Bush Wins!!!!!

  • Thread starter PhatFat
  • 205 comments
  • 4,873 views
87chevy
I read the supposed 'humor' and had to respond. But I think Ghost C called it exactly as it was. At first I had a smile on my face, but when I continued to read I was pretty insulted. It actually lost any semblance of humor after about the 3rd point. That's way more prejudice than anything i've seen from my American fellows in this forum. That whole thing is just pissing on American culture, oh and the Aussies.
Maybe you´ll like this one better then:

11/5/04

Dear Friends,

Ok, it sucks. Really sucks. But before you go and cash it all in, let's, in
the words of Monty Python, 'always look on the bright side of life!' There
IS some good news from Tuesday's election.

Here are 17 reasons not to slit your wrists:

1. It is against the law for George W. Bush to run for president again.

2. Bush's victory was the NARROWEST win for a sitting president since
Woodrow Wilson in 1916.

3. The only age group in which the majority voted for Kerry was young adults
(Kerry: 54%, Bush: 44%), proving once again that your parents are always
wrong and you should never listen to them.

4. In spite of Bush's win, the majority of Americans still think the
country is headed in the wrong direction (56%), think the war wasn't worth fighting (51%), and don't approve of the job George W. Bush is doing (52%). (Note to foreigners: Don't try to figure this one out. It's an American thing, like Pop Tarts.)

5. The Republicans will not have a filibuster-proof 60-seat majority in the
Senate. If the Democrats do their job, Bush won't be able to pack the
Supreme Court with right-wing ideologues. Did I say "if the Democrats do
their job?" Um, maybe better to scratch this one.

6. Michigan voted for Kerry! So did the entire Northeast, the birthplace of
our democracy. So did 6 of the 8 Great Lakes States. And the whole West
Coast! Plus Hawaii. Ok, that's a start. We've got most of the fresh water,
all of Broadway, and Mt. St. Helens. We can dehydrate them or bury them in
lava. And no more show tunes!

7. Once again we are reminded that the buckeye is a nut, and not just any
old nut -- a poisonous nut. A great nation was felled by a poisonous nut.
May Ohio State pay dearly this Saturday when it faces Michigan.

8. 88% of Bush's support came from white voters. In 50 years, America will
no longer have a white majority. Hey, 50 years isn't such a long time! If
you're ten years old and reading this, your golden years will be truly
golden and you will be well cared for in your old age.

9. Gays, thanks to the ballot measures passed on Tuesday, cannot get married
in 11 new states. Thank God. Just think of all those wedding gifts we won't
have to buy now.

10. Five more African Americans were elected as members of Congress,
including the return of Cynthia McKinney of Georgia. It's always good to
have more blacks in there fighting for us and doing the job our candidates
can't.

11. The CEO of Coors was defeated for Senate in Colorado. Drink up!

12. Admit it: We like the Bush twins and we don't want them to go away.

13. At the state legislative level, Democrats picked up a net of at least 3
chambers in Tuesday's elections. Of the 98 partisan-controlled state
legislative chambers (house/assembly and senate), Democrats went into the
2004 elections in control of 44 chambers, Republicans controlled 53
chambers, and 1 chamber was tied. After Tuesday, Democrats now control 47
chambers, Republicans control 49 chambers, 1 chamber is tied and 1 chamber
(Montana House) is still undecided.

14. Bush is now a lame duck president. He will have no greater moment than
the one he's having this week. It's all downhill for him from here on out --
and, more significantly, he's just not going to want to do all the hard work
that will be expected of him. It'll be like everyone's last month in 12th
grade -- you've already made it, so it's party time! Perhaps he'll treat the
next four years like a permanent Friday, spending even more time at the
ranch or in Kennebunkport. And why shouldn't he? He's already proved his
point, avenged his father and kicked our ass.

15. Should Bush decide to show up to work and take this country down a very
dark road, it is also just as likely that either of the following two
scenarios will happen: a) Now that he doesn't ever need to pander to the
Christian conservatives again to get elected, someone may whisper in his ear
that he should spend these last four years building "a legacy" so that
history will render a kinder verdict on him and thus he will not push for
too aggressive a right-wing agenda; or b) He will become so cocky and
arrogant -- and thus, reckless -- that he will commit a blunder of such
major proportions that even his own party will have to remove him from
office.

16. There are nearly 300 million Americans -- 200 million of them of voting
age. We only lost by three and a half million! That's not a landslide -- it
means we're almost there. Imagine losing by 20 million. If you had 58 yards
to go before you reached the goal line and then you barreled down 55 of
those yards, would you stop on the three yard line, pick up the ball and go
home crying -- especially when you get to start the next down on the three
yard line? Of course not! Buck up! Have hope! More sports analogies are
coming!!!

17. Finally and most importantly, over 55 million Americans voted for the
candidate dubbed "The #1 Liberal in the Senate." That's more than the total
number of voters who voted for either Reagan, Bush I, Clinton or Gore.
Again, more people voted for Kerry than Reagan. If the media are looking for
a trend it should be this -- that so many Americans were, for the first time
since Kennedy, willing to vote for an out-and-out liberal. The country has
always been filled with evangelicals -- that is not news. What IS news is
that so many people have shifted toward a Massachusetts liberal. In fact,
that's BIG news. Which means, don't expect the mainstream media, the ones
who brought you the Iraq War, to ever report the real truth about November
2, 2004. In fact, it's better that they don't. We'll need the element of
surprise in 2008.

Feeling better? I hope so. As my friend Mort wrote me yesterday, "My
Romanian grandfather used to say to me, 'Remember, Morton, this is such a
wonderful country -- it doesn't even need a president!'"

But it needs us. Rest up, I'll write you again tomorrow.

Yours,

Michael Moore
MMFlint@aol.com
www.michaelmoore.com
 
neon_duke
I wonder how many of the knee-jerk Bush haters know that I'm not a Republican, or even care?

But you're still a war mongerer, duke. All Americans are out for oil and Iraqi blood, didn't you know that?

I guess I'm not a republican, either, according to the political compass. Who knew I'd be directly in the middle?

Edit: Oh, the above came from Michael Moore. Does it really need a rebuttal? I think not.
 
OK...Michael Moore...say no more

In case you are thinking I've suffered a sense of humour bypass, I did find this one quite funny:

"I'm offended by political jokes. Too often they get elected" FHM

:lol:

Edit:

Ghost C
Does it really need a rebuttal?

I can't resist doing one ;), it says narrowest victory...but didn't Bush actually get more votes than any other President in history :)
 
Nice to see how Americans react to a piece of text that is absolutely not taking things serious. Really, I have read much more insulting texts about my country and I couldn't care less. Guess it's only funny for non Amerikans.

And indeed, it is a nice piece of copy/paste. ;)
 
Tacet_Blue
I can't resist doing one ;), it says narrowest victory...but didn't Bush actually get more votes than any other President in history :)

He sure did, but nevermind that, he's Bush. At least thirty million of those votes must've been invalid.
 
17. Finally and most importantly, over 55 million Americans voted for the
candidate dubbed "The #1 Liberal in the Senate." That's more than the total
number of voters who voted for either Reagan, Bush I, Clinton or Gore.
Again, more people voted for Kerry than Reagan. If the media are looking for
a trend it should be this -- that so many Americans were, for the first time
since Kennedy, willing to vote for an out-and-out liberal. The country has
always been filled with evangelicals -- that is not news. What IS news is
that so many people have shifted toward a Massachusetts liberal. In fact,
that's BIG news. Which means, don't expect the mainstream media, the ones
who brought you the Iraq War, to ever report the real truth about November
2, 2004. In fact, it's better that they don't. We'll need the element of
surprise in 2008.

More people also voted for Bush than voted for Reagan - so what's the point of this again? Bush won with the largest number of popular votes ever cast in American history: 59,459,765. That's around 4 million more than Kerry. So get over it.
 
Talking about votes, I´ve read in another forum that the America´s voting system uses these "delegades"(I don´t know if that´s the right word, I don´t even know if that´s a word at all) in each state, and the size (population) of the state is what defines how many delegades each one has. Like Ohio for being a large state has 20 of those, but Delaware has only one. And that´s what is used to count the votes. So if in Ohio the Candidate A made 200 thousand votes and Candidate B made 199 thousand, candidate A will get all the 20 delegades. The guy also said that in the last election Gore made 2 million more votes than Bush, but because of this system Bush was elected.

Is this true? Cause it seams to be a flawed system IMHO. Could anyone care to explain it to me?
 
Gore had, SUPPOSEDLY, 330,000 more votes than Bush, total. Other than that, I'll leave it to someone else to respond to the rest.
 
FatAssBR
Talking about votes, I´ve read in another forum that the America´s voting system uses these "delegades"(I don´t know if that´s the right word, I don´t even know if that´s a word at all) in each state, and the size (population) of the state is what defines how many delegades each one has. Like Ohio for being a large state has 20 of those, but Delaware has only one. And that´s what is used to count the votes. So if in Ohio the Candidate A made 200 thousand votes and Candidate B made 199 thousand, candidate A will get all the 20 delegades. The guy also said that in the last election Gore made 2 million more votes than Bush, but because of this system Bush was elected.

Is this true? Cause it seams to be a flawed system IMHO. Could anyone care to explain it to me?


They are called Electoral Votes, and I think it is a measure of how influential that state is. Its fair because surely both parties are aware of this and will be campaigning strongly in the states with the highest Electoral votes.

You'll need Macromedia Flash, but here is a nice animation of the breakdown of voting and how many votes a state represents

Edit: Gore won the popular vote by a narrow margin, (and a recount) but he didn't seal the important states, so his total Electoral votes were less. If you win in one state by 10 million votes and that state only represent 3 EV, then that is all you get, if your opponent wins by 1 vote in a state with 20 EV, then he would have less votes, but more Electoral Votes. A US citizen can explain this better ;)
 
Thanks Tacet. But I don´t think it´s much fair. It may be to the parties, but if I live in a small state and you live in a large one, it means that your vote worths more than mine? That´s not cool, they should stick to the regular formula.
 
Electoral Votes are a representation of how many people are in the state. The bigger the state (Population-wise), the more votes. It's not that a popular vote means more or less from state to state, it just means one state has more people than the other.
 
FatAssBR
Thanks Tacet. But I don´t think it´s much fair. It may be to the parties, but if I live in a small state and you live in a large one, it means that your vote worths more than mine? That´s not cool, they should stick to the regular formula.


It happens in the UK as well, we call them "seats". I think the SDP party were calling for proportional representation years ago, so all votes were equal.

The people in the powerful constituencies may believe that their vote should count more than a lesser one, as they contribute more to the economy and have more to lose. But no one said politics was fair ;)

Edit:
Ghost C
Electoral Votes are a representation of how many people are in the state. The bigger the state (Population-wise), the more votes. It's not that a popular vote means more or less from state to state, it just means one state has more people than the other.
Well there you go...I thought it was more than just population, but more people should mean more production anyway.

I'm still confused but this is from the Electoral College site:
Each state gets a number of electors equal to its number of members in the U.S. House of Representatives plus one for each of its two U.S. Senators. The District of Columbia gets three electors. While state laws determine how electors are chosen, they are generally selected by the political party committees within the states.
Each elector gets one vote. Thus, a state with eight electors would cast eight votes. There are currently 538 electors and the votes of a majority of them -- 270 votes -- are required to be elected. Since Electoral College representation is based on congressional representation, states with larger populations get more Electoral College votes
 
Actually it’s somewhat the other way around. The electoral college gives the smaller states more power in an election than they would have in a popular vote.

Imagine for a moment that the presidential election in America was done by popular vote.

Candidates would spend most of their time hitting the big cities only. They’d spend lots of time in California and New York. You wouldn’t see anyone campaigning in New Hampshire that’s for sure.

And how would elected politicians act if this were the case. They could pass a law saying that Montana was now going to be a landfill and not have to worry about losing that many votes in New York or California.

As it is now, if there was one person in a state it would still get two electoral votes. That means that that one person all by himself would get two electoral votes in the main election. That means that the electoral college system favors small states over larger ones – which is a good thing.

The electoral college is the way it is to empower voters in smaller states and make sure that even small states have some power on the national stage.
 
Viper Zero
Ban this guy, ban that guy!

Ban Wellyrn because I didn't like his political view. Ban Anderson because I didn't like his attitude. Ban Arwin because he posts too much.

You might want to grow up, Do you race, before you start telling moderators to ban people.
If you read my post properly, you might actually realise I was calling for THIS account to be banned, as in MINE.
 
FatAssBR I'm lost.... What did my post have anything to do with your Michael Moore letter? I was responding to the Anti American gibberish from a foreigner, I wasn't upset with Rebublicans or Bush (at the time I wrote that).....

The Electoral College is a sham, any system where someone can become president without the popular vote, will and always will be a sham.

Also the truly scary thing is not that Bush got elected, but that Republicans control the House and Senate!!! Goodbye Abortion, Goodbye Seperation of Church and State, oh, and Good Buy American manufacturing jobs, and tax breaks for those who need them.
 
87chevy
The Electoral College is a sham, any system where someone can become president without the popular vote, will and always will be a sham.
http://people.howstuffworks.com/electoral-college.htm

Also the truly scary thing is not that Bush got elected, but that Republicans control the House and Senate!!!
Not complete control, but a majority. Democrats can still filibust in the Senate, which the Democrats like to do when they don't get their way.

Goodbye Abortion
Good, I still can't comprehend killing a child for no good reason because the mother is incompetent of her decisions.

Goodbye Seperation of Church and State
Seperation of Church and State in the Constitution declares that the government cannot impose or endorse a religion of any kind. Give me one example where that is done today.

Good Buy American manufacturing jobs, and tax breaks for those who need them.
Manufacturing jobs are up and people who did deserve tax breaks got them.
 
Yo... Cheby mon I got me a tax break ! And I dare say I deserve it. I work hard for my money. I dont know I can still turn my TV on and watch all the porn channels on cable if care to. The abortion argument is just that ..an argument . I cant ever see Roe vs Wade overturned. And yes I aggree with a womens right to choose but I still voted for Bush. I really do not see the extreme right wing holy rollers that you fear are in charge. I guess they must be hiding. I have no problem what so ever with having a guy in charge who I believe has faith in god, even though I may not have anything remotly approaching the same faith. GOOD is GOOD even if you think it took more than 7 days to create the universe and the world is more than 4000 to 6000 years old and that its not feasable for a non virgin to give birth. Who's to say what religion is right among the many in the world ? But at the same time whats wrong with a person who believes ? Its not like he's comming over for dinner any time soon. Sorry I just do not see the same devil you all seem to see. Kerry couldnt even say for sure what he stands for . I know exactly where Bush is comming from.
I like him better than Kerry so I voted for him. Its that simple.
 
I think many people just find it very dangerous to have one of the most powerfull people being an evangellical christian who thinks that non christians will burn in hell. In the eyes of many Europeans he is just as radical in his believes as fundamentalists in the middle east. And, in many of his speaches it is obvious that he lets his faith dictate his political decisions.

And to say that good is good......I think that many moslims, hindoes, christians have a very different idea of what is good compared to what Bush says. That doesn't mean that they are wrong about it. For instance abortion. He says it's bad and our prime minister says it's good. Different point of view, because of a different notion of what is good.
 
We should pause a minute for Mr. Blair. After all he's the one who'll be eating dog food for another 4 years or at least 6 months.
 
87chevy
FatAssBR I'm lost.... What did my post have anything to do with your Michael Moore letter?
You said you didn´t find the text that PjotrStroganov posted funny, so I said maybe you would like Michael Moore´s letter better, that´s all. :)
 
Viper Zero
I guess Jesus told Bush to give me a tax break.

Hot damn! :rolleyes:

Nice to know that that was the only decission Bush made in the last 4 years. :rolleyes: . Easy isn't it, to make a sarcastic remark on something that has nothing to do with the argument.
 
If there's one thing I know it's that the American and Brittish senses of humor/humour aren't always very compatible. In the Netherlands we watch and appreciate both, but in the UK you will see silly things like a UK remake of Friends (Coupling), Who's the Boss, and so on. Totally freaky, and we don't get the point. Yet each of you guys has great shows and if you look carefully you're not that far off.

The real joke in the letter above is on both the UK and the US anyway. But I guess in the current context that is lost on many.
 
87chevy
FatAssBR I'm lost.... What did my post have anything to do with your Michael Moore letter? I was responding to the Anti American gibberish from a foreigner, I wasn't upset with Rebublicans or Bush (at the time I wrote that).....

The Electoral College is a sham, any system where someone can become president without the popular vote, will and always will be a sham.

Also the truly scary thing is not that Bush got elected, but that Republicans control the House and Senate!!! Goodbye Abortion, Goodbye Seperation of Church and State, oh, and Good Buy American manufacturing jobs, and tax breaks for those who need them.


Don't forget Social Security. If it is privatized, people will blow it, then we will pay for their welfare.
 
How exactly am I misinformed for stating that the war in Iraq is religious? Crusade, in relation to conflict, means a religious war. That is it's definition. Bush stated clearly (and it was broadcast) that the war in Iraq was a crusade. It may have been a slip of the tongue but that still belies his intentions.


And as for Bush receiving the most votes of any President doesn't that also mean, given the proximity of the vote, that he also had the most votes against a President ever too?

You talk about propaganda, and being informed but you're still just spouting rhetoric.
 
okoj
How exactly am I misinformed for stating that the war in Iraq is religious? Crusade, in relation to conflict, means a religious war. That is it's definition. Bush stated clearly (and it was broadcast) that the war in Iraq was a crusade. It may have been a slip of the tongue but that still belies his intentions.

Yes...a Holy Crusade, thats it, oh and don't forget the oil...the Holy Oil.

btw it was broadcast as a crusade against terrorism, but you can twist those words any way you like...it's a free country ;)
 
Tacet_Blue
Yes...a Holy Crusade, thats it, oh and don't forget the oil...the Holy Oil.

btw it was broadcast as a crusade against terrorism, but you can twist those words any way you like...it's a free country ;)

...and how am I twisting it? Surely if Bush did not mean it to be a religious conflict he would have avoided using the word 'crusade', yes? Or at least his speech writers and their advisors would...
 
Back