When I first saw Bush, I voted for Kerry.
2007-12-08 14:45:16 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Seriously? It's this weird guy from TEXAS who others countries would mistake from a cowboy who lives in an old trailor park if they ever saw him...
At least Kerry would have done some great things
2007-12-08 14:56:45 · update #1
Now you see what has happened...
Gas prices rose...
More foreclosures...
Stocks fall...
Losing billions, BILLIONS to some dumb war that doesn't even affect us...
and last but not least...(might be least)
AMERICA'S PRESIDENT IS GEORGE BUSH!
O M G!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2007-12-08 14:59:14 · update #2
Both elections were won by fraud. His brother in Florida bought voting machines for the second election that the new governor, also a Republican trashed and replaced as almost his first official act. They left no paper trail, could be hacked into and had no way to verify or recount the votes. That is how he won Florida the second time. One district in Jacksonville, Florida failed to have their votes counted 27,000 of them in a Democratic precinct. That didn't make the national news like the recount did. Do you know what all they did to prevent a recount in Florida? Riots ensued. The Florida Supreme Court ordered a recount. The biased US Supreme Court would not allow it.
2007-12-08 15:00:12 · answer #1 · answered by joker_32605 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
You ASSUME Kerry would have done great things...but in whose perception. Raising taxes isn't a great thing. Kowtowing to terrorists isn't a great thing. And where's your proof that other countries think Bush is a "Texas cowboy from a trailer park?" Sounds to me your assertions are based on hatred.
Gas prices rose...That's an OPEC thing; not our deal.
More foreclosures...Bush can't be blamed for irresponsible home buyers or the banks who financed the would be irresponsible home buyers.
Stocks fall...They've been on the rise for two weeks.
Where have you been? Living in luxury compared to the 8 years under Clinton.
Losing billions, BILLIONS to some dumb war that doesn't even affect us...Okay, fine. If you want terrorists running rampant in every corner of the world, and you are selfish enough to believe that Iraqis don't deserve a chance at the same freedoms we enjoy, then fine, it's a dumb war...and regardless of what you say, it does affect us unless you want to open up Alaska and the offshore rigs to oil drilling in order to get us by until feasible methods of alternative fuels can be explored and prepared for consumer use.
and last but not least...(might be least)
AMERICA'S PRESIDENT IS GEORGE BUSH! HOORAY!
2007-12-08 17:50:44 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Us people?? Texas, cowboys??.......You sure are filled with stereotypical prejudices. I voted for George Bush because he is honest. I did not vote for John Kerry because he is dishonest. Cambodia in Xmas??? He was just a gold digger with a lot of phony Viet Nam stories and delusions.
You certainly have all the Democratic talking points memorized. Perhaps you will get a job on network news or the NY Times.
2007-12-08 16:03:40 · answer #3 · answered by jimmiv 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I voted for electors pledged to George Walker Bush and Richard Cheney in 2000 because I saw in Mister Bush a man who appeared to be somewhat in awe of the enormous task he was about to undertake. Mister Gore seemed too self-assured and had too many pat answers.
The choice to vote once again for electors pledged to President Bush and Vice President Cheney in 2004 was even easier. As a retired Naval officer I was keenly aware of Mister Kerry sponsoring the change to the tax code in 1991 which made 85% of my Social Security check taxable income because of my receiving a military pension as well.
I also recalled that Lieutenant Kerry, U.S. Naval Reserve, visited with the North Vietnamese delegate to the Paris peace talks. An act which would have landed me in Leavenworth for a considerable numbers of years.
2007-12-08 15:27:51 · answer #4 · answered by desertviking_00 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because the Democrats ended up with John Kerry running against him - not a great choice either.
2007-12-08 14:55:18 · answer #5 · answered by pam-i-am 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
They didn't.
He never had the popular vote. So that means more people voted for the other candidate (i.e. Al Gore). That's why the U.S. has one of the most undemocratic election systems in the west.
2007-12-08 15:34:55 · answer #6 · answered by poolboyg88 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
because I'm a nascar loving toothless illiterate bumpkin that thinks people should be responsible for themselves, that government is not there to give you free health care, bail you out because you signed up for a mortgage you couldn't afford, or rebuild your house after a hurricane. I don't make a lot of money, but I work my *** off for what little I do make, and I don't appreciate a government that picks my pocket to give people my money so they can sit on their butts in public housing watching the Jerry Springer show.
2007-12-08 15:03:39 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Do not blame me blame the electorial college. Just wait and see what happens when you choose to vote against the latest partisian threat this year.
2007-12-08 15:00:24 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Interesting question. I suppose it's because some people - the majority - want a leader who is determined and resolute and not wavering all over the place when it comes to solving the concerns that presently face our nation.
2007-12-08 14:50:16 · answer #9 · answered by LeAnne 7 · 0⤊ 3⤋
same reason they voted for Arnie...
1) spread some money...spend some money....everyone loves you... till they find out they have to pay you back double.
2) Say what you need to, to get elected/reelected
2007-12-08 15:19:42 · answer #10 · answered by peezim 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋