Keeping it civil instead of returning to our dark ways

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by sgtclub
No they wouldn't, because there would be no one left to fund their programs. George Soros only has so much money.

Fund the programs? With what? Maybe NC is on the rebound. What does Georgia/Mississippi/MO/TN/KY/AK contribute? What does Ohio contribute? Iowa's one goddamned subsidized farm. OK? Wyoming? SD? ND? If a tidal wave wiped out the coasts, this nation would collapse. We heathens provide the bread and butter which keeps you fat Jesus Nuts waddling to the polls and thumping your bibles.

And we're the ones facing the fucking bombs. Not you, you dumb manipulated sons of bitches. Ain't no AQ bombs heading for Topeka, assholes. You're already dead - there's no need to bomb you. If AQ bombed most of the Bible and Rust Belt, the nation would still conduct business. You. Don't. Matter. Except of course come election time, when you show up like a pack of lemmings and vote a man who ass-fucks you economically into office because he "loves his mom" and "shows character." You fucking idiots. You don't even realize how badly you've been hoodwinked. Its US, ME... the guy making real money, who benefits from Bush in the short term, nor your stupid Rust Belt ass. And you turn around and tell me I "Don't get it?" There's no "getting" at all. One of us is a sucker and one is not. I have money, and now I'll get more. What will you get, you dumb son of a bitch? "Character"? Fools.

[Did you just call me Coltrane?]

Originally posted by dtb
The difference being, if they tried again, the North would say "Good Riddance."

We sure as shit don't need their tax-sucking shit podunk (sorry Not Bob) states. I say good riddance too. They offer nothing to the country.

[Say_hello_for_me]

Originally posted by Did you just call me Coltrane?
It's scary that those in the greatest amount of danger want nothing to do with Bush.

I'd be interested to see if you or TM have any evidence to show that our troops voted Democratic this year. I've posted before that Rummy and co. aren't popular, but I think most of those in the greatest amount of danger would just as soon spit on Kerry as cast a vote for him.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by dtb
And if the Pakistanis and Al Quaeda could have voted, Bush would have won in a landslide, and you could pointed to a true mandate!

You are a fucking idiot. Did you read the entire transcript of that OBL tape? Of course not.

Wallow in your self-pity and anger and hatred. However, if you do, you will ensure that the Dems will continue to be defeated. Instead, my suggestion to you is that you stop blaming Reps for you loss and start figuring out what you need to do to win.

Hint - ranting about how much you hate joe 6 pack and jesus fucks won't help you to win.

[dtb]

Originally posted by Not Me
Have you been to places like North Carolina? They are becoming increasingly populated by people who speak with Brooklyn accents.

I have, in fact. The Brooklyn-speakers are inhabiting places where NY-based investment banks and other financial institutions are expanding. They're not in the hills.

Anectodal (and thus useless for any probative purpose) evidence: every person I know (sample: 7) who moved to Charlotte from NYC was back within a year, citing the "lifestyle" of NC as utterly cloying (e.g., co-workers making repeated suggestions to come to their church - even after polite refusals) and suffocating.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally posted by sgtclub
There are morons on both sides that didn't vote. I can't fathom why they would be weighted significiantly to one side or the other. The intesity of the divide may be greater, but in sheer numbers, we are less divided.

I just don't see it. You may have picked up a few votes in the popular, but this has to be the most bitter Presidential election I've ever seen.

Last time I felt like people were divided over and disagreed about their candidates. Remember, Bush was supposed to be the great uniter, the compassionate conservative, middle-of-the-road but leaning right. The big complaint for people was that there wasn't much difference between Gore and Bush.

Well, that turned out to be complete bullshit. This time around, the two candidates couldn't have been more different. And I think that dtb is right. This time, the candidates really reflected the geo-political differences on every issue inherent in the parties. The chasm between the red states and the blue states is a huge, gaping one.

This country won't be united. The Republicans will have their way and they will ignore or step on anyone who voices an opinion other than their own. The gap will increase. That's why I say we live in two different countries. It's only going to get worse.

TM

[Did you just call me Coltrane?]

Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
I'd be interested to see if you or TM have any evidence to show that our troops voted Democratic this year. I've posted before that Rummy and co. aren't popular, but I think most of those in the greatest amount of danger would just as soon spit on Kerry as cast a vote for him.

I'm talking about the war on terror, not Iraq.

[dtb]

Originally posted by Not Me
You are a fucking idiot.

Physician, heal thyself.

Originally posted by Not Me
Did you read the entire transcript of that OBL tape? Of course not.

I did -- apparently you didn't (or perhaps the fact that you [allegedly] live in a blue state gives you some small comfort if you did read it -- all of it.)

Originally posted by Not Me
Hint - ranting about how much you hate joe 6 pack and jesus fucks won't help you to win.

Gee -- thanks for the tip. I know you have the interest of my "winning" at heart.

Hint -- you're an asshole.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Dissent. They were down yesterday right after the polling rumors came out of a big Kerry victory.

Another, even more sophisticated explanation:

• "The price action suggests the market believes Bush has got it," said David Ader, interest rate strategist at RBS Greenwich Capital. "The initial reaction is a relief trade which benefits stocks and hurts bonds."
  
  Flows into equities often come at the expense of safe-haven government debt. The benchmark 10-year dropped 19/32 in price, lifting yields to 4.12 percent from 4.06 percent late Tuesday.
  
  Bond dealers also assume a Bush White House will be more likely to run high budget deficits, and there will be a need to issue more Treasuries than a Democratic presidency.

(source)

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Because they don't view the risk of the threat the same way, which causes them to focus less on foreign policy and more on domestic policy.

Meaning the risk of the threat is all ours and not yours, therefore we are acting irrationally by rejecting the candidate who keeps repeating that he is going to protect us?

TM

[Did you just call me Coltrane?]

Originally posted by ThurgreedMarshall

Last time I felt like people were divided over and disagreed about their candidates. Remember, Bush was supposed to be the great uniter, the compassionate conservative, middle-of-the-road but leaning right. The big complaint for people was that there wasn't much difference between Gore and Bush.


TM

2. I remember wondering why I voted in 2000 since I couldn't distinguish the two candidates.

[dtb]

Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
I'd be interested to see if you or TM have any evidence to show that our troops voted Democratic this year. I've posted before that Rummy and co. aren't popular, but I think most of those in the greatest amount of danger would just as soon spit on Kerry as cast a vote for him.

Wrong.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by dtb
I have, in fact. The Brooklyn-speakers are inhabiting places where NY-based investment banks and other financial institutions are expanding. They're not in the hills.

We are a melting pot. But trying to say the Reps have more losers than the Dems in their party is ridiculous. For every backwards appalachian in the Rep party, there is a felon (or two) in the Dem party.

This is a diverse nation. Along with the welfare moms/felons in the Dem party, we have jesus fucks in the Rep party. The difference is that the jesus fucks aren't too fucked up on crack to vote.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Did you just call me Coltrane?
I'm talking about the war on terror, not Iraq.

One in the same. Building a stable democracy in Iraq will protect NYC more than anything else will.

[Did you just call me Coltrane?]

Originally posted by Not Me
We are a melting pot. But trying to say the Reps have more losers than the Dems in their party is ridiculous. For every backwards appalachian in the Rep party, there is a felon (or two) in the Dem party.

Jesus. You are clearly underestimating the number of hilljacks in this country. Multiply the number of people on welfare by 10 and the rednecks still outnumber them.