My comments on GW and the election...
 

I was not a fan of the re election of this president,
HOWEVER!!!!

he is now our pres again for the next term ,and his policies were never made a secret to anyone. so with the mojority of the people ( popular vote) voting overwhelmingly for his continuance,
Then I believe we should all honor that, and support it rather than be subversive...

and for all of you running down the US here latley, FUCK YOU COCKSUCKERS!!!!!

we are/ have been/ an d will always be the strongest... so the best thing for you to do is either abstain, or join, but do not cross us or try to run us down, cause that is the wrong approach to achieve any peace. and will surely cause more trouble than it will solve anything... so if you live in the us, and you are a critic, I would caution you to use your head, and do not cross the line of anarchy with your statements!

on tht note thank god ascrift is leaving, and lets hope that we can encourage the republicans to honor what they say and see if they try to run rough shod over us as democrates, or if they actually do try to reach across the isle. but at any rate, I would also say prepare for more war, cause apperantly that is what the us wants as a country or they would not have had the results we had!

mush,

Fuck Bush

Brand New GFY Feature: Political analysis and opinion from a retarded chimp.

:thumbsup :thumbsup :thumbsup :thumbsup :thumbsup

He did not win OVERWHELMINGLY. He was one of the WEAKEST incumbants wins in history. 3% win is NOT overwhelmingly. 3.5 mil votes is NOT overwhelmingly. Last incumbant to win by less than 3.5 million votes was Harry Truman in 1948( by 2.2 million ) and only 48 million votes TOTAL were cast back then.

I'd hit it :thumbsup

On principle?

Why is the suicide rate so low in Poland? Because it's hard to kill yourself jumping out of a cellar. Typical :glugglug

First off, he only won by less than 3% of the total votes...the lowest win since 1916 which was won with 3.1% difference of the total vote, so you "voting overwhelmingly for his continuance" theory is complete bullshit, this was one of the slimmest wins ever.

You saying "and will surely cause more trouble than it will solve anything.." sounds similar to what the terrorists say...

What is your definition of "anarchy"? Would that be "running down the US here"? Isn't freedom about voicing your opinions and concerns? So what if there are haters of GWB and rather move to Canada where democrats can live "freely" and not be drafted into a war which they feel is unjust.

Just my :2 cents:

Americans are DUMBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB

he had the largest total popular vote IN HISTORY!!!!

and in case you all forgot, last election was won by less than 3.5 million so read the history a little closer LOL

and he won an OVERWHELMING num ber of the states...

how many did us democrates win?

I do not like it any better tan any of you, but to live in such denial about who won and how overwhelming it was is just assinine!!!! and I hate to say it but very ignorant!!!

what we need now is to try to reach out and heal the division in our country, cause last I checked it was created by a rule of law, and a majority vote can change that law.... nothing changed, so now what? do you think stirring touble in our own streets as a sign of protest is a civilized or rigt in any way sort of thing to do?


and if so why?

erhm. but 3% are 3%.. you should not forget there are also a lot votes to the democrats..
i didnt look it up, but from that its logic that he also had the largest votes "against" him.

:thumbsup

That because we had the most people voting ever, MORON. Going by that John Kerry had the 2nd most votes ever so I guess Kerry must have been more popular than Reagan, FDR and Lincoln. Quit being biased.

Also going by YOUR logic Bush had the most votes AGAINST him than anyone in history too.

We talking about INCUMBANTS winning re-election, MORON. YOU try READING. I have looked up that stats and since popular votes were recorded in the 1820's Bush was the LOWEST % in HISTORY for an incumbant.

But go ahead Bush push your "mandate" on the nearly 50% that didn't vote for you and see if the GOP wins in 2008.

Also in 1996 Clinton won re-election by over 8 million votes and yet republicans said he didn't have a mandate. Explain that one.

well moron, how and why do you think so many people went to the polls this time???? doh!!!!! could it be they wanted their voices heard?


the last ting I am is biased for bush, I am just saying you guys are why we keeop losing, cause your arguments are failed and biased, that definatly turns the middle to a more stable point of logic that the other side obviously had this time around...

'

Clinton never got over 50% of the popular vote. Bush got 51% so I am assuming that is their reason for a mandate

and now think:

why did so many people go to the polls? because they wanted a change.

thats why bush got the most votes against him

:)

Wow. you really know how to make yourself look like a fucking twat. Just remember that most of those programs that send you checks are based here in the good old US of A

"ALMOST" only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades!!

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh

And, I hate to burst your bubble but the MOST votes were FOR him. He took popular AND electoral!!

Who cares, Clinton WON by 9.2% not 3%... what does that tell you?

are you as blind as you are ignorant?

BUSH WON !!!!

so who do you think got the more people out to vote again? the ones against him? or for him?

51% is NOT overwhelming and is NOT a mandate. But please I hope Bush agrees with you. He will doom the GOP in 2008. I would consider McCain though. I would have voted for him in 2000 if the GOP had the brains to accualy nominate him.

Ignornace MUST be bliss :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

Please run for office and win with 51% and then tell everyone you have a MANDTAE and see if you win re-election when the time comes.

i am either blind or ignorant..
you are just admit yourself with your percentage values and "most votes ever" that they have also been the most people did not want him to be president.

whats so difficult you arent understanding this?

By the slimmest margin ever for a current president

Bush didn't get the most votes AGAINST him? Please show me a winning candidate the got more votes agianst him. LINK PLEASE.

It tells me that a higher percentage of voters actually voted for bush than ever voted for Clinton.

Anyone can spin stats the way they want to make their point. I was just state the reason that the republicans are given for having this so called mandate

Put the total amount of votes aside and what you have is a 6.2% higher approval rating for clinton than bush.

Now, if you look at all the votes in this election....sure he had the most votes for him, but he also had the most against him. The only thing which matters is 1) he won and 2) % he won by, 3%.

Think about that..

Clinton wins by 9.2% of the popular vote
Bush wins by 3% of the popular vote

If you dont see the difference you're about as dumb as Bush

WTF are you talking about? Votes AGAINST HIM? You vote for one or the other. If your mentality states that the reason that you vote for someone else (ie Kerry) is because you are voting AGAINST Bush, then you have no business being at the polls in the first place. :2 cents:

The state of the world right now is unstable. People get scared when some dipshit rag head camel fuckers come over here and fly a few planes into the ground and kill 3500+ people. Understandably. But what I can tell you is that the state of the Union is FUCKING STRONG! We will prevail. No one said it would happen over night. John Kerry couldn't have done anything better tha GW did.

GW was faced with some pretty harsh decsions. Sure he may not take the same stance on Porn as I or yourself does, but in the end (even with his personal agendas which EVERY president throughout histor has had) he is looking out for the US best interest.

Not negotiating with beheading cowardly terrorists is SMART. Fuck them. Cut all the heads off you want. We CAN NOT fold to these hahahahas. Taking Saddam Husseien out of power is a GOOD THING for everyone. Sure, no WMD's bah blah blah. Who fucking cares? He is a murdering tyrant that deserves nothing less than a red hot fire poker up his ass.

Our kids are over ther fighting? Damn right they are. Do they want to be there? No. You know why? Because it's fucking scary that these evil muslim dipshits walk around over there without a care in the world. Your most evil and fearful adversary is one that has no regard for his own life.

Its for oil you say? Fuck yeah. Take it. I would you would. We have our own, but we are smart. We will leave our reserves in TX, Alaska, The Gulf of Mexico and other places. Let the rest of this filth ridden world dry up first. Then we will get 100.00 a barrell.

The only thing Bush has REALLY done wrong is not sealing up the borders of the US and kicking out all of these leechers with Visas and illegals. :glugglug

Look in 20 years some candidate is going to have "the most votes ever" doesn't mean he's the most popluar president ever. it called POPULATION increase. In 1992 Perot go more votes than Lincoln so I guess Perot was more popular than Lincoln.

Good to see ya Joe

There you go :thumbsup :thumbsup

who thinks we wil attack iran? or reinstate the draft?

We don't havbe enough troops to invade anyone else without a draft. I wonder if that crazy fucker in N Korea knows that? besides we'll get Isreal to bomb those nuclear reators in Iran for us.

I agree, and unfortunatly if we attack iran, i bet China will make a move on taiwan knowing we are not in a position to stop tem.

I think we as americans better get ready for worldd war, as i think it is coming in the next four years. that is what I am saying, we can not stop what has been determined now, so we need to unite so we do not get defeated.

there are so many "murdering tyrants" in africa.. so why dont you go there?

most thing that is really anoying your pseudo kind of moral..

"beeing good only for their own interests" (like oil)

and i dont feel saver now where i live in europe because saddam is in jail now

put me in office and I will. Those idiots is Africa are small potatos pal. We'll get to them after the big dogs are taken down :glugglug

You got your number wrong fuckwit :321GFY
Stop watching John Stewart for your news, he is almost as fucked up and retarded as you :321GFY

So going by that logic then you are for invading;

Iran, N Korea, China, Viet Nam, Cuba and about half of Africa. If not then you are being a HUGE hypocrite.

I say the truth is in between the two viewpoints. Bush won by a few electoral votes and a small percentage of the popular vote but did win re-election which
many presidents didn't.

Been proven the Stewarts viewers are more educated than Fox's or CNN's.

No one is arguing that Bush won. What we are saying is that this is not Reagan in 1984 or many other elections. He BARLEY won. which mean yes he IS the president for 4 years, but he does NOT have a mandate and if he thinks he does his party will pay for it in 2008. If the people in Ohio are still losing jobs in 2008 they are not going to care about gay marriage or abortion. PERIOD.

Anarchy? Opinions not welcome in the "land of the free"?

OVERWHELMING # of states, maybe, but not in # of electoral votes. AND the last election was NOT won by votes...it was won by electoral votes. The division in this country will not be healed. Bush said yesterday that he will reach out to those who share his values....and all those who voted against him obviously do NOT share his values. That's like saying 'I will reach out to all those who are white rednecks like me.' And finally, the largest popular vote in history was had by BOTH candidates in this election.

wtf?
do you need a brain transplant? Read the definition of overwhelming.
You are a moron and a disgrace to this country. Sheep!!!!!!!!!!

1/3 the number of people reported killed under Saddam's entire regime have been civilian casualties since the US invasion... and we're just getting started (Fallujah will be the boodiest yet). How high does that number need to get before you stop referring to it as a GOOD THING?