when there not a good choice

[juanbenae]

the choice made can't be the right one. go figure

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=2026&ncid=2026&e=5&u=/latimests/20041228/ts_latimes/reelectionhoneymoonwithvoterseludesbushpollssay

[Moses]

Originally posted by k911sc
the choice made can't be the right one. go figure

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=2026&ncid=2026&e=5&u=/latimests/20041228/ts_latimes/reelectionhoneymoonwithvoterseludesbushpollssay

Not really. It's just hard to admit that the Kerry/Edwards ticket sucked hard.

[ZAMIRZ]

Originally posted by Moses
Not really. It's just hard to admit that the Kerry/Edwards ticket sucked hard.

word. I would have gladly voted democrat if the candidates were even slightly better than Bush, but they weren't.

[BlueSkyJaunte]

I'm having a hard time understanding this whole thing.

The Libs are crying (literally...some of my coworkers were in tears after the results came in, and some even took sick days...what a bunch of babies...) and rending their clothes over how stupid the people in this country are to have voted for Bush & Co.

But, by the same token, how stupid are you (and your party) if you're unable to convince a population of morons (their words) that your candidate is the best choice?

That said, I think we were faced with two nearly equally bad choices. And in the end, emotion decided the race--not merit. Well, it couldn't have been merit, because neither candidate had any.

[juanbenae]

my point to the post was he's not even started his second term and his approval rating is lower than the % of vote he got.

i did not realize how hard kerry sucked until he could not beat bush.

who's in office does not change my day to day life, now the pelican server being down? there's a problem!

[cowtown]

Originally posted by k911sc

who's in office does not change my day to day life, now the pelican server being down? there's a problem!

If Kerry had run on the "100% server uptime" platform, he would have been in like Flint.

[Moses]

Originally posted by k911sc
my point to the post was he's not even started his second term and his approval rating is lower than the % of vote he got.

I'm not surprised. Bush was an amazingly weak candidate. He's a poor speaker and the whole Iraq mess would have buried him if the Democrats had run anyone except a classic stuffed-shirt liberal Democrat with a sleazy trial attorney sidekick. What were they thinking?

Bush is no populist. He doesn't have Reagans "common man" likeability or charm. Bush does not appear warm, engaging or particularly bright. That the democrats let this one slip away is a testimony to their arrogance and complete political disconnect with mainstream America.

[juanbenae]

Bush is no populist. He doesn't have Reagans "common man" likeability or charm. Bush does not appear warm, engaging or particularly bright

thats what i mean! well said mo

[techweenie]

Originally posted by Moses
Bush is no populist. He doesn't have Reagans "common man" likeability or charm. Bush does not appear warm, engaging or particularly bright.

That's exactly why there's such a push in some quarters to get the law changed and Schwarzenegger into the next round. Not-particularly-bright actors with charm can be good front men.