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.
Originally posted by Bout Time
....I'll tell you what: Let Kerry & Bush debate once a week from now until Nov.2. It can even be a two on one, with Dick Cheney sliding his hand up Bush's arse & playing puppet master like he did with their 9/11 commission testimony.
Just start talking policy, accomplishments and proposals at some point. If not, resign yourself to wear the Fascist label that so aptly applies by avoiding what counts. & focusing on a collective American mindF***K as a re-election strategy!!!
By the way Marg, you're new avatar is kinda scary, LOL.
Originally posted by 27jd
Yes, Bush's camp did decline the weekly debates challenge. Any surprise? Where are all the Bush supporters on this thread, I'm interested to know their views on this (although I'm sure they will come up with some good reasons, ).
Originally posted by James the Lesser
Sorry, Kerry is up for it, Bush isn't. Why? People might find out Bush has the grammer and mind of a 4th grader. If it was Bush calling for weekly debates and Kerry saying no you would say the winner cries out for debates while the loser declines. But since it is the opposite, you say the opposite.
Originally posted by RANT
Tell him to mention the need for disclosure on the US Government and UFO's.
I'm not saying to go Jerry Brown with it, but in recent history every winning Democratic presidential candidate has promised "to look into it" ala Carter and Clinton.
Originally posted by keholmes
Originally posted by RANT
Tell him to mention the need for disclosure on the US Government and UFO's.
I'm not saying to go Jerry Brown with it, but in recent history every winning Democratic presidential candidate has promised "to look into it" ala Carter and Clinton.
Did it ever occur to you that they checked into it and found nothing? And realized that to report so would turn the faithful against them, as certain people have one thing proved to them and they just ignore the proof or start to focus elsewhere.
Originally posted by jsobecky
It's not a Bush thing, or a Republican thing. It's Political Science 101. The loser is becoming frantic and thus cries out for debates. The person ahead will of course not let his opponent control the strategy of the campaign.
And if it hasn't been pointed out here yet, the loser will, after being snubbed, cry out with oh- such- righteous- indignation that his opponent is afraid to defend his record.
Democrats do it to Republican challengers, too. Read your history book; you'll see that it's true.
OLBERMANN: Good evening. This is Thursday, August 26, 68 days until the 2004 presidential election. But tonight, the key numbers may be 2 to 1 and 286. The latter is the number of votes in the electoral college currently within John Kerry�s grasp, according to the polling done in the so-called purple states. Two to one? That now the number of witnesses at the swift boat event who now support John Kerry�s version of it, not Larry Thurlow�s. And the new one is an anti-Kerry retired Naval chief petty officer.
To put a number on it, Zogby says just the blue and red states right now would make it Kerry 286, Bush 214 in the electoral college, so much of a margin that even if both remaining yellow states, Missouri and Florida, went to Mr. Bush, it wouldn�t matter. Still, Kerry by 34 votes; 16 more than needed for electoral certification. Tim Russert would not even have time to get out his grease board.
Originally posted by 27jd
The way I see it is, the Bush administration is in trouble, and they know weekly debates would drive the last nail in his coffin. So of course they will avoid as many debates as possible, they would be stupid not too, it would only further harm Bush.
Originally posted by Bout Time
Yes, it was a tounge in cheek thread title.
Yes, challengers ask to debate, incumbants decline.
No, as outlined by the Electoral College poll, (you know, that entity you & all the Bushies love to quote in the 2000 presidential theft by team Dim Son) the repeated semantic of putting Kerry & loser analogously is false.
But more importantly, and looking past the obvious that your horse in this race has a lame wheel ( his mind): Don't you think our political process would be served better by more frequent debates? I've tried to find a reason supporting the 'less is better' frame of mind, but I can't. What say you ?
[edit on 30-8-2004 by Bout Time]
Originally posted by Bout Time
I've tried to find a reason supporting the 'less is better' frame of mind, but I can't. What say you ?
[edit on 30-8-2004 by Bout Time]
www.americandaily.com...
55% of Kerry supporters stated they were voting for Kerry more to vote against Bush than to support Kerry. Only 44% were voting for Kerry because of Kerry. Whereas only 16% of Bush supporters indicated their vote for Bush was primarily a vote against Kerry; 83% were voting for Bush because of Bush.