US Presidential Elections

[MajesticTreeFrog 0]

You really want to know whats going on behind American politics, listen to, or watch the BBC.  Ironically, the Brits get a more accurate picture than we do.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I know, it is sad isn't it when other countries get better news about our country than we do.

[Xeon 0]

I tend to disagree that Bush's purpose in Iraq is only to secure oil. I think its a great achievement to actually place the first democracy in the Middle East and I think it will help America's security greatly. I think Bush has done a decent job so far and his choices he made were only to help the security of the world. Also, weapons of mass destruction was only a pretense to go to war, not a goal in itself. If your wondering why there where none found its because they weren't intended to be found, but only used to get the war started.

[Soleq 0]

World security is such a subjective term. Secure for whom? Surely not for the people who have been detained simply because they look Middle Eastern. Bush's world security can be read as business security for US corporations.And I do believe that the Bush administration tauted WMD as the goal of the invasion, to stop terrorists from obtaining said WMD. Then when it was obvious that there weren't any in Iraq, the administration pulled back.

[Ryan1405241476 0]

I am glad Bush is still president, I don't even think Kerry knows his own position on somethings with how much he flip-flopped, plus I have to agree with Bushes policies and i think he would make the best president after seeing how he handled 9/11.

[MajesticTreeFrog 0]

I am glad Bush is still president, I don't even think Kerry knows his own position on somethings with how much he flip-flopped, plus I have to agree with Bushes policies and i think he would make the best president after seeing how he handled 9/11.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I disagree, I think Kerry would have been better, but that does not necessarily mean good. The problem with the democats is that they campaign on being not-republicans, as opposed to actually standing for/advocating an actual world view/solution/etc. So, those who fall on the liberal side of the spectrum (not just the insane left wing nutso people) must sigh and vote for whatever comes up on that side. This is why the 2 party dominant system sucks, in my opinion, 2 choices isn't enough. Because realistically, I don't want any of em in office.

[Ryan1405241476 0]

I disagree, I think Kerry  would have been better, but that does not necessarily mean good.  The problem with the democats is that they campaign on being not-republicans, as opposed to actually standing for/advocating an actual world view/solution/etc.  So, those who fall on the liberal side of the spectrum (not just the insane left wing nutso people) must sigh and vote for whatever comes up on that side.  This is why the 2 party dominant system sucks, in my opinion, 2 choices isn't enough.  Because realistically, I don't want any of em in office.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

their are more than 2 parties, most people just want a member from one of two parties though but their are still independants, the gree party, workers world, ect... whcih parties are big or not is determained by the vvoters, if a huge number of people started to vote independant then their would be three main parties plus to could fill in any name on the ballot too.