available for voting, so I don't think there is anybody running for president who would be appealing to terrorists based on ideology.

Answer 5

Any Republican. Its simple logic.

Its clear that the GOP politicians, not just Bush, have no real interest in going after terrorists. If they did, they woud not have abandoned any real effort to actually finish off al-Qaida in Afghanistan, where there really were terrorists. nor would they have blocked any real reforms that would secure the borders of the United States.

A Democrat, on the other hand, is going to get US troops out of the quagmire in Iraq, freeing up the ability of the US to project military force effectively; is likely to endorse and lead a real reform that will protect US borders--and is far more likely, if provoked, on actually seeking out and destroying terrorist organizations.

That's what the record says. Only a stupid fool would choose based on any other basis. And the terrorists are a lot of things. Unfortunately, stupid is not one of them

Answer 6

A terrorist would not even bother to vote. The main reason for a person being a terrorist in the first place is because of one's inability or refusal to participate in any democratic process. The ultimate goal of terrorism is to terrorize and to eventually establish authoritarian rule. This is a truly asinine question.

Answer 7

A terrorist would support whomever would make it easier to carry on the jihad and gain more recruits for terrorist organizations worldwide. Any individual who would mindlessly attack Muslim countries just on principle and who would further inflame tensions in the Middle East would fit that description. In addition, the individual would forsake looking for the central organizers of major terrorist organizations in favor of a power grab for resources and influence in the Middle East. In other words, a terrorist would support someone just like Bush.

Answer 8

I would pull for David Duke if I were a terrorist. However I am not so I would prefer the "none of the above vote because they are all jerks.

Answer 9

If I were a terrorist I'd vote Republican so that I could come in contact with more American soldiers on our turf.
If Dems win, it would be harder to get to the Americans, since they'd mostly stay in the USA.

BTW, Captain F. up there doesn't realize that those who caused the 1993 WTC bombing are in jail now, thanks to Clinton. Safer with Bush?? Did you forget 9/11?

Answer 10

Terrorist will not fight face to face. They do the dirty work behind our backs. Only fools like Bush and Cheney think a terrorist would face our Marines in Iraq, They will not. Just like in Nam.
Democrats tried to set a date to end the occupation and Republicans blocked it. That makes the occupation of Iraq a Republican agenda. Hillary will raise the $500 million needed to win and Obama and Edwards will not. A Clinton/Edwards ticket will give Democrats 8 years in control of the White House, a Edwards/Obama ticket will give Democrats 16 years. It will take far longer to fix the mess caused by Republicans.

Answer 11

I wouldn't vote. Terrorists don't believe in the normal political process of voting. That's why they resort to bombs, assassinations, etc.

Here is the defintion for terrorist:

a radical who employs terror as a political weapon; usually organizes with other terrorists in small cells; often uses religion as a cover for terrorist activities -- WordNet 3.0, 2006 Princeton University.

Here's another:

a person who tries to frighten people or governments into doing what he/she wants by using or threatening violence -- Kernerman Dictionary