Getting nervous.........

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
I am not quite sure about that last statement, I know he has a lead in Michigan, but all the others Bush has a slight to marginal lead in. Penn is the closest with a 1 point lead for Bush. Maybe what you meant is that he has regained some of the ground he has lost recently.
 
nbcrusader said:
Republicans survived Clinton
Democrats survived Reagan


In the grand scheme of things, it really doesn't matter. But, I'll still vote.

This is exactly what I was saying (almost :wink: ) in my original post.

We really have nothing to be nervous about. :shrug:
 
WHHaaaaa?

zoney! said:


This is exactly what I was saying (almost :wink: ) in my original post.

We really have nothing to be nervous about. :shrug:

TO YUU AND OTHERS.... NO ONE'S REALLY AFFECTED??? SHORT or LONG RUN?

Excuse me? :eyebrow: :|

How many blue, white collar or tech people do you know that are have become unemployed in the past 3 yrs or underployed, OR have finally gotten a job again-- most now getting 25% or Less income than before?

Do you know that W has NOT created a single net job in his term? He's the only president since Hoover to have this happen to.

ex.
2.5 million> jobs loss under Bush
- 1.0 mILLION jobs created under Bush
_______________
=1.5 jobs Net Loss under Bush

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

Have you asked your parents how their health insurance is?

How about your grandpaarents? Do you care about them? Do you now they will soon be paying a 17% Increase in their medicare premiums.

In some several years ahead they predict retirees will be paying up to 30+% of their SociAL sECURITY on health/medicare related issues.

Does your family/you even have health insurance?
------------------------------------------------------------------

Do you know any [or are] Diasabled people living on either SSD {worked}, SSI { too young to have or too little work} or SSD + SSI when your SSD is below the poverty line?

Do you know they already haVE cuts in services these past 3 yrs and sometimes Co-pzayments for stuff they necver had to pay for before. Every damn dollars adds up, when you are poor working, unemployed or Disabled!
*******************************************88

Over 1000 solders have died.
Thousands & thousands have serious Life-changing Injuries because of a war we were Lied to ABOUT <-- JUST AS pRES. jOHNSON fabricated up the Tonkin Gulf incident which realy jumped started the war. >

Tens of thousands of families and friends have had their emotional centers and in family cases their financial centers seriously wrenched because of these deaths & injuries!

Hey Headache how many young people like yourself might soON be up for the draft because Team bUSH HAS STRETCHED OUR FORCES SO THIN. How does that sound to yo?.

There's a non-professional [in the rise up ranks sense] 67 yr old reservest forced to go back intp Iraq.50 yrs old & others too.

Natl guard & reservists are trained more for HOme Emergencies Floods, hurricans, riots, 9-11 NOT Combat Duty. Yet many of them are over therE.

How many of you know that the majority of the 9-11 hijackers were Saudi Arabians! Not Saddams people. Bin Laden& co HAtes sADDAM & HIS bATHISTS party beacuse Saddy & B's are SECULARists.

Meanwhile Bin Ladin hates that the US is in Saudi Arabia BECAUSE {not usa's freedom in general perse] but because we are in SA which houses the 2 holiest sites in all of ISLAM.... Mecca & Medina? BVlus many regular Saudis hate the Royal Family that the US keeps proped up becuase of The OIL!
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Today a Mother who cried out in her grief at a Bush Rally and interrupted it was rudely hustled off into a police van.

wHY is it that at any bUSH OR cHENNEY people have to sign LOaty Oath to attend.???

Hey, where's the Bundt meeting, folks?

This is not suposed to be the old Soviet Union or Fascist Italy?

iS is w TOO SACERED TO BE CONFRONTED BY DEMONSTRATORS . hE WAS TOTASLLY FLUSTERED AT HIS SPEECH WENT aids ACTIVISTS INTERUPTED!


SORRY FOR THE BOLD THERE
 
Last edited:
Headache in a Suitcase said:


only polls i look at are the ones that tell me how the electoral vote will go, 'cause those are the only ones that matter... CNN national polls are useless.


This is correct.

I agree the election is not really close.

Bush is in front comfortably.


Is it right that this election will be determined in only a handful of states?
 
deep said:



This is correct.

I agree the election is not really close.

Bush is in front comfortably.


Is it right that this election will be determined in only a handful of states?

absolutely, but those states all seem to be sliding towards bush. still too early to start bragging... the debates could change everything. but if the election was held today, well... we certainly won't have to wait 2 months before we know who won.

also not a very good sign that about a hundred national guardsmen walked out of kerry's speach to the gathering of guardsmen the other day.
 
Last edited:
still too early to start bragging


No need for any of us to brag.

You, I and NBC could 'touch' the screen for W ten times each. Kerry will still win our electoral votes.


about a hundred national guardsmen walked out

Guardsmen went AWOL, I've heard this before.
 
Re: WHHaaaaa?

dazzledbylight said:


TO YUU AND OTHERS.... NO ONE'S REALLY AFFECTED??? SHORT or LONG RUN?

Excuse me? :eyebrow: :|

How many blue, white collar or tech people do you know that are have become unemployed in the past 3 yrs or underployed, OR have finally gotten a job again-- most now getting 25% or Less income than before?

Do you know that W has NOT created a single net job in his term? He's the only president since Hoover to have this happen to.

ex.
2.5 million> jobs loss under Bush
- 1.0 mILLION jobs created under Bush
_______________
=1.5 jobs Net Loss under Bush

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

Have you asked your parents how their health insurance is?

How about your grandpaarents? Do you care about them? Do you now they will soon be paying a 17% Increase in their medicare premiums.

In some several years ahead they predict retirees will be paying up to 30+% of their SociAL sECURITY on health/medicare related issues.

Does your family/you even have health insurance?
------------------------------------------------------------------

Do you know any [or are] Diasabled people living on either SSD {worked}, SSI { too young to have or too little work} or SSD + SSI when your SSD is below the poverty line?

Do you know they already haVE cuts in services these past 3 yrs and sometimes Co-pzayments for stuff they necver had to pay for before. Every damn dollars adds up, when you are poor working, unemployed or Disabled!
*******************************************88

Over 1000 solders have died.
Thousands & thousands have serious Life-changing Injuries because of a war we were Lied to ABOUT <-- JUST AS pRES. jOHNSON fabricated up the Tonkin Gulf incident which realy jumped started the war. >

Tens of thousands of families and friends have had their emotional centers and in family cases their financial centers seriously wrenched because of these deaths & injuries!

Hey Headache how many young people like yourself might soON be up for the draft because Team bUSH HAS STRETCHED OUR FORCES SO THIN. How does that sound to yo?.

There's a non-professional [in the rise up ranks sense] 67 yr old reservest forced to go back intp Iraq.50 yrs old & others too.

Natl guard & reservists are trained more for HOme Emergencies Floods, hurricans, riots, 9-11 NOT Combat Duty. Yet many of them are over therE.

How many of you know that the majority of the 9-11 hijackers were Saudi Arabians! Not Saddams people. Bin Laden& co HAtes sADDAM & HIS bATHISTS party beacuse Saddy & B's are SECULARists.

Meanwhile Bin Ladin hates that the US is in Saudi Arabia BECAUSE {not usa's freedom in general perse] but because we are in SA which houses the 2 holiest sites in all of ISLAM.... Mecca & Medina? BVlus many regular Saudis hate the Royal Family that the US keeps proped up becuase of The OIL!
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Today a Mother who cried out in her grief at a Bush Rally and interrupted it was rudely hustled off into a police van.

wHY is it that at any bUSH OR cHENNEY people have to sign LOaty Oath to attend.???

Hey, where's the Bundt meeting, folks?

This is not suposed to be the old Soviet Union or Fascist Italy?

iS is w TOO SACERED TO BE CONFRONTED BY DEMONSTRATORS . hE WAS TOTASLLY FLUSTERED AT HIS SPEECH WENT aids ACTIVISTS INTERUPTED!


SORRY FOR THE BOLD THERE

THANK YOU. it does affect us all, and the world. it does matter.
 
Dazzled by Light has made many excellent points, but I'd like to make a couple more:

•Bush would likely have the power to appoint a Supreme Court Justice or two during a second term. Roe vs. Wade would be a litmus test for whomever he appoints. Think Scalia, Thomas...that's the type of justice that would land on the Court for life, or until resignation.

•In a recent poll, 30 out of 35 countries who were polled on whom they'd like to see win the Presidential race chose Kerry. Bush is NOT popular overseas. If you think that doesn't matter--guess again. Like it or not, we live in a global economy, and we need to think globally. Air transportation, the Internet...we can't be isolationist anymore.

•Throughout our history, the U.S. has not been an aggressor nation. We've gone to war to help out in dire situations, i.e. WWII, and thank God for that. But we have not gone into a country under false pretenses--i.e. weapons of mass destruction--and destroyed the infrastructure of a country, along with over 1000 American lives and over 10,000 Iraqi lives. No, I won't shed a tear that Uday and Qusay Hussein were two of the Iraqi dead--they were evil. And I'm glad that Saddam is no longer in power. However, his overthrow has cleared a path for a fundamentalist element that he kept in check to rise...and that means a tough time for the women in that country, I'm afraid. And the Iraqi people have not thrown flowers at the American soldiers...they'd rather throw homemade bombs and shoot guns at them. We got into this war under false pretenses. Bush and his Administration lied to the American people--and you STILL want him as President?!?!?!?

•Okay, so Kerry's not perfect. He made a mistake stressing his Vietnam service because he didn't want to be seen as a lightweight on defense. But the more I read and hear about this man, the more he strikes me as an intelligent, decent man with loads of integrity. I would be proud to have him represent our country in the international community. Pride...not the shame and embarrassment I feel now over the current occupier of the White House. And I feel that Edwards, who can relate to the common man, who knows how it feels to come from working-class roots and who has experienced the pain of losing a child (as my parents have), will be a far better VP than the reclusive, foul-mouthed and downright scary Dick Cheney.

I'm Diane L., and I approve of THIS message.
 
Diane L said:
Dazzled by Light has made many excellent points, but I'd like to make a couple more:

•Bush would likely have the power to appoint a Supreme Court Justice or two during a second term. Roe vs. Wade would be a litmus test for whomever he appoints. Think Scalia, Thomas...that's the type of justice that would land on the Court for life, or until resignation.

•In a recent poll, 30 out of 35 countries who were polled on whom they'd like to see win the Presidential race chose Kerry. Bush is NOT popular overseas. If you think that doesn't matter--guess again. Like it or not, we live in a global economy, and we need to think globally. Air transportation, the Internet...we can't be isolationist anymore.

•Throughout our history, the U.S. has not been an aggressor nation. We've gone to war to help out in dire situations, i.e. WWII, and thank God for that. But we have not gone into a country under false pretenses--i.e. weapons of mass destruction--and destroyed the infrastructure of a country, along with over 1000 American lives and over 10,000 Iraqi lives. No, I won't shed a tear that Uday and Qusay Hussein were two of the Iraqi dead--they were evil. And I'm glad that Saddam is no longer in power. However, his overthrow has cleared a path for a fundamentalist element that he kept in check to rise...and that means a tough time for the women in that country, I'm afraid. And the Iraqi people have not thrown flowers at the American soldiers...they'd rather throw homemade bombs and shoot guns at them. We got into this war under false pretenses. Bush and his Administration lied to the American people--and you STILL want him as President?!?!?!?

•Okay, so Kerry's not perfect. He made a mistake stressing his Vietnam service because he didn't want to be seen as a lightweight on defense. But the more I read and hear about this man, the more he strikes me as an intelligent, decent man with loads of integrity. I would be proud to have him represent our country in the international community. Pride...not the shame and embarrassment I feel now over the current occupier of the White House. And I feel that Edwards, who can relate to the common man, who knows how it feels to come from working-class roots and who has experienced the pain of losing a child (as my parents have), will be a far better VP than the reclusive, foul-mouthed and downright scary Dick Cheney.

I'm Diane L., and I approve of THIS message.


Yep, to this post and also to Dazzled by Light's post. Of course it affects us all...why do you think it's such a huge fight?
 
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-bushblair15sep15,1,1463976.story


Bush's Buddy Blair Favors Kerry, So the Chatter Goes

Britain's prime minister has stayed neutral in the U.S. race, but some analysts see a preference.

By John Daniszewski
Times Staff Writer

September 15, 2004

LONDON — At the recent Republican National Convention, First Lady Laura Bush recalled an "intense" meeting at Camp David between her husband and Tony Blair, his British ally in the campaign against Saddam Hussein. At the mention of the prime minister's name, the delegates applauded.

So it might come as a surprise: Blair would like to see somebody else occupying the White House.

Or at least that's the buzz in the political talking classes here. For the record, Blair has struck a strictly neutral pose. He easily deflected a reporter's question about his preference at a news conference last week, saying that the choice of president is for the American people alone.

But in a delicate political minuet, an envoy from Blair's left-of-center Labor Party had just been in the United States on a semiprivate visit, meeting with Democratic leaders and activists in New York. The message being delivered was that Labor's traditional friendship with the party was intact and that Blair stood more than ready to cooperate with a Democratic administration should John F. Kerry win the November election.

At the same time, Progress magazine — independent, but considered the favored mouthpiece of Blair's "modernist" wing of the Labor Party — came out with a lacerating editorial criticizing President Bush's style and handling of the presidency and concluding that "those who recognize that American leadership is both vital, and a force for good in an uncertain world, will wish John Kerry well on 2 November."

The piece, penned by the magazine's editor, Robert Philpot, signaled where the Blair camp genuinely stands. It was headlined "The Real Deal."

"I think it is fairly obvious that if Blair were to draw a personal preference, he would want Kerry to win," John Rentoul, chief political commentator for the Independent on Sunday, said in an interview. "However, he is not going to say so."

The advantage to Blair of a Kerry White House is obvious, said one Labor commentator close to Downing Street's thinking. "We will have an administration in Washington that is far more in touch with the one here in London, and actually could take some of the more difficult decisions," the source said, requesting anonymity because of Blair's edict to appear neutral.

Support for Bush — or lack of it — among foreign leaders has intermittently emerged in the presidential campaign.

This year, Vice President Dick Cheney chastised Kerry for his reported comment (which later emerged to be a misquotation) that foreign leaders had told him they preferred him for the presidency. A White House spokesman went so far as to challenge Kerry to name names or else admit he had lied.

"American voters are the ones charged with determining the outcome of this election, not unnamed foreign leaders," Cheney mocked Kerry at the time.

Even though Britain is a close U.S. ally, there are indications of great disquiet about Bush's leadership, and a feeling that he is a political liability.

"Everyone around here is praying that Bush loses — not least because we lose loads of votes every time he opens his mouth about his close friend Tony Blair," said one Labor member of Parliament, who requested anonymity. "And I should say that I supported the military action in Iraq."

Bush's standing in Britain is low. A recent survey for the Times of London showed Britons polled preferring Kerry to Bush by a 52%-29% margin. The Labor lawmaker said Bush's widespread unpopularity is "our Achilles' heel" and could hurt Labor in the next general elections.

Another Labor legislator, Clive Soley, disagreed. "I don't think it makes that much difference either way," he said. "The perverse part is that Bush winning makes people realize that whether or not they like it, people have to adjust to the feelings in the United States, and that would be good for the political classes."

Political journalist Andrew Grice, writing in the Independent, said that some backbenchers in Blair's party wished the prime minister would go further to help Kerry, perhaps even by asking the Democrat to speak at Labor's national conference, as President Clinton did in the past.

But according to Grice, Labor's upper echelon has concluded — especially given Bush's upturn in U.S. polls and the recent focus on security issues — that most Americans are reluctant to switch presidents. Any overtures to Kerry could risk burdening U.S.-British relations if Bush were reelected.

Still, Labor's preference for the Democratic Party is unsurprising, given that Labor and the Democrats both tend to the left of the political spectrum and are often in sync on policy. Blair followed Clinton's example to move his party toward the center in the 1990s, a shift that resulted in victory in 1997 after 18 years of Conservative Party rule. The two leaders were exceptionally close.

When Clinton left office in 2001, Blair — reportedly at Clinton's advice — shifted his friendship to Bush.

Kerry need not worry about the Bush-Blair bond, however, Rentoul said. "If John Kerry wins, which he still might do, Tony Blair will be his best buddy too," Rentoul said. "He is pretty flexible in that sense."
 
Here's an interesting column about the polls we get bombarded with every day:
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/newyork/columnists/ny-nybres163973220sep16,0,5538561.column

The main point of the column is this:
Any editors of newspapers or television news shows who use poll results as a story are beyond gullible. On behalf of the public they profess to serve, they are indolent salesmen of falsehoods.

This is because these political polls are done by telephone. Land-line telephones, as your house phone is called.

The telephone polls do not include cellular phones. There are almost 169 million cell phones being used in America today - 168,900,019 as of Sept. 15, according to the cell phone institute in Washington.

There is no way to poll cell phone users, so it isn't done.

Not one cell phone user has received a call on their cell phone asking them how they plan to vote as of today.

Then again, the column does feature some quotes from Zogby (who is polling all the battleground states), saying he isn't using the telephone for his polling (although he doesn't really say what he does use then). So maybe the polling agencies are using other methods.
But it is an interesting thing to keep in mind, especially since 169 million cell phones is quite a lot (even when 90% of those who have a cell phone also have a land-line then it's still more than 16 million people who are not accounted for with the traditional polling methods).

C ya!

Marty
 
Does anyone here ever watch CNBC or just read the paper altogether. Bush came in right at the tail-end of the highest run the stock market has ever made - reaching about 11,000. That # was nearly split to 6,500 when the tech boom ceased and collapsed, bringing down other sectors with it. To compensate this, firms and companies had to dump jobs. That is just how it is, sad, but true. You complain that he didn't create jobs....people, its impossible to do that when you have an economy that just went through the ringer. IT IS NOT HIS FAULT. He came into the situation and is handling it. If he was elected in 1996 and not 2000, we'd all be singing a different tune due to the .com explosion. Is everyone saying Bush is at fault for the.com bust?

It pisses me off to see mindless drivvle being spoken when people simply say, 'Well, we lost jobs during his term." Really? Enlighten yourselves on why this happened.

And we wouldn't be in such a mess if Clinton did something the first time the Towers got hit in '93. That idiot did NOTHING. N-O-T-H-I-N-G. He could have saved lives if he went after him. He had a 15-minute window to kill Osama about 9 years ago and he didn't. Thank you Mr. Clinton. I hope you were enjoying your hummer at that time. Bush does something and is fighting terrorism and people bash him. Clinton does nothing and pretends everything is fine - let's praise him as we lose 3,000 friends as soon as he leaves office.
 
Is this also Clinton's fault?

I.M.F. Says U.S. Debts Threaten World Economy

WASHINGTON, Jan. 7 — With its rising budget deficit and ballooning trade imbalance, the United States is running up a foreign debt of such record-breaking proportions that it threatens the financial stability of the global economy, according to a report released Wednesday by the International Monetary Fund.

Prepared by a team of I.M.F. economists, the report sounded a loud alarm about the shaky fiscal foundation of the United States, questioning the wisdom of the Bush administration's tax cuts and warning that large budget deficits pose "significant risks" not just for the United States but for the rest of the world.
 
Well, the International Monetray Fund said something. Excuse me while I bury myself.

This is a non-regulated piece of garbage. "Experts" said it is alarming. Whenever you read anything that says "experts" you should immediately ask questions, like who are these people. And what makes them experts. That didn't raise any red flags for you? Just take it as gospel. Ok, got it.
 
odowdpa... you make a good point about the dot-com bust and the whole jobs issues. Hell, there are even arguments that the President really has no real "influence" over the economy (which I'm sort of dicey on).

With that said, blaming Clinton for not capturing Osama is little bit much IMO. I don't blame Clinton but I do blame the government as a whole for 9/11. Clinton contributed a little bit just as the CIA did, Bush and his administration did, etc...

Also from what I understand, the deficit is manageable considering the size of the US economy. Hell, I think even Rubin of the Clinton cabinet, concedes that deficit spending may sometimes be alright if there is a recession going on (which there was). I do miss the days of projected surpluses.
 
Back
Top Bottom