This guy for President...

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by és:, Oct 8, 2008.

  1. és: macrumors 6502a


  2. solvs macrumors 603


    Jun 25, 2002
    LaLaLand, CA
    And we fall for it. People are doing that with McCain now too. He talks a good game, but one only needs to look at his plans and policies to see what he really wants to do. People accuse Obama of being all talk, but he has some good plans and surrounds himself with some good people, even if he won't be able to deliver all he promises. Won't be anywhere near as bad as Bush. He just, couldn't be. Palin on the other hand is just like Bush. Maybe worse.

    Not that I fell for it in '00, but I didn't vote for Gore either. Ironically, actually thought Gore was the arrogant and out of touch one. Figured Bush would be just like his Dad, maybe Reagan. Not great, but whatever. After 9/11, actually thought he'd be good. Strong military and all. If I only knew. Here's hoping we don't fall for it again with another pro-war, "fiscal conservative", neocon who destroys the military, screws up foreign policy, and deficit spends his increased gov right into another several trillion dollars into debt.

    Little known, Bush actually lost his first political bid to a bible thumper. He was considered too smart :eek: and an Ivy League New Englander. He vowed never to let anyone out religion him again. So he adopted the fake Texas attitude (he was actually born in CT), left the silver spoon/Ivy League behind him, and let the alcohol (and drug induced) lack of firing brain cells turn him into "regular folk". Of course, ask David Kuo how religious he actually is (not very). Combine that with a general laziness/incuriousity, and pretty much failure at everything he's ever done, along with lots of cronyism, and well...
  3. és: thread starter macrumors 6502a


    Chomsky has actually gone on record about Bush putting this whole 'stupidity' thing on as an act. I'll try and find it if you've not heard it. I wasn't that interested in American politics before 2000, so I never really got to see Bush speaking coherently and intelligently but I can believe it, considering the education and privileged upbringing that he's had.

    They really are. He's a scoundrel and shouldn't be trusted. I'm dreading election night when the results start coming in. If It's McCain, I'm going to be really worried - mainly about foreign policy. Iran will have it coming.
  4. RacerX macrumors 65832

    Aug 2, 2004
    All anyone needed to do was find out about the people Bush was keeping around himself in the 2000 election to figure out what type of future we were in for if he got into office...

    This was on the net back then, and one could have read what they had in mind before getting into office. The only people who didn't see this coming were the ones who decided not to look. And most of the key figures from the George H.W. Bush administration even spoke out against many of these ideas.

    I still don't see a good reason for people not to see this back in 2000... but it seemed that most Americans were so comfortable in their lives that they figured neither of them (Bush or Gore) would make much of a difference.

    I knew what we had coming when Bush disengaged from the middle east and didn't follow up on the USS Cole bombing in the months after he took office. And the topper was in 2001 when he unilaterally pulled us out of the ABM treaty (which gave Putin what he needed to stir up Russian nationalism in the following years).

    I've come to the conclusion that people just don't want to see what is standing right in front of them. They'll accept the lies rather than doing just a little reading up... specially if they don't foresee any consequences from their choice. The fact that McCain is at about 42% today shows that even in troubled times little has changed.
  5. Anuba macrumors 68040


    Feb 9, 2005
    The problem is that two candidates just sort of pop into existence once every four years, then there's an election and after that, at least one of them (the loser) disappears -- in Dubya's case, the winner kind of disappeared too, went into hiding somewhere in the White House and let Cheney run the country.

    There's a very short timeslot for voters to get well acquainted with the candidates, and candidates often exploit this by lying like crazy to get elected. They have nothing to lose, because the winner will be safe on the job for 4 years anyway, and the loser can quietly slip into oblivion. And if they make a comeback after 4 years, everyone's forgotten what they said last time anyway. There's no perpetual accountability. The shorter the time in the spotlight, the less pressure is on the candidates to be consistent and honest. This is why you have such dirty campaigns, this is why scumbags like McCain have the audacity to even try to get elected. This is why airheads like Palin can be thrown into the mix, they come out of nowhere and by the time you eventually find out who they are, it's too late.

    In countries where you have two political blocks and each has a leader that remains in the spotlight at all times, these party leaders can never hide and they have plenty to lose by being dishonest. If their team wins, he'll be prime minister; if they lose, he'll be the leader of the opposition. Anytime he opens his mouth, he has to look at least 3 years back and 3 years ahead. He's under constant scrutiny between elections, and any party leader who fails to establish a sense of trust among voters and keep the trust alive at all times, will be switched out.

Share This Page