I've been hearing quite a bit about liberals who want bush to win just so that there is such a backlash that no republicans will be elected for years.(Wow, I sound illiterate:@@

What are your thoughts on this? Could it happen? Or is it just more lefty idealism

I strongly believe that statement. I think that people like Hillary stand to gain a whole lot by Bush being a two term president.

By 2008 this small amount of truly rabid liberals will infect so much more people that they could vote in Hitler as long as his ticket was the Democrat Party.

It is important to elect a moderate liberal or centrist this election or you might just be looking down the barrel of someone like Hillary in the White House once more.

Thinking that is how spoiler Nadar sleeps at night. He thinks the moderate Dems are the sell outs, and is willing to cut off his nose to spite his face.

If you think about it, it makes sense. You don't inch your way to socialism, you get pushed there by the ultra right wing. Bush has done more for the socialist cause than 1,000 Hillarys.

[Edited on 22-2-2004 by RANT]

being moderate can be deadly tho, just look at the reichstag pre-nazi party

Also, if his re-election doesn't swing the people to vote the left for years to come, the other candidate is equally disturbing...someone like John Ashcroft.

Actually, I think that Hillary is working to undermine the Democratic candidates now so Bush will win.

Just my opinion.

But think about it. Should Bush win, there would be a backlash unlike we have seen in our lifetime. The divide we have currently is only stagnant (relatively) due to the fact that there is hope of an end (i.e. the election).

Should Bush win, there would be no hope and the unrest would be outrageous.

If we could make it to 2008 without marshall law being enacted, people would be so ready for anyone Democratic, that they would choose ANYONE, and most likely it would be the strongest, or loudest, candidate.

That would be Hillary.

I am truly surprised that the name t***r has not been mentioned. And it shouldn't be.

I would hope americans would see through this leftist ploy before it's too late. Its akin to republicans giving money to Dean in hopes that he would win the primary

Originally posted by Dreamstone
I am truly surprised that the name t***r has not been mentioned. And it shouldn't be.

What?

John titor, who said that revelations in the year 04 elections would cause great upheaval. Type it into the search option on ATS, youll get a ton of info.

yes, this is very true, but with a less negative tone... however, this wouldn't necessarily favor the democrats either.
republicans... democrats... they're all alike.
the people won't get any results from either sides.
it's best to let them all run themselves down.

a nader supporter I see... he at least believes the same. Extremism is popping up all over the globe, the last place I want to see it is here

Lets everyone not forget, a bill does not get to the presidents desk for signature without first going through the congress and senate - if a democrat gets elected they can twiddle their thumbs for four years.

And don't even think a judge is going to be seated!

[Edited on 22-2-2004 by Phoenix]

extremist on both sides scare me.

Phoenix,

That is great. Let them twiddle away. It's better than having any Republican agenda being run through in a Republican controlled everything. They can and will and have #ed us using this method. Democrats would do it too if they could. There needs to be a balance, but sadly...

In a "(any party) controlled everything" system, government stops being about the people and starts becoming about people in power.

Krazy,

I feel the same way about that.

It will be quite a laugh when I log onto this board in 2010 neglecting a chinese invasion or catastrophic cosmic cataclysm I will be able to ask yall where is my Hillary Clinton President and rabid socialist movement. The fact is that Hillary wont be elected because the American people are still 10-15 years away from accepting the idea of a woman in the highest position of power on the planet. Think about it. By the way someone get on TSNN and write an article about CCCs those are serious mothas.

[Edited on 22-2-2004 by Agent47]

Originally posted by Agent47
Hillary Clinton President and rabid socialist movement

i just feel inclined to point this out...
hillary clinton has nothing to do with the socialist movement... nor do we want her to.

Originally posted by echelon

Originally posted by Agent47
Hillary Clinton President and rabid socialist movement

i just feel inclined to point this out...
hillary clinton has nothing to do with the socialist movement... nor do we want her to.

Yes because you wouldnt want your movement to become more of a joke than it already is.

Dude, you have some timeline on when we will be ready for a woman president?

Hmm.

Anyway, I think that (after reading a lot about the tribulation) there is credence in the idea that someone could easily create dissent so great that a "speaker for the people" would be elected easily and prove to undermine our nation in incrimental steps without much opposition due to the fact that everyone would be so happy to get rid of the pests.

People do get to a point to where anyone is better than the ones focused on.

Socialism does tend to take advantage of any major shift in power and ideas. Only those who are convinced that bush really is the antichrist will ever elect anyone left of Howard Dean to president.

10-15 years for a female president? Try 40-50. America isn't ready for anyone without testes in office