Who are you voting/rooting for in this years election

Who are you voting/rooting for?

  • Democrats: John Kerry/John Edwards

    Votes: 64 57.1%
  • Republicans: George W. Bush/Dick Cheney

    Votes: 35 31.3%
  • Reform Party: Ralph Nader/Peter Camejo

    Votes: 1 0.9%
  • Green Party: David Cobb/Pat LaMarche

    Votes: 1 0.9%
  • Other third party canidate

    Votes: 2 1.8%
  • No one

    Votes: 9 8.0%

  • Total voters
    112
Status
Not open for further replies.

georges

Moderator
Staff member
Brino said:
Well maybe thats because you live in France and you dont have to deal with all the domestic issues Americans have with Bush as president! When it comes to domestic issues Bush is the worst president ever and concerning foreign relations I dont think he's that good either.

A big part of my family leaves in the us and they are all republican. You know Brino Socialists (the left wing parties or la gauche in french) (pcf, fo, les socialistes) as well as Republicans (the right wing parties or la droite in french) (ump and rpf) have fucked up France enough.I have seen too much shit done under the liberal as well as under the conservatives in France and the Europe of 25 hasn't made things better. We have a 12% unemployment rate in France.
Personally and in all honesty three democrats presidents were significant to me fdr, harry s truman and jfkennedy. They were the best democrat candidates that america ever had.
 
georges said:
hypocritical no :nono:. we have our own opinion.you are a majority of democrats on that board ok. however it is not because i don't like a person that facts don't interest me.yes but also during clinton there was also the asian financial crisis and it had consequences too indirectly.

How? What kind of consequences, georges? And how do they matter to the discussion? You said earlier that Bill Clinton didn't bring down unemployment the way Reagan did. Well, I've shown that more jobs were created under Clinton was better than under Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II combined. That's a cold, hard fact, georges.

Now explain to me why the Asian financial crisis has anything to do with this.

I don't ignore your facts but i am just trying to tell you that kerry isn't the best choice.

I didn't say a damn thing about Kerry. I'm talking about Bill Clinton and his job creation record.

However the economical situation in the eighties was different from the nineties.Personnally you can't compare the 80's to the 90's because those are different times.

How was it different, georges? You can't just say "it's different". If you want anyone to take you seriously, you have to explain why it's different.
 

georges

Moderator
Staff member
Inspector_XXX said:
1)How? What kind of consequences, georges? And how do they matter to the discussion? You said earlier that Bill Clinton didn't bring down unemployment the way Reagan did. Well, I've shown that more jobs were created under Clinton was better than under Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II combined. That's a cold, hard fact, georges.
Now explain to me why the Asian financial crisis has anything to do with this.

2)I didn't say a damn thing about Kerry. I'm talking about Bill Clinton and his job creation record.

3)How was it different, georges? You can't just say "it's different". If you want anyone to take you seriously, you have to explain why it's different.

1) A lot firms and subsidiaries of american firms that were touched by the financial asian crisis have gone bankrupt and have to lay off their personel.That happened during bill clinton as far as i know.So even if there is a subsidiary of an american firm in Asia or everywhere else in the World which employs american people that is gone bankrupt or that is shut down, you can see it as unemployment.The stats don't precised which type of job were created high qualified or low qualified jobs Then the question on all the jobs that were created were all these low qualified or high qualified jobs.
2)ok
3)It was different for these reasons:
-developpment of new technologies (data procesing and software tech, research and developpment, military, etc) which lead to the creation of new high qualified jobs
-strong value of the dollar (it was at its highest peak in the 80's as compared to the early 90's late 90's. 1,5€ what was cost 1$ from 1983-1988 and 0,70€ was what cost 1$ from 1993 -1999)
-there was also less delocalizations of firms as compared to the early 90's.
-also in the 1980's us wasn't involved in wars like somalia and bosnian wars that happened under clinton's presidency
 
Last edited:
Good job supporting your arguments, georges. I'm impressed.

georges said:
1) A lot firms and subsidiaries of american firms that were touched by the financial asian crisis have gone bankrupt and have to lay off their personel.That happened during bill clinton as far as i know.So even if there is a subsidiary of an american firm in Asia or everywhere else in the World which employs american people that is gone bankrupt or that is shut down, you can see it as unemployment.

It's true that the Asian crisis occured during Clinton's presidency (fairly early on during Clinton's presidency), and yes, it probably caused unemployment among American companies. But if anything, that just makes Clinton's job-creation record look even better, since he had to deal with the extra unemployment caused by the Asian crisis.

The stats don't precised which type of job were created high qualified or low qualified jobs Then the question on all the jobs that were created were all these low qualified or high qualified jobs.

True, but the hourly wage statistics I showed earlier in this thread show that wages rose sharply during Clinton's second term. I think that's a pretty good indicater that there were decent-quality jobs being created.

3)It was different for these reasons:
-developpment of new technologies (data procesing and software tech, research and developpment, military, etc) which lead to the creation of new high qualified jobs
-strong value of the dollar (it was at its highest peak in the 80's as compared to the early 90's late 90's. 1,5€ what was cost 1$ from 1983-1988 and 0,70€ was what cost 1$ from 1993 -1999)
-there was also less delocalizations of firms as compared to the early 90's.
-also in the 1980's us wasn't involved in wars like somalia and bosnian wars that happened under clinton's presidency

But there were new technologies being developed in the 1980s as well. Computers were taking hold then. There's always new technology coming into the economy.

I admit I'm not sure what to make of the currency differences. How do you think that effects job creation?

I agree that there was less delocalization of firms in the '80s than in the '90s (I assume that word means the same thing as "outsourcing"). But again, I think that just makes Clinton's job record look even better, since all the job gains made in the 90s had to overcome the losses due to outsourcing.

And I don't understand what the military actions under Clinton had to do with his economic record.

But this was a very good post, georges. I encourage you to defend your positions like this more often. You're pretty good at it when you try.
 
My prediction. And quote me on this if u must. Kerry will win the popular vote, no doubt. However the electoral college will sway towards bush. Thus bush will be president. No opinion here, just an intuitive realization.
 

georges

Moderator
Staff member
Jizm said:
My prediction. And quote me on this if u must. Kerry will win the popular vote, no doubt. However the electoral college will sway towards bush. Thus bush will be president. No opinion here, just an intuitive realization.

dunno about popular vote but fact is that the electoral college will elect bush as president on that i agree.
 

georges

Moderator
Staff member
bibo said:
Blimey! That´s true! Could have something to do with the fact that 99% of all children in Germany were in the HJ at that time and partens had to expect repressions and trouble if they wouldn´t put their kids into it. And it´s not very likely that the Hitler would recruit people from the missing 1% for his beloved SS. Does that make them all possible SS soldiers? Anyways, that didn´t keep you from trying to sell us the story of Kohl, one of the creators of modern Europe being a former officer in the SS. At the age of 10. Just another oopsie and we´re all making mistakes and everything, but nevertheless a good sign of how flexible the content of your arguments is.
Munich 1972 is over one generation ago. Shall we compare how many victims have been killed from fundamental arabs and radical israel folks since then (and in the years before 1972 as well)? If Arafat is considered a terrorist for his actions and his sympathies towards radical muslims, then why isn´t Sharon? Oh, I know! Terrorists is a term that´s being used for the weak and the desperate people, those people who don´t own a TV station and a couple of newspapers to camouflage their actions. It´s a term for people who have gone so low as to kill innocent people. But you know what? When they do, they at least have the backbone to not call it "collateral damage" or "ethnic cleansing" or "euthanasia". Those words are a (TM) of the strong (as you all them).
And one final thing...
Apologizing is NEVER a sign of weakness. Only the wise and strong apologize. Stubborn idiots who consider themselves holier than the pope never do.

You also forget to talk about the hi jacking of the plane of the sabena company that happened in 1973 and during the elimination of terrorists the brother of benjamin natanyahu the lieutenant colonel yeonathan natanyahu was dead.The highjacking of the plane was oredered by people sharing the islamists extremists idea.
Back to the germany during WWII, lot of people voted for Hitler before WWII right?So these people were supporting his idea, right?
Kohl was born in 1930 in Ludswighaffen but he was enroled surely in the hitlerjugend probably at 13 years old. FYI the htler jugned started to enrole people from age of 12.I agree that maybe his parents didn't have the choice but maybe should you ask the question did they support the hitler's regime before teh war?I have two well documented books (tomes) of diffrent armies furing WWII written by liliane and fred funken two brilliant about what concern WWII subjects. In the second tome, it is clearly described that some people of the hitler jugend served in the SS despite they were young.That book was written in 1963.
Sharon was one of the most successful and most brilliant general Israel had.
What is for me a terrorist?A person who kills another person, who makes propaganda for encourgaing other people to kill other because they think differently.That is a terrorist.That israelian palestinian conflict started in the early 80's with the libanese front.
I agree that apologizing is a good idea but when the other party or person continues to kill and perpetuate murders then there is no need to apologize.
I am sure you have noted that even inside the palestinian authority yasser arafat is contested doesn't it mean something.

regards and peace

georges
 

Brino

Banned
Bush is a dumbass! I just heard him pronounce Al Qieda as Al Kieeda and I couldnt stop laughing! :rofl:
 

georges

Moderator
Staff member
Brino said:
Bush is a dumbass! I just heard him pronounce Al Qieda as Al Kieeda and I couldnt stop laughing! :rofl:

kerry is a sm@rt @ss fuck and weakminded democrat.he wasn't that brave in vietnam
 

georges

Moderator
Staff member
Brino said:
I'm not going to start this back and forth name calling with you about who's better!

we will see that at elections who is better and who will win then it will tell us who was right
 
Back to the germany during WWII, lot of people voted for Hitler before WWII right?So these people were supporting his idea, right?

I already said it in another threat: are all the french people who were cheering to the germans when they were marching into Paris streets Nazis? Hitlers road to power in Germany was the same that many other dictator have taken: Obscuring his true goals and taking advantage of an economical and political depression, simplification of explanations, plans and outlooks.
Calling everyone who has ever voted for Hitler a Nazi is the same as calling someone an alcoholic becauseonce drank a glas of wine.

Kohl was born in 1930 in Ludswighaffen but he was enroled surely in the hitlerjugend probably at 13 years old. FYI the htler jugned started to enrole people from age of 12.I agree that maybe his parents didn't have the choice but maybe should you ask the question did they support the hitler's regime before teh war?

What the f*ck is your point? I was refering to the fact that YOU simply said "kohl was a member of the waffen SS" in another threat which is a. absurd and b. cheeky. And it´s even more cheeky to then go on and make assumptions about the person, based upon those ridiculously false informations. It´s a good example of what facts and history means to you and you´re not too shy to display that again and again and again.

In the second tome, it is clearly described that some people of the hitler jugend served in the SS despite they were young.That book was written in 1963.

Is that the same book that described the NS regime as socialist?
When WW2 was near the end and Germany in ruins and on the floor, Hitler promoted lots of children to officers and gave them awards etc.etc. It´s the sad end of a dictators regime. If you do a little more research, you´ll eventually find out that Helmut Kohl was never one of them.
FYI, dude, in germany, policicians are being kicked out of their jobs when someone discoveres that they´ve been members of SS or involved in war crimes.

Sharon was one of the most successful and most brilliant general Israel had.

Yes. He´s quite probably a genius and deserves the highest respect of the entire rest of this planet for his impressive tactical skills of destroying civil houses and killing civil arabs.

He´s not better and not worse than Arafat. Sharon is an old, senile man with the mental flexibility of a handicapped donkey. He doesn´t want peace, neither does Arafat. He wants to solve the conflict by eliminating his opponents, so does Arafat. If you call Arafat a Terrorist, then surely Mr. Sharon is one as well. Double standards anyone?

What is for me a terrorist?A person who kills another person, who makes propaganda for encourgaing other people to kill other because they think differently.That is a terrorist.

Blimey! Last time I´ve checked, Sharon wanted to kill Arafat because he´s thinking differntly.

That israelian palestinian conflict started in the early 80's with the libanese front.

Nonsense!
The israel palestinian conflict started as early as 1948 when the UK decided to create a jewish state on the territory of Palestinia that they had conquered in 1918. It then escalated during the 6-day-wars in 1967 and never stopped since then. Jimmi Carter (a Democrat... I`m missing his name in your list of semi-decent US presidents) made a mighty step into the right direction with his Camp David Peacetalks with Sadat/Begin. If it was Reagan instead of Carter, he would have deserved another set of shiny halos in your books of course.

I agree that apologizing is a good idea but when the other party or person continues to kill and perpetuate murders then there is no need to apologize.

I seriously doubt that Kerry´s apology was addressed towards Saddam, but to the innocent people who died in Iraq instead. Doesn´t make a difference in your eyes though, after all, they´re just raggies and possible supporters of BinLaden and Saddam. Just like all germans are and have been supporters of Hitler once they voted for him, eh?

I am sure you have noted that even inside the palestinian authority yasser arafat is contested doesn't it mean something.

Indeed. It means that the man is sick, getting old and will die pretty soon. And the vultures from the second row are trying to take over his power. But that doesn´t solve the problems. Even worse: the entire region is a melting pot for radical and fundamental islamists, thanks to a clumsy, nonsensitive way of solving the problem of international terrorism by the western world. By promoting the fight against a couple of crazy muslims to another, modern crusade.
 

georges

Moderator
Staff member
bibo said:
1)I already said it in another threat: are all the french people who were cheering to the germans when they were marching into Paris streets Nazis? Hitlers road to power in Germany was the same that many other dictator have taken: Obscuring his true goals and taking advantage of an economical and political depression, simplification of explanations, plans and outlooks.
Calling everyone who has ever voted for Hitler a Nazi is the same as calling someone an alcoholic becauseonce drank a glas of wine.

2)What the f*ck is your point? I was refering to the fact that YOU simply said "kohl was a member of the waffen SS" in another threat which is a. absurd and b. cheeky. And it´s even more cheeky to then go on and make assumptions about the person, based upon those ridiculously false informations. It´s a good example of what facts and history means to you and you´re not too shy to display that again and again and again.

3)Is that the same book that described the NS regime as socialist?
When WW2 was near the end and Germany in ruins and on the floor, Hitler promoted lots of children to officers and gave them awards etc.etc. It´s the sad end of a dictators regime. If you do a little more research, you´ll eventually find out that Helmut Kohl was never one of them.
FYI, dude, in germany, policicians are being kicked out of their jobs when someone discoveres that they´ve been members of SS or involved in war crimes.

4)Yes. He´s quite probably a genius and deserves the highest respect of the entire rest of this planet for his impressive tactical skills of destroying civil houses and killing civil arabs.
He´s not better and not worse than Arafat. Sharon is an old, senile man with the mental flexibility of a handicapped donkey. He doesn´t want peace, neither does Arafat. He wants to solve the conflict by eliminating his opponents, so does Arafat. If you call Arafat a Terrorist, then surely Mr. Sharon is one as well. Double standards anyone?
Blimey! Last time I´ve checked, Sharon wanted to kill Arafat because he´s thinking differntly.

5)Nonsense!
The israel palestinian conflict started as early as 1948 when the UK decided to create a jewish state on the territory of Palestinia that they had conquered in 1918. It then escalated during the 6-day-wars in 1967 and never stopped since then. Jimmi Carter (a Democrat... I`m missing his name in your list of semi-decent US presidents) made a mighty step into the right direction with his Camp David Peacetalks with Sadat/Begin. If it was Reagan instead of Carter, he would have deserved another set of shiny halos in your books of course.

6)I seriously doubt that Kerry´s apology was addressed towards Saddam, but to the innocent people who died in Iraq instead. Doesn´t make a difference in your eyes though, after all, they´re just raggies and possible supporters of BinLaden and Saddam. Just like all germans are and have been supporters of Hitler once they voted for him, eh?

7)Indeed. It means that the man is sick, getting old and will die pretty soon. And the vultures from the second row are trying to take over his power. But that doesn´t solve the problems. Even worse: the entire region is a melting pot for radical and fundamental islamists, thanks to a clumsy, nonsensitive way of solving the problem of international terrorism by the western world. By promoting the fight against a couple of crazy muslims to another, modern crusade.

1) not all the french weren't cheering the nazis but many of them were collaborators.my question is what the percentage of resistance in germany during wwII

2)so for you mr kohl is a saint?many thaught that mittereand was a saint but he was the minister of finance under vichy's regime.

3) no that was what a teacher said us a teacher from switzerland.
In the past Horst Bender who was Himmler's juridical adviser during WWII was Minster of justice after the war during the 60's-70's.
In 1972 some ss criminals like Ernst Lerch and Helmut Pohl were acquitted.
Odessa organization did you heard about it? Then you should know taht in the past it could help nazis to go where they want and do what seemed to be the less suspicious to recognize them

4)wiping out terrorists who build bombs in their house, isn't it a way of fighting terrorism?Calling a general a terrorist is quite ballsy from you

5)in 1948 the olp didn't exist.The war of 6 days was a war against egypt mainly were egyptians lost mainly all thier airforce.
In 1973 the war of yom kippour it was against a war but against a syria who lost it. THe terrorism tah twas developped by olp was one that happened at the 1972 games of munich.Carter did a good thing about the Camp David talks that has nothing to do alongwith economics.

6)not all people are for bin laden or saddam only the ones that are easy to convince and that support their ideas.

7) do you honestely think that you can fight a dictator or terrorism with wise words? i would like to see that

regards and peace

georges
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top