Dl021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11435 posts, RR: 81 Posted (8 years 8 months 16 hours ago) and read 703 times:
Will you support whomever wins the Presidential election? I think everyone can agree that once the election is over that we have at least 4 years of a leader who will be faced with serious challenges and will need the support of the entire country and world.
Will you support the next president, regardless of who it is?
ConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted (8 years 8 months 14 hours ago) and read 610 times:
It's more a social (and ins ome instances, idealistic) thing than political.
Basically, what he appears to be asking, is are you gonna be the type who'd whine about "stolen election" four years later? Or are you going to be the "I don't agree with him, but our troops are over there" type?
Jaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted (8 years 8 months 14 hours ago) and read 595 times:
What do you mean by support?
After Bush was sworn in, I told myself that he would get the benefit of the doubt as I was made to believe that he had made a reputation for himself for working both sides of the aisle in Texas. So, I waited to see his performance before I decided to judge or condemn him. Alas, within a few months he showed himself to be a puppet of right wing social conservatives.
If Bush wins again (as I suspect he will), life will go on and I will accept him as the President. But he will not get my support on issues I fundamentally disagree with him on.
Phxairfan From United States of America, joined exactly 12 years ago today! , 811 posts, RR: 9 Reply 7, posted (8 years 8 months 14 hours ago) and read 585 times:
"Will you support the next president, regardless of who it is?"
The same way I do now, watch him on tv. And vote for whoever I want to be president again in 4 years. While Kerry may be the opposite of what I believe, there is no way I would not support my country if he is elected. The leader of my country does not change the fact that I am an American, and the fact that I am a citizen. If I ever recieve the call to defend my country, regardless of who the president is, I will answer. Besides its not like we can stop paying taxes or following laws because we don't like who's in office. (Without getting punished.)
Dl021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11435 posts, RR: 81 Reply 8, posted (8 years 8 months 10 hours ago) and read 554 times:
The support I am speaking of is the basic attitude and voice with which we speak in our everyday lives. What we do as citizens in our daily discourse has an effect on what other people think. The cryers and whiners, and when Clinton was in I was certainly a bitcher, who actively campaign against everything President Bush has done have certainly not helped our country by their constant negativity. The people who wait for the slightest appearance of a misstep to pounce on their opponent weakens them and thus the nation when that person is President.
There is a difference between being the loyal opposition who will have their say, but then fall in with the troops on the march (i.e. Wendell Willkie in WWII, who was pretty sure Roosevelt was a socialist, but supported him during the worst parts of the war with Pearl Harbor, Kasserine, the uncertainty at Guadalcanal) and being the people that work actively to undermine what the President is doing.
Our expressed attitudes and opinions, and the manner in which they are put out has an effect on other peoples confidence and decision making. It affects our political will, our economy, and other nations and peoples' opinion of us. It also lends aid and comfort to our enemies when we give them reason to doubt our resolve by denigrating the office of President and the holder of that office. The people who sought to cast President Bush as illegitimate due to the court battles after the election, even after the media recounts were held a year after the election showed Bush won, hurt us byt helping our enemies hold hope that we would middle and wallow instead of being resolute in our pursuit of our enemies.
I will still defend a persons right to say that with which I disagree, to the death if need be....but that does not obviate our responsibility, defined by the Supreme COurt a long time ago, to not yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater.
Falcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (8 years 8 months 10 hours ago) and read 551 times:
Support, or accept the outcome? I do NOT support the policies of George W. Bush in many areas, such as Iraq and much of his policies on the economy. I just do not.
There is no "honeymoon" this time, if Bush is elected, and most people who oppose his policies will be ready to point out his shortcomings much more vigorously this time.
I will support him on issues that I find myself in agreement with him; but overall, I will not and do not support his policies.
And personally, I don't think he's going to win re-election, but we'll find out in about 12 days.
Dl021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11435 posts, RR: 81 Reply 10, posted (8 years 8 months 10 hours ago) and read 544 times:
Its the same as an argument between my brother and I. If we are having a knock down drag out fight, fine. The second someone else comes after one of us we defend each other to the hilt.
We had some of that after 9-11, but it got lost in the politics. I think that the bickering over right or wrong in Iraq lets the enemy think we are likely to pull out and gives them the resolvet to hunker down and stay, instead of giving up or moving out. Can this be disputed with logic?
Falcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 11, posted (8 years 8 months 10 hours ago) and read 541 times:
I think that the bickering over right or wrong in Iraq lets the enemy think we are likely to pull out and gives them the resolvet to hunker down and stay, instead of giving up or moving out. Can this be disputed with logic?
Problem is that neither man has said, in the short term that we CAN pull out of Iraq, and both of them are right. One candidate defends his decision to go to Iraq,and the other derides it, and THAT is where the battle line on Iraq is drawn. Most of us agree we have to make Iraq work. But there's a deep split on 1. Whether we should have gone in, in the first place, and 2. If we're safer because of that action. I'm in the "nay" column on both of those.
L-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29367 posts, RR: 61 Reply 14, posted (8 years 8 months 9 hours ago) and read 525 times:
Well, if Kerry where to be elected, I am sure the Republicans are going to take a cue from the spoilt brats and the democratic party headquarters and start campaigning against him for the 2008 election.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
Falcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 15, posted (8 years 8 months 9 hours ago) and read 517 times:
Well, if Kerry where to be elected, I am sure the Republicans are going to take a cue from the spoilt brats and the democratic party headquarters and start campaigning against him for the 2008 election.
Spoiled brats, eh? That's pretty funny.
And I think you must be getting some amnesia, L-188. You surely remember back to November, 1992, when the GOP started an 8 1/2 year blitz against then-President Elect Bill Clinton, and it never let up.
You see, if the Democrats do that, Republicans really have no one but themselves to blame, for they set the precedent with the unending, unyielding two-term character assassination of Bill Clinton. Those you support are the uneqiivocal masters at that, and it's a live-and-learn world, isn't it?
Turnaround would be fair play, and I think, unless Bush gets Iraq and the economy really going in the right direction (which neither are), then you can bet what you fear will come to pass.
Falcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 17, posted (8 years 8 months 9 hours ago) and read 496 times:
Clinton brought his own problems on himself.
Horseshit, I'm sorry to say. They started attacking the man, before he had even taken the oath of office! And Vince Foster? Ron Brown? Travelgate? "WhiteWatergate" (first time we spent $70 million investigating a couple that had lost money in a land deal)? Clinton brought all that on yourself. Don't be such a fool!!
On healthcare, and the Lewinsky scandal, you're right, Clinton brought that on himself, and rightly so. But the other stuff? You're on another planet.
And don't tell me that fib again about not being a Republican.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11435 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2004, 1558 posts, 
, 811 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
Printer friendly format 
