The 2004 Election Has Nothing To Do With 2004, It's All About 2008, Let Me Explain...

[DJ®]

The 2004 Election has nothing to do with Bush and Kerry, why?

Well:

Democrats - Eventhough they want Kerry to win......the high profile Democrats in the background (for example, the Clintons and Al Gore) don't want Kerry to win. The reason being, if Kerry wins, that knocks out Hillary Clinton's chance of running in '08......and Kerry is just a stepping stone to get to that point. Ever wonder why Hillary was hesitant to speak at the DNC?

Also, if you notice, there were a lot of great potential candidates for Democratic Presidential or Vice Presidential nominee, but they all bowed out....why? Because they don't want to interfere with Clinton's plans or they are saving themselves for a chance to run alongside Hillary.

Republicans - Eventhough they want Bush to win, the high profile Republicans in the background don't want him to win. If Bush wins (which will be by a narrow margin), there is the potential that he may do even more harm to the Republican Party's image over the next 4 years, therefore making the Republican who runs in '08, job much harder. But if Kerry wins, they are banking on him being a 1 termer and strengthening support for a Republican candidate (ex. Giuliani, Pataki, McCain, or Condi Rice.....could you imagine Rice vs. Clinton, an all woman race? :eek3: )

Just some food for thought as we argue over these two fools running right now.

[mr toolio]

if hilary wins in 2008, im seriously getting the fck out of the country..

Adam

[Todd Spoth]

DJ, whats your education background? just wondering. :thumb:

[mr toolio]

DJ, you're making it seem like its a conspiracy..!

Adam

[DJ®]

DJ, whats your education background? just wondering. :thumb:

Why, you sayin' I sound dumb or something?

j/k............ :D

[DJ®]

DJ, you're making it seem like its a conspiracy..!

Adam

That's not a conspiracy......that's real underground politics. Everything I told you has some truth to it once you put all the pieces together.

[Todd Spoth]

Why, you sayin' I sound dumb or something?

j/k............ :D


nah just wonderin.... they should let me mod this forum too :thumb:

[Mobil1]

the sad part about all this is that its true.

some people who are high up and hold quite a bit of sway over americas future are petty enough to put their own political gain over what is actually best for america. :-/

[stretch-d]

the sad part about all this is that its true.

some people who are high up and hold quite a bit of sway over americas future are petty enough to put their own political gain over what is actually best for america. :-/

I think that only a fraction of that is truth...

The fraction??? Hilliary wants to run for office in 2008--Semi-secretly wanting Kerry to lose.

Everthing else...well...you know.

[LudeTerror]

im right there with u on the democrat and hillary idea, that is my way of thinking about this election, its just a setup.

[DJ®]

I think that only a fraction of that is truth...

The fraction??? Hilliary wants to run for office in 2008--Semi-secretly wanting Kerry to lose.

Everthing else...well...you know.

How convenient that you only think the part about Democrats is true :rolleyes: .

[stretch-d]

How convenient that you only think the part about Democrats is true :rolleyes: .


Ok...Who are the so called 'high profile' Republicans?

...and you base your theory on the republicans how? Where does that come from?

I'll tell you...It's your opinion based on zero fact and a belief that Bush has somehow screwed things up and will continue to do so with four more years in office. The fact is--he hasn't.

You attempt to speak for Republicans as being seperated as a party--not true.

You also assume that if Bush is re-elected, that it would be an impossibility for another Republican to win the 2008 election--also not true.

Everybody knows about the Clinton's ambitions to return to the Whitehouse...so no big discovery there.

This is how I arrived at my opinion on the topic (which is mostly conspiricy theory) that you brought up.

[DJ®]

It's your opinion based on zero fact and a belief that Bush has somehow screwed things up and will continue to do so with four more years in office. The fact is--he hasn't.

Of course, I would expect you to say that.....you support him. How many parents of bad kids admit to people outside their family, that their kid is bad?

You attempt to speak for Republicans as being seperated as a party--not true.

Every group/party has some form of separation.......whether it's an apparent level of separation, or carefully hidden. But truth of the matter is, there are Republicans who secretly don't want Bush to win this year.

You also assume that if Bush is re-elected, that it would be an impossibility for another Republican to win the 2008 election--also not true.

Maybe not, but if he continues along the same path he has so far, which has been average at best....people are going to definantly want change of parties in '08.

Bush's term is nothing like Reagan's, which paved the way for Bush Sr's election. Clinton (eventhough his approval rating was high) soured Gore's election campaign with the Lewinski mess of his last term....plus Gore never used Clinton to his advantage anyway.....and I bet the Republican who runs in '08 will do the same in regards to Bush, but if Bush loses in '04, he will be a distant memory by '08 anyway...making it a little easier for the '08 Republican candidate.

[eternalsun]

if hilary wins in 2008, im seriously getting the fck out of the country..

Adam
FUCKIN :wrd:

[stretch-d]

Of course, I would expect you to say that.....you support him. How many parents of bad kids admit to people outside their family, that their kid is bad?

We all know that I support him...but for legitiment reasons. ...and I don't think that he's 'bad'--as you put it. I support him because I believe in most of his ideals....Not because I know he's bad, and won't adimit that he's bad in this thread because I support him.



Every group/party has some form of separation.......whether it's an apparent level of separation, or carefully hidden. But truth of the matter is, there are Republicans who secretly don't want Bush to win this year.

I believe that both parties are well unified for this election. Not just the Republicans.



Maybe not, but if he continues along the same path he has so far, which has been average at best....people are going to definantly want change of parties in '08.


Perhaps...but doubtful...due to the fact that the 'hyper left wing libs' have pretty much taken over the Democratic party...and that Bush is doing a good job.



Bush's term is nothing like Reagan's, which paved the way for Bush Sr's election. Clinton (eventhough his approval rating was high) soured Gore's election campaign with the Lewinski mess of his last term....plus Gore never used Clinton to his advantage anyway.....and I bet the Republican who runs in '08 will do the same in regards to Bush, but if Bush loses in '04, he will be a distant memory by '08 anyway...making it a little easier for the '08 Republican candidate.

We'll see...

[DJ®]

We all know that I support him...but for legitiment reasons. ...and I don't think that he's 'bad'--as you put it.

I don't think he's "bad"........I just said he's average - at best. The Parent/kid thing was just an example.

I just wonder, if it wasn't for 9/11.......what accomplishments would he have made? He didn't exactly set off fireworks here in Texas when he was governor.

If we were in a serious war (i'm talking close to WWII type shit) I'd be all for keeping him in, eventhough I don't care for him. In times of war, you keep the sitting President in. But I don't consider us at a time of War.......more like a time of conflict.

Also, if he had caught Bin Laden before investing into Iraq....my perspective on allowing him 4 more years would be different.

I still can't understand why we started a conflict with a country's President that we "suspected" of plotting against us........when we never caught the guy who has proven and still is actively planning attacks against us and releases a tape every other month to remind us that he is.

[stretch-d]

I don't think he's "bad"........I just said he's average - at best. The Parent/kid thing was just an example.

I just wonder, if it wasn't for 9/11.......what accomplishments would he have made? He didn't exactly set off fireworks here in Texas when he was governor.

If we were in a serious war (i'm talking close to WWII type shit) I'd be all for keeping him in, eventhough I don't care for him. In times of war, you keep the sitting President in. But I don't consider us at a time of War.......more like a time of conflict.


Man...this is a serious war that were ingaged in...The lack of realizing that truth is what eventually allowed the 9/11 attacks to ocurr. The people that we're fighting absolutely understand that they're fighting a war against us. It's best that we do as well.



Also, if he had caught Bin Laden before investing into Iraq....my perspective on allowing him 4 more years would be different.

I still can't understand why we started a conflict with a country's President that we "suspected" of plotting against us........when we never caught the guy who has proven and still is actively planning attacks against us and releases a tape every other month to remind us that he is.

I do think that it's because we (as a nation) can do more than one thing at a time...I don't think that it would be a good idea to put the handling of other issues on hold until we complete one. What if we never find him and then we get attacked by someone else because we didn't do anything--because we didn't find him yet.

See mine and this administration's point?

[MuddyJEEP.com]

The 2004 Election has nothing to do with Bush and Kerry, why?

Well:

Democrats - Eventhough they want Kerry to win......the high profile Democrats in the background (for example, the Clintons and Al Gore) don't want Kerry to win. The reason being, if Kerry wins, that knocks out Hillary Clinton's chance of running in '08......and Kerry is just a stepping stone to get to that point. Ever wonder why Hillary was hesitant to speak at the DNC?

Also, if you notice, there were a lot of great potential candidates for Democratic Presidential or Vice Presidential nominee, but they all bowed out....why? Because they don't want to interfere with Clinton's plans or they are saving themselves for a chance to run alongside Hillary.

Republicans - Eventhough they want Bush to win, the high profile Republicans in the background don't want him to win. If Bush wins (which will be by a narrow margin), there is the potential that he may do even more harm to the Republican Party's image over the next 4 years, therefore making the Republican who runs in '08, job much harder. But if Kerry wins, they are banking on him being a 1 termer and strengthening support for a Republican candidate (ex. Giuliani, Pataki, McCain, or Condi Rice.....could you imagine Rice vs. Clinton, an all woman race? :eek3: )

Just some food for thought as we argue over these two fools running right now.

interesting indeed........

[MuddyJEEP.com]

nah just wonderin.... they should let me mod this forum too :thumb:
hehehehhehe.....

[Mobil1]

John McCain 08'! :thumb: :rock:

[DJ®]

How funny.........24+ hours after I made this thread........I come across this article:

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110005540

[MuddyJEEP.com]

How funny.........24+ hours after I made this thread........I come across this article:

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110005540
you must be freaking political Nostridamus! :thumb: ....did I spell that right?

[Agent S14]

if hilary wins in 2008, im seriously getting the fck out of the country..

Adam
:rolleyes: