I think Bush deserved to win, a lot people don't.What do ya'll think. If you have learned about it like me or If you remember it, I would like to know
Also, I liked Bush the son, A Lot of people don't now. Why?
2000 Election
Posts
Total:
17
-->
@Dr.Franklin
This is the obvious incident that comes to mind
-->
@dustryder
Whats the matter with it
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Starting a war, destabilizing the region, costing money and lives all for non-existent WMDs?
-->
@dustryder
Not our finest hour.
-->
@dustryder
It did stabilize a region, the only reason it wouldn't because of Iran
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Really? How did the Iraq invasion stabilize a region?
-->
@dustryder
It made iraq an ally
-->
@Dr.Franklin
What does being an ally have to do with the impact of the invasion on the stability of Iraq?
-->
@dustryder
So we can move on to toher areas of the middle east
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Oh I get what you're talking about now. What I meant by destabilizing the region was the destabilization of Iraq and the middle east, not the US. It's important to keep in mind that war does not only impact one side, but both.
Elections are nothing more than pageants. George W. Bush was selected to be the president. It's not about "deserving" to win. His family comes from old banking money, which if one does one's research, funded the Nazi campaign. The atrocities the Bush family is responsible for, particularly the 20th century and early 21st, is quite substantial.
@Athias
Pageant: a public entertainment consisting of a procession of people in elaborate, colorful costumes, or an outdoor performance of a historical scene.
Funny way of saying democracy.
George W. Bush was selected to be the president. It's not about "deserving" to win.
Yeah selected by the people who voted for him and the electoral votes.
His family comes from old banking money, which if one does one's research, funded the Nazi campaign
Non-sequitur to him winning by votes.
The atrocities the Bush family is responsible for, particularly the 20th century and early 21st, is quite substantial.
Not an argument against him winning just after the fact he won.
Just so we are clear:
You have a funny way of saying democracy.
Bush won by votes.
What he does that isn't vote tampering like banking and atrocities doesn't make how he won any less fair.
-->
@dustryder
wrong
@TheRealNihilist:
Well metaphors can be funny. Unfortunately, this metaphor is quite accurate.@AthiasPageant: a public entertainment consisting of a procession of people in elaborate, colorful costumes, or an outdoor performance of a historical scene.Funny way of saying democracy.
Yeah selected by the people who voted for him and the electoral votes.
And the international banking families who sponsor him. That's been true for every president since McKinley.
Non-sequitur to him winning by votes.
Not really. Exposure is significant to vote-getting; banking sponsorship is important for exposure. It's quite simple.
Not an argument against him winning just after the fact he won.
I'm not arguing against his "winning." He was selected, as most if not all presidents have been, are, and will be.
What he does that isn't vote tampering like banking and atrocities doesn't make how he won any less fair.
Fairness? There's no fairness in democracy because it is by virtue an immoral system. It is a means to coerce minorities and dissenters into submitting their property, labor, and other resources.
-->
@Dr.Franklin
How so?
-->
@dustryder
because you are