2007-12-13 03:24:27 · 21 answers · asked by Darth Vader 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Yes.
I noticed all the Repukes of Y!A still say he wouldn't make a better leader than Bush. That makes me sick.
2007-12-13 04:02:56 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Fixed? come on now, the reason Kerry lost in 04 was because he was an inconclusive idiot. He flip-flopped on issues, which made him seem like your usual slippery politician. He called for a more sensitive war on terror, as if war could ever be waged sensitively. He spent his time bragging about his three purple hearts, wasting time arguing with those swift-boat veterans instead of actually bringing issues to the table.
By November, the only thing that could be said about Kerry was that he was Bush-lite. That's why the swing voters voted against him. He tried to be everything, but ended up with nothing.
2007-12-13 03:32:50 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋
How precisely became he slandering John McCain? He became speaking approximately McCain's political stance on the matters. it fairly is an election in spite of each thing, isn't that what your meant to do? So via your good judgment, in simple terms because of the fact he became a POW interior the vietnam war we at the instant are not meant to question something John McCain says or does... lots for freedom of speech there Sparky.
2016-11-03 03:26:30 · answer #3 · answered by dudderar 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Once more, how can I vote for someone AGAIN if I never voted for them in the first place?
Bush won that election to the point where there can be no question about election hijinx or Supreme Court tampering as the last spoiled-rotten, delusional candidate had charged.
2007-12-13 03:32:52 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
Where is the sense in this question? You provide no facts that any election was ever rigged.....I wouldn't vote for Kerry for my local dogcatcher!
2007-12-13 04:23:29 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Not only did I vote for him in 2004, I worked for his campaign. He was the best the Democrats had to offer in 2004. But, if he ran again in 2008 against the current slate of Democrats (or Republicans for that matter) I would NOT vote for him.
Although, if the choice was him or W, I would vote for him...anybody's better than the dope that won that year.
2007-12-13 03:37:25 · answer #6 · answered by Mister J 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I would never throw away a vote on someone who tries to be all things to all people regarding something as important as the war in Iraq. Half-assed opposition to it makes nobody happy, which he found out the hard way. If you're going to be against that war, do so in a way that is unapologetic and consistent. (It also helps if you didn't vote for that debacle beforehand, of course.)
2007-12-13 03:30:34 · answer #7 · answered by David 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
nope. but then again you couldn't but kerry and w in a bag and come up with enough good parts to make a man
2007-12-13 05:33:09 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Even though I worked very hard on the Kerry campaign, I would not vote for him again, because he has demonstrated that he is very weak-willed, as evidenced by conceding the vote to Bush too early in the game.
2007-12-13 03:36:28 · answer #9 · answered by Silver 3 · 1⤊ 3⤋
You can't possibly think that an election had to "be fixed" for John Kerry to loose! He is an empty suit, no thanks
2007-12-13 05:33:54 · answer #10 · answered by rosi l 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
John Kerry was a terrible candidate, the current roster of dems running are WAY better
2007-12-13 03:30:57 · answer #11 · answered by Sean G 2 · 3⤊ 3⤋