What Election Day means to us?

I never thought of Bush as a dumb person. He can only blame his terrible oral skills. This election is very interesting, a president who lost the debates and has highest rate job loss in history still got elected. Yet in war time, America needs a strong and consistent president, and Bush made the cut. Kerry's infamous statement about the war in Iraq and his Senate record potrayed him as an extremely liberal politician and flip-flopper. Let's wait and see if Hillary can do better than that (she came to our school earlier this year and gosh, I must admit her rhetorical skills are almost as good as Bill).
 
u cannot say that Bush lost the debate. He didn't do a good job but neither did Kerry. I hate the way Kerry speaks. He never goes into any detail

I am positive that Hilary would do better than both Bush and Kerry. I ADMIRE her

The result of this election actually helps her because if Kerry won this year and he did a bad job during his admin., people would not vote for the democrate again; if he did a good job (or at least not so horrible), he would be reelected => Hilary would have no chance at all
 
if Hilary got elected next election, it'd be so funny: Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton
 
Are you supportive of Hillary because she is a woman, or because you truly feel that she has what it takes to do be a President? Secondly, will she even have a chance? Not that I'm averse to seeing a woman in the White House for a change (far from it), I'm not quite so sanguine. Assuming that Hillary is even nominated, think of the issues that will arise as a result of adding the "woman-man" debate into the mix. If Kerry was portrayed as a flip-flopper, you can bet the Republicans will tear Hillary apart. However, if she is the first woman to run, it might create a new tradition for the US. There's hope yet...

I actually think that Kerry won those debates outright. The camera at least loves him, whereas Bush... He was pretty persuasive, and where he was vague, Bush's increasingly-constipated face made up for it.

Let's take a honest, post-election look at the real reasons why Bush won. Aside from the rich people who want the tax cuts, the majority who voted for Bush must have been common folks (yeah, the same people who fill our mailboxes with "Our Prez r0xrs, the world can STFU, kthanxsbye!!"). Excluding the issue of the war in Iraq relating to terrorism (because you have to be living under a rock to not to know that it's just not on), what really motivated the average American to vote for Bush?
 
Chỉnh sửa lần cuối:
Seriously , i think Hillary Clinton would be a good candidate for President of the United States and could easily be elected . I admire her , too :)

Hmmm , Hillary may have to battle Kerry for their party's nomination in 2008 .A victory by President Bush could establish her as the front-runner for the 2008 Democratic nomination for president. She must have been in high gear for that :) Hm , but still there are some obstacles , the Monica Lewinsky , the White Water scandal, and her failure in the Health Care Reform ( I read 'bout it in "Living history " , dun't know if that's considered her failure ) may all influence her running . THat's not bad records , but in hot running days , dirty tricks , personal attacks , all are not excluded .

Now, the Democrats now have no other candicate more potential for the nomination than HIllary and Kerry . The Republicans now have nobody but Bush. As someone has said to me , there could be a repeat of the Clinton-Bush election of 1992, only with the first names changed . True , its funny , Bush - Clinton - BUsh - Clinton , but it must stop there , for both Bush and the Clinton have only girls who are to said not to be very interested in politics ( Or are they ? )

And why BUsh win , to me , the only reason is that there must be something wrong with the mindset of the American voters . REpublicans , any, are far more worse off than Kerry . Maybe that is just my view , an outsider's view . But it's unlikely that any Republican will be elected next term . THey can not find any worse candidate than GWBush to field in 4 years to come . 8-} What a nonsense ! A president who lost the debates ( the stupid way in which he barked still makes me vomit ) and has highest rate job loss in history ( the deficit just keeps increasing steeply ) got re-elected . 8-} Life sometime really sucks !

:)) And Bill Clinton , its high time he rested . Bypass heart surgery , still he looks so charming . His hands till now have been twisted by hundreds of handshakings , signings . Its now his wife's era ! Go ahead , HIllary :D
 
His hands till now have been twisted by hundreds of handshakings , signings
Nhấn để mở rộng...
no , it should be rectified like this , his hands till now have been twisted by thoundsands of handshakings and lengthened by miles of signatures






:))
 
Chỉnh sửa lần cuối:
big budget deficit might not be a bad thing because it shows that other coutries are actually investing in the US
as long as they have the ability to pay off the deficit and their ecn is still growing, big budget deficit is fine
Nhấn để mở rộng...
But it can also lead to bankruptcy:)

To anh Long: I'm not there now ( u probably can see tat from my location, and must one be living there to express his view?? ) but I was under the Clinton administration and it was great then..However when Bush came into power, my image of the States also change:)..Ok, must admit I was a bit carried away:)..Fine, lemme rephrase it then..those people was tricked into buying into republican rhetoric..


To Phương: hm, the chance of Kerry getting nominated is very very very slim..I don't think he will have a chance after this election..Normally I don't think they will field the same candidate who have been beaten once as a repeat of this year might happen again..Actually I think Edwards, Hillary have more chance..I did come across a review this morning in the paper and they did mention the new african american who has juz been voted in as a senator or representative this year as another potential candidate..Dunno about him so won't say anything..As for Hillary, she might have a chance..Having been quite a popular senator and the fact that she might be the first woman president might help her win the support of women but she has the similar background to Kerry..Will she able to draw votes from those southern states that Republicans have been dominating for so long..It is those states that the Democrats have to try to win if they really want to win..

And about the debates, I only manage to catch the first one..Kerry really kicks Bush's ass but mainly thanks to Bush rather than because of his own ability..Kerry was not really answering those question posed to him but instead, he concentrated too much on attacking Bush while Bush could not do anything but keep on repeating nonsense and appear annoyed:)
 
Hillary Clinton's candidacy for the President is somewhat less than perfect for two reasons.

First off, in light of the world politics becoming increasingly attached to terrorism, Hillary, who has very few, if any, record on fighting domestic and international terrorism, will definitely have an extremely hard time demonstrating her abilities on this issue to Americans. As a shrewd polician, Kerry already realized this atmosphere and that was probably why he excessively stirred up his alleged heroic records during Vietnam War over the course of presidential campaign; however, as we can see, not many Americans buy his argument. I thus personally think that Hillary and her political strategists would need to solve this big puzzle if she was to be elected in 2008, assuming no significant change in US political climate for the next couple of years.

Secondly, as I previously commented, the demographic breakdowns and surveys told us, to a certain extent, that Americans are increasingly concerned about their national identity and values, signaling the rise of a more conservative America as opposed to a new liberal Europe (abortion and same-sex marriage are just two among dozens of examples here). And I think the possibility that Hillary, a strong, change-driven WOMAN*, will receive even minimal support from die-hard Conservatives is close to zero. Thus, if who Americans need now is an outgoing, moderately dominant person who can mobilize everyone, from conservatives to liberals, to unite, Hillary, who was dubbed by the conservative as 'a flaming liberal', will not be a perfect candidate.

*I just wanted to note that my capitalizing the word 'woman' is not meant to be about my attitude towards gender by any measure. Rather, I meant the fact that Hillary is a an ambitious, highly educated woman will make her job of swaying die-hard Reps, and, to a lesser extent, moderate Reps, to her side doubly harder.
 
to Tung: big budget deficit can lead to bankrupcy, but with the situation right now, it couldn't. Other countries wouldn't lend their money if they thought the US couldn't pay them back. In fact, the SS fund is the one that need to be taken care of. I was amazed that they didn't cover much about this at the debate at ASU
 
personally, I think Bill Clinton did a great job during his presidency. I've heard that when Bill and Hilary was in harvard, Hilary was better than Bill. Of course there's a huge defference between doing in school and being a president but oh well, that's enough for me to support Hilary.

The conservatives would of course oppose to a woman running for president. But who care about them. They always vote for the elephant anyway
 
Nguyen My Hanh đã viết:
personally, I think Bill Clinton did a great job during his presidency. I've heard that when Bill and Hilary was in harvard, Hilary was better than Bill. Of course there's a huge defference between doing in school and being a president but oh well, that's enough for me to support Hilary.

The conservatives would of course oppose to a woman running for president. But who care about them. They always vote for the elephant anyway
Nhấn để mở rộng...

Maybe you don't but I am sure Hillary does.
 
hmmm, Hillary got stuck in the ''White Water '' or the ''WAter Gate ''scandal ? Hm, my hazy memory . How come i mix those quite different words together :(

bro TÙng đã viết:
I did come across a review this morning in the paper and they did mention the new african american who has juz been voted in as a senator or representative this year as another potential candidate..Dunno about him so won't say anything
Nhấn để mở rộng...
i think hes Barack Obama . He gave a pretty impressive at the Democratic convention .
Obama đã viết:
Well, I say to them tonight
there's not a liberal America and a conservative America
there's the United States of America.
There's not a black America and white America and Latino America and Asian America
there's the United States of America.
Nhấn để mở rộng...

and btw, did Hillary and Bill go to Havard together , i think they went to Yale :p
 
Nguyen My Hanh đã viết:
personally, I think Bill Clinton did a great job during his presidency. I've heard that when Bill and Hilary was in harvard, Hilary was better than Bill. Of course there's a huge defference between doing in school and being a president but oh well, that's enough for me to support Hilary.

The conservatives would of course oppose to a woman running for president. But who care about them. They always vote for the elephant anyway
Nhấn để mở rộng...

Since when did either of the Clintons go to Harvard? Are you sure you "ADMIRE" her?
As to your amazement that the economic issues were not covered, the reason is quite simple. Just think about it. Most of the ppl watching the debates didn't really care about those things chiefly because they didn't know much about them. I doubt that the two candidates knew much about them either... Few do, indeed. I certainly don't. Do you?
 
im not sure abt that

u misunderstood

I mean that the conservative always vote for the republican, so it doesn't really matter if the democrate's candidate is a woman or a man, they will not for the democrate anyway (i mean of course they could mock if Hilary ran for president but other than that, ther's not much they can do abt it)
 
yes, i do care about the econ issues in the debate because it's my assignment
and to my amazement, i couldn't answer the question my teacher asked simply because they didn't talk about it
 
i doublechecked the thing, sorry, i was so out of it, it was Yale
 
First off, I'm hopeful that you'll notice Khoa's effort to tell you that you've been misspelling HiLLary's name all along.
Second, I wasn't asking whether you cared about the econ issues or not. I asked if you understood the inner working of them. Seriously, I have great doubt that even Alan Greenspan understands them thoroughly. And thirdly, I don't think conservatives ALWAYS vote for the Rep.
 
Chỉnh sửa lần cuối:
hmmm, Hillary got stuck in the ''White Water '' or the ''WAter Gate ''scandal ? Hm, my hazy memory . How come i mix those quite different words together
Nhấn để mở rộng...
Watergate is to do with Nixon, not Hillary Clinton, Hillary Clinton is Bill Clinton wife, she would not be able to progress this far without her husband anyway. I don't see anything in her admirable.
the deficit just keeps increasing steeply
Nhấn để mở rộng...
I see, the problem is en economy which never go to deficit is an economy with problem. Everybody who studied economics know that. If you look at the U.S, U.S economy go to depression about every 20 years. Once in 1940, once in 1970, once in mid 1980, and this time start from 2000. It's perfectly normal and U.S economy will boom again soon.
As to your amazement that the economic issues were not covered, the reason is quite simple. Just think about it. Most of the ppl watching the debates didn't really care about those things chiefly because they didn't know much about them
Nhấn để mở rộng...
They still vote for Bush despite the economic issues is because they know much much much more about economic than you do.
 
Chỉnh sửa lần cuối:
sorry i misunderstood your question, and also sorry or misspelling Hillary name, thank u for telling me that.

i was saying that federal budget and SS matter were not covered much in the debate. of course we don't understand the econ thoroughly (it is so true that even Greenspan doesn't), but ppl have the right to know where their money is going.
 
Đặng Trần Hiếu đã viết:
They still vote for Bush despite the economic issues is because they know much much much more about economic than you do.
Nhấn để mở rộng...

I'm sorry, but this statement is a little confusing. Why would people who truly understood the economic situation vote for Bush, whom we've all tacitly labelled the "screw-economy" president? The fact that the US economy began to recover at the end of Bush's presidency wasn't anything he could take credit for, and it didn't even become that much of a priority in his campaign.

The majority of people watching the debates might or might not have understood about economic issues, but they certainly didn't care enough about them. The average Americans were glued to the TV screen scanning for phrases that would incense them, like "gay-marriages", "terrorism", and "abortion".
Nhấn để mở rộng...
 
Bạn phải đăng nhập hoặc đăng ký để phản hồi tại đây.
Back
Bên trên