If you were George W. Bush's wife, wouldn't you be smoking up all the time, too?

I still think Laura Bush looks like a jack-o-lantern.

Re: 2, possibly 3 reasons to vote for Bush
 

Let this be a lesson to all future Democratic candidates: no eye candy, no victory.

Sorry, but I HAVE to say it again.....

We are SO proud of all THREE of those Theta ladies!!

The only thing Bush has going is his daughters.

well that, and a 3+ million vote advantage in the popular vote. And an insurmountable lead in Ohio. And an advantage in the HR if it goes to that point.

Yeah, Bush has nothing going for him.

KS 361

I know he won. And "going for him" I was refering to good things. I don't think him being elected is a good thing, but we never agreed on it. Don't ask me to support him because I won't.

I'd support Kerry if he won. Being an American is more important to me than being a Republican, Democrat, or yes, even a Texan.

Guess i'm able to overcome political differences to support a president. I never supported Clinton, but had i been comissioned as a 2LT in the US Army under him i still would have supported him.

But go ahead and pucker up for 4 years if sour grapes is your style.

And ok, to be truthful, there is still a chance Kerry will win. You know what you'll see from me if that should happen? A congratulations to Kerry supporters and well wishes for our country for the next 4 or 8 years. Not an underlying hope that our country will falter so i can pull out the "I told you so's"

KS 361 minutes I've been up tonight watching election returns, but since i have excuses to miss class tomorrow, i'm gonna stick it out till it's called

I would not call it sour grapes. Why support someone that you have no faith in or agree with most his actions just because he is president? By that theory if Nader was elected and decided to nuke Spain, we all should support him because he is president? Just because I do not support Bush does not mean I do not support other groups such as the military. I support the troops a 100%, that doesn't mean I support Bush or his reasons for sending them over there. My brother in law is getting shipped to Iraq in January. I am supporting him all the way. Not supporting Bush doesn't put him in danger.

If the country goes down the crapper in the next 4 years, I don't know if I will say any I told you so's. I will know it will cause a backlash no Republican could get elected president except maybe McCain, but I wouldn't mind him at all. I might even vote for him. If the economy gets better, jobs are abundant, and soldiers quit getting killed for people that don't want them there under Bush, that would be great and I certainly wouldn't complain as much about him then. I just do see all or any of those things happening. All we can do is see what happens in the next 4 years.

If you're so behind your brother-in-law that has volunteered to serve in Iraq, why didn't you back the candidate that voted to equip the military with the protection they needed and not the guy that voted against increased military spending?

"I support the troops, but i don't support the candidate that supports them" Sounds like quality logical reasoning to me.

Granted i'm not 100% behind our prescence in Iraq, noone over there would be over there had they not volunteered for military service. There is no draft and despite what Kerry and his cronies tried to scare the American youth with, there is no need or plan for one.

That being said, i trust the C-in-C to have more access to sensitive intelligence documents and interpretation of said documents than me, so i'm willing to trust him.

KS 361

Just because Kerry didn't vote for that huge budget doesn't mean he doesn't support the troops. Bush said at one time the Iraq oil profits would help pay for everything plus more but he still keeps coming back asking for money. Even some Republicans in congress are starting to get upset about this one. I supported Kerry because he was more likely to bring the troops back quicker, at least some of them. He is also less likely to start some new war where we have to send even more troops.

"So supporting the candidate that sent them over for a reason that fell through, and wants to send more troops over and keep them over there longer which leads to a better chance of getting killed" Sounds like quality logical reasoning to me.