It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bush will win election and no one will know why

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 1 2004 @ 12:09 PM
link   
Bush will win the election in 2004!!!

But HOW?

As election night begins, America will be glued to the television set waiting to see Bush's face as he gets ousted from the White House. The exit polls are coming in revealing that the voters are choosing John Kerry in nearly every state. However when the official results come in, CNN and Fox News are reporting that Bush is winning a majority of the states and electoral votes. How can this be? Well Bush is really gonna rig it this time and not just Florida.

There will be a short lived political uprising that will be calmed down by the likes of Rush Limbaugh who will tell us we are all stupid for voting democrat and that we are just cry babies that lost.

I am not a psychic, I just call it as I see it coming.




posted on Jul, 1 2004 @ 12:49 PM
link   
Haha...is this a joke or a serious prediction? Really, I'm asking.



posted on Jul, 1 2004 @ 01:00 PM
link   
Wel, I believe it. If can get away with getting the presidency in 2000 when he clearly lost, then he can do the same this year - and there is nothing that you or I can do about it. It is no longer 'we the people'.



posted on Jul, 1 2004 @ 01:21 PM
link   
clearly lost/ o come on already .How manny different ways could they have counted thoes battets??? I mean realy (clearly lost) Right im no bush fan but every count and I DO MEAN EVERY count came out selverl 1000 in bushes faver and that was with DEMACRATS doing the counting.
Pluse they dident even count the over seas votes .(solders mostly ) Why is that you think? Because the military was in faver of bush as most are replubican. Wich of corse would have made the vote strech Even WIDER in bushes faver. And farther more the only counties that were even Recounted were counties that favered the democrats . So if they were doing recounts and wanted to be fairTELL me why they dident include the more republican counties as well?
If gore would have won then he would have been president I have no problem with that . But rember if your trying to clame cheating then you better look in the democrats direction as THEY DID THE COUNTING.So the democrats counted wrong for Bush humm nice to see them helping.



posted on Jul, 1 2004 @ 01:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Simcity4Rushour
clearly lost/ o come on already .How manny different ways could they have counted thoes battets??? I mean realy (clearly lost) Right im no bush fan but every count and I DO MEAN EVERY count came out selverl 1000 in bushes faver and that was with DEMACRATS doing the counting.


Clearly you don't know the whole story. Recounts aside, Bush did not win the popular vote. Do you understand? This means more voters voted for Gore than Bush, though somehow the electoral college manages to undermine all that America stands for and Bush becomes president. A bit hairy, isn't it?



posted on Jul, 1 2004 @ 02:09 PM
link   
Summary of whatever godservant and gtwill and iceofspades are talkin about:

blah blah blah bush is a cheater......i hate bush.......he rigged the election ....... blah blah blah.........i am just a repungnant who knows absolutely nothing........ blah blah blah bush is stupid...........


o yeah, and Sim makes some good points. Unlike all you people who follow on the "I hate bush" thing.



posted on Jul, 1 2004 @ 02:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by omega1
Summary of whatever godservant and gtwill and iceofspades are talkin about:

blah blah blah bush is a cheater......i hate bush.......he rigged the election ....... blah blah blah.........i am just a repungnant who knows absolutely nothing........ blah blah blah bush is stupid...........


o yeah, and Sim makes some good points. Unlike all you people who follow on the "I hate bush" thing.


I find that insulting. Maybe before you go around smiting what others are saying, you should consider your own ignorance. What I said above IS a major issue. Bush was never elected, making him technically appointed. As I just said, don't be ignorant.



posted on Jul, 1 2004 @ 03:36 PM
link   
Bush WILL win the election, you are right. But everyone will know why ... because when it comes down to the end, people will vote for the candidate who will best keep them safe from the terrorists. That's Bush. Who do you think Usama Bin Laden wants in the White House - Kerry with his manta 'I'm an internationalist and I won't send our troops anywhere unless the UN says I can' or Bush 'either you are with us, or with the terrorists'. UBL would LOVE for Kerry to be elected, therefore Bush is our best candidate.

UBL wants Kerry. People in America who want to be safe will vote for Bush. That's most everyone. It's that simple.



[edit on 7/2/2004 by FlyersFan]



posted on Jul, 1 2004 @ 03:50 PM
link   
Kerry sucks so it's not out of the realm of possibility Bush can win without help. I mean, Bush is at his lowest approval rating and if the election was now it'd still be a dead heat!

Anyway, I can guarentee this election will not be rigged.
It'll be way to much scrutiny to pull anything off.


I don't get it though, Bush is supposed to be stupid, an idiot, dumb as a brick, etc.....so how is able to do all this stuff like rigging an election, planing and pulling off 9/11, etc?



posted on Jul, 1 2004 @ 04:00 PM
link   
Dumbass himself doesn't rig the elections, the real president, Dick Cheney and Co. do. I can see Florida getting rigged again with Jeb's help, I can see California getting rigged not with Arnolds, but his underlings help. Why not Arnold? If he wants to go back to making movies when his political career is over he can't do something as evil as screwing over America. But Bush will most likely win due to the fact he never won 2000. More people voted for Gore but he still the president. I wonder how much money changed hands? I wonder where Jeb found a place large enough to dump the over 40,000 "missing" votes that magically disappeared?

Well, hate Bush, and if I could I would kill him. No, not him, Cheney, then Bush, then Rumsfeild, then Rice, then whoever else in the cabinet. Except Colin Powell. He was the only one to say he wasn't going to spout the same bull# that the other did. Hell, if I take out the Senate President and the Speaker of the house, Colin Powell will become the first black president! But will never happen for there is no way I could get all of them.



posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 01:44 AM
link   
FlyersFan wrote : Bush WILL win the election, you are right. But everyone will why ... because when it comes down to the end, people will vote for the candidate who will best keep them safe from the terrorists. That's Bush.

Actually other than the realativly minor raid in Afghanistan I would like you to explain how Bush helped keep the americans safe. As far as I , and others far wiser than me such as the UN can see we were under no direct attack from Iraq, not that is not great to see a tyrant like Sudam out of power, but why were the last 2 years centered on Iraq? There was no direct link that anyone, including the UN and even the 9/11 commission can find, between Sudam and Osama. Sudam was not threatening the states, the UN had forces in Iraq monitering the actions of anything/one suspicious. As far as I can see Bush used the war on Iraq to distract the americans from the fact that Osama was never apprehended during the raid in Afgahnistan.



posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 01:52 AM
link   
I dont htink the elction was ever rigged, but I do think Bush could probably win. Why? Because everybody says they hate Bush, but when they are sitting in those polls the truth comes out. They dont like Kerry either.

Then again, Kerry could win simply because I know of alot of people that are simply going to vote for Kerry because its a vote against Bush. Kerry- winner by default. I say, if you want a vote against him, vote for Nader!



posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 02:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by kastinyque
...As far as I can see Bush used the war on Iraq to distract the americans from the fact that Osama was never apprehended during the raid in Afgahnistan.


absolutely



posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 04:03 PM
link   
Why did he invade Iraq? Didn't you know? GOD TOLD HIM TO! He says that god told him to invade Iraq. For the links that prove this go to Bush is Going Crazy, Aides Say. Unless it is in the pit, now debate, area, then google it. Also Bush was seeing things that weren't there called WMD's. Been there for over a year, no WMD's. He is just plain loco.



posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 04:24 PM
link   
Whoa, this sizzling debate sounds like it should be in the restricted political forum and not the predictions section.

The point should be made that all the votes were re-counted and verified in the last Presidential election and that Bush was clearly the winner. Not by much perhaps, but he did indeed win the popular vote.

I think that Bush has a very good chance of staying in office, if for no better reason that the Democratic Party is once again fragmented and does not have a strong candidate to defeat him.

Kerry is politically hurt from Bill Clinton not being supportive of him.

There are rumors that Hillary will accept the opportunity to be Kerry's running mate. That would definitely make the ballot more interesting but I still don't think Kerry will make it to the White House.

Someone brought up the point that the voters will choose whoever they think can win the war on terrorism. That alone spells victory for Bush.

I think that Bush will remain in office unless he is assassinated, which is always a possibility in these turbulent times.



posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 04:48 PM
link   
The current White House crew are such insane ideologues that i see that as entirely within the realm of possibilities. I believe Bush REALLY BELIEVES he is on a 'Mission from God'. It is GWB's gihad in the name of fighting terrrorism. What he fails to see is that a Police State is just entrenched terrorism itself.

Paul_Richard, I believe if you check you will find the national popular vote majority went to Al Gore.

Pack your bags and run for the hills if GWB is elected again.



posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 05:09 PM
link   
Here is a quote from the St. Augustine Record in regard to the last Presidential election:

The Democrats are still screaming -- Al Gore won the popular vote -- let's continue the statistics of the last presidential election. Counties won: Gore, 677, Bush, 2,434. Square miles won: Gore, 580,134. Bush 2,427,039. Population of counties won: Gore, 127 million, Bush, 143 million. Counties won by Gore cover just 580,000 square miles. Counties won by Bush cover 2.4 million square miles. You can fly from New York to L.A. and not fly over one state won by Gore. If you took away the votes in the large cities -- Gore didn't get enough votes to win Rhode Island.

Now, although I am an Independent Conservative and don't always vote Republican, it does clearly indicate that GWB did in fact win the popular vote in the last Presidential election.




posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Clearly you don't know the whole story. Recounts aside, Bush did not win the popular vote. Do you understand? This means more voters voted for Gore than Bush, though somehow the electoral college manages to undermine all that America stands for and Bush becomes president. A bit hairy, isn't it?


Last time I checked, the popular vote doesn't elect the president, the Electoral College does. SCOTUS only verified what we already knew.

I wish people would stop whining already about the 2000 election. What happened in 2000 was unprecedented in American history. It happened. Get over it.

[edit on 7/2/2004 by Karellen]



posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by kastinyque
I would like you to explain how Bush helped keep the americans safe.

As far as I , and others far wiser than me such as the UN can see


It would be my pleasure to explain it to you. But first, let me say OMG! The UN is smarter than you? That's sad, because the UN is full of the most self serving, crooked, manipulative, and useless people the world has ever seen. I would hate to think that anyone on this board isn't smarter than the UN (Useless Nations). Recent UN uselessness - Rwanda, Sudan, Iraq. Millions upon millions slaughtered, mutilated, and raped while the UN stood by and did nothing. In Iraq they did nothing because their security council members (France Germany and Russia) didn't want to give up their illegal oil deals to save human lives. Guess Iraqi lives aren't that important to those countries.

America and the world are safer today because we went into Iraq. That's a fact. Saddam was paying Palestinian homicide bombers $50,000 each to murder Jews and Americans. The $$ went to the families of the bombers because the murdering bombers themselves were dead and in hell. Saddam had terrorist training grounds in Iraq, complete with Boeing 727s that his terrorists practiced hijacking American airliners on. No more Saddam = no more Iraqi terrorist training camps = safer flights for Americans (and everyone else). Saddam was in deep with Syria, a known terrorist country. Saddam has up to one billion $$ of money that he stole from Iraqis in that country. The Syria uses his illegal $$ that he has there to finance international terrorism. There are MANY indications he had meetings and swappings of money with Al-Quida. It's been in the news. Exactly what went down is still being investigated, but I doubt they were getting together to buy girl scout cookies.

Also, Saddam stole billions from the Iraqi people, money that was to go for their medicine, education, food, etc. He murdered hundreds of thousands, maimed hundreds of thousands, ordered the rapes of tens of thousands, he started a war that lasted 8 years with Iran - causing the deaths of hundreds of thousands, he invaded Kuwait and caused the deaths of another estimated 100 thousand.

I suppose George Bush could have just let it continue, but he took a clue from BILL CLINTON. Clinton went into the Balkins, which had NO THREAT to America (unlike Saddam who did). Clinton went in with NO OTHER COUNTRIES (unlike G.W. who had a coalition of 45 countries). Clinton went in WITHOUT ANY UN APPROVAL (unlike G.W. who DID get mandates from the UN for Saddam to disarm and follow UN orders or else serious consequences would follow).



posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 08:47 PM
link   
Im not arguing on the side of sadam huissein! I know he was horrible, Im glad hes been arrested, I hope he is convicted and excecuted. Im arguing that because they could not capture the real Immediate threat of Osama Bin Laden , there by disabling the regime, he went after a sitting duck. He even went to Bahgdad after 9/11 and had a 'peaceful' meeting with huessien. I agree that Sudam was a threat, but not an immediate threat to north america where as Osama was, and still is. He captured heussien , wonderful! But there are still reports of threats from the alqueda regime, the Al Qaeda regime has not changed its focus, it was the largest threat before sept 11th, and after all of Bush's war on terrorism Al Qadeda is still the largest threat, undiminshed because all of the concentration has been focused on Iraq.
Here is another news story discrediting the link between suddam and osama, they did have contact of course but nothing indicates that there was a co-oberation between them.
www.thenation.com...



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join