LOL Mayor of St. Paul, (D), Endorses Bush!

[tpahl]

The vast majority of knowledgable folks already know about G.W and Mr. Kerry's past. and the same can be said of the where G.W stands on most topics. Mr.Kerry stand on things changes with the wind, the moon, and the stars. ever try to shoot at those moving ducks at the fair with a cork gun????
That would be a fair comparision IMHO.

Actually most people do not know. Most anti war people say they are voting for Kerry. When you tell them that kerry not only voted for the war, but now is saying that he will send more troops, they are generally surprised and often deny it.

When you tell conservatives that Bush has increased spending more than most any president in history, they deny it, make excuses for it, and in general try to ignore it. The media does not report it.

Most people know what their impressions of what democrats and republicans like people to beleive, they do not know much about what the candidates have actually done.

 

[freeandfun1]

When you tell conservatives that Bush has increased spending more than most any president in history, they deny it, make excuses for it, and in general try to ignore it. The media does not report it.

Frankly, I know about Bush's spending. See, I watch FOX and they often beat up Bush on this issue. Especially if you watch any of the financial issues shows on FOX, you will hear over and over again about Bush's spending. See, not all of us agree with Bush's spending, but we also know that sometimes you have to do something you don't like to further more important issues. That is called life and compromise.

 

[Annie]

Actually most people do not know. Most anti war people say they are voting for Kerry. When you tell them that kerry not only voted for the war, but now is saying that he will send more troops, they are generally surprised and often deny it.

When you tell conservatives that Bush has increased spending more than most any president in history, they deny it, make excuses for it, and in general try to ignore it. The media does not report it.

Most people know what their impressions of what democrats and republicans like people to beleive, they do not know much about what the candidates have actually done.

Travis, I doubt you've run into many here that don't have a pretty good idea where the deficit is and why. We also know about Kerry's record, for me at least, way more than I care to. Now, if I'm following, we should vote for the guy without a record, because maybe, just maybe he'll be better? In the midst of a war? :fifty:

 

[tpahl]

Travis, I doubt you've run into many here that don't have a pretty good idea where the deficit is and why. We also know about Kerry's record, for me at least, way more than I care to. Now, if I'm following, we should vote for the guy without a record, because maybe, just maybe he'll be better? In the midst of a war? :fifty:

Here on a board of politically junkies, I agree, we do for the most part all know where the candidates stand fairly well. I am talking about the general public that is not following politics as close as us. They instead see ben afflick endorsed kerry, and the mayor endorsed bush, and do not actually look for the important things, like where the candidates stand.

As for Badnariks record, he has no voting record, that is correct. but if you ever see him speak you can tell he means what he says. He has spent the last few years teaching a course on the constitution and how it limits the federal government. I seriously doubt he is going to increase government if elected. And as I said before, the more realistic part of voting for him, is not that he get elected but that it will send a STRONG message to the other parties to straighten their act up.

Travis