Predict the US Presidential Election Winner!

  • News
  • Thread starter Gokul43201
  • Start date
In summary, the conversation revolved around the US Presidential Elections and the prediction of who will win. Most participants believed that Bush would win due to the flaws in the Democratic party's primary system and the Republican party's superior campaigning skills. However, some still held out hope for Kerry, while others were staunchly anti-Bush. The conversation also mentioned the influence of media and the public's naivety in determining the outcome. One participant shared a quote about political parties, while another believed that Bush's win would not be based on what was right or wrong, but rather on successful marketing. Overall, the general consensus was that Bush would win, with a few exceptions.

Who wins ?


  • Total voters
    24
  • Poll closed .
  • #36
FaverWillets, the Swift Boat Vets have made an impact because of the publicity they generated, but their actual part in the campaign is a tiny fraction of what Kerry is getting from similar groups (by that, I mean $$$-wise). The difference (imo) is the way the Kerry ads are presented - putting out an ad of the Statue of Liberty wearing a black hood as MoveOn.org did offends everyone and doesn't help Kerry out at all. The media reports on those ads were limited to discussing how repulsive they were - not whether the content had any merrit.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #37
When a campaign is waged with half truths, outright lies and innuendo as in using Laci Peterson's name alongside John Kerry's in a Pro Bush commercial is NOT REASONABLE to this argument?

John Kerry voted against the Unborn Victims Of Violence Act (UVVA), of which Laci Peterson's murder was easily the most high-profile example. In fact, the bill was often called the Laci Peterson Law. To use her name in an advertisement is reasonable since the Lace Peterson Law is a perfectly valid campaign issue.

That is why I said earlier I would refuse to respond as long as you resorted to hyperbole. To suggest that the Swift Boat Veterans are analogous to Communist governments is not only strange, but unhelpful. Why not post what they said and their later comments that (supposedly) show they lied?


How is such hysteria going to further the discussion? Why not go ahead and use all-caps and multiple exclamation points? Might as well, since you have the ranting bit down pat.

As for lying, was John Kerry in Cambodia on Christmas Eve as he clearly stated in a previous interview?
 
  • #38
JohnDubYa said:
John Kerry voted against the Unborn Victims Of Violence Act (UVVA), of which Laci Peterson's murder was easily the most high-profile example. In fact, the bill was often called the Laci Peterson Law. To use her name in an advertisement is reasonable since the Lace Peterson Law is a perfectly valid campaign issue.

JohnDubYa's right.

Taking a pro-choice stance puts Kerry (and others) in a sticky situation on that law. You can't be pro-choice and support the UVVA law, since the whole premise for legalization of abortion is that the unborn have no rights. The alternative proposed by the pro-choice side really didn't fully cover the situation since, if the mother lives and the unborn child dies, you can't bring murder charges (Kerry supported the pro-choice side's alternative).

A bit heavy on the symbolism and (arguably) an over simplification of the issue, but the ad does at least pertain to a valid issue.
 
  • #39
JohnDubYa said:
To suggest that the Swift Boat Veterans are analogous to Communist governments is not only strange, but unhelpful.

I believe Faver was trying to point out a seeming contradiction in the name (SBV for "Truth"), just as North Korea is anything but Democratic, but still goes by the name "Dem." People's Rep. of Korea.
 
  • #40
BobG said:
A bit heavy on the symbolism and (arguably) an over simplification of the issue, but the ad does at least pertain to a valid issue.

It's brilliant strategy. An overwhelming majority of the population are Laci sympathizers, and so by making Kerry her enemy, makes Kerry everybody's enemy.

Also, I'd add an 'un' before your 'arguably', but so is the matter provided in any 30 or 60 second commercial.
 
  • #41
Speaking of Kerry, I think he should fire his campaign manager for emphasizing his Vietnam service. It certainly didn't help his cause, it did more damage to his reputation and the perception of voters.

As far as next next election goes. I would like to see Giuliani and Hillary Clinton duke it out.
 
Last edited:
  • #42
Battle of the Titans

The_Professional Speaking of Kerry, I think he should fire his campaign manager for emphasizing his Vietnam service. It certainly didn't help his cause, it did more damage to his reputation and the perception of voters.

As far as next next election goes. I would like to see Guiliani and Hillary Clinton duke it out.
Yesterday 04:53 PM


That would be like... Godzilla meets King Kong! It would make for one of the most interesting Presidential elections in decades...hope it happens.
 
  • #43
FaverWillets said:
That would be like... Godzilla meets King Kong! It would make for one of the most interesting Presidential elections in decades...hope it happens.
You must be drinking too much tea. It would be Godzilla (Guiliani) or King Kong (McCain) vs. Cannon fodder.
 
  • #44
Godzilla meets King Kong!

I would rather look at King Kong than Hillary.
 
  • #45
JohnDubYa said:
I would rather look at King Kong than Hillary.


LOL Well, I DO stand corrected on those choices...though, Hillary thinks very fast on her feet, as a debater should would make mince meat of her adversary...it would Gulliani or McCain to level the field in a debate against her..debating is not Bush's forte, nor was it Gore's in 2000.

And, we can't have McCain head to head with Guilliani now can we? By the way, there has never been a former mayor of NYC ever to run for President and win. Guilliani could become the exception. The 2008 election year will be a welcome site to this current mess.
 
  • #46
The_Professional said:
Speaking of Kerry, I think he should fire his campaign manager for emphasizing his Vietnam service. It certainly didn't help his cause, it did more damage to his reputation and the perception of voters.

As far as next next election goes. I would like to see Giuliani and Hillary Clinton duke it out.
I thought I heard that Kerry has now hired Michael Dukakis' former campaign manager... oiy vayyyy... Isn't that like hiring the former captain of the Exxon Valdez to teach new students how to pilot super tankers? { this actually did happen by the way...and after he grounded the tanker while drunk on his butt.}
 
  • #47
Well, we don't have any footage of Kerry driving a tank. So it makes sense I guess.
 
  • #48
JohnDubYa said:
Well, we don't have any footage of Kerry driving a tank. So it makes sense I guess.


It appears that his Swift Boat has capsized too. Like a monkey with a football...! The Dems are truly a mess...have been since Lyndon Banes started his illegal war in '65.
 
  • #49
I wouldn't let JFK off the hook regarding Vietnam either.
 
  • #50
FaverWillets said:
When a campaign is waged with half truths, outright lies and innuendo as in using Laci Peterson's name alongside John Kerry's in a Pro Bush commercial is NOT REASONABLE to this argument? That among ALL Swift-Boat Veterans for Truth who did grant interviews to the media contradicted their statements made in their commercials, they lied, plain and simple...that Bush claims that the war in Iraq makes America safe? I really don't depend on your response to vote in November. I know what I must do, and hope that your overall position that Bush WILL win will turn out to be incorrect. I've already supported YOUR contention that Bush will likely win. I am just calling it the way it is...he can't hope to win playing fair...he is just too slow to dare to attempt any live debates...so he hides behind his campaign of distortions and misinformation. The Republican SPIN on truth is really something to behold...they can sack and sell cow manure to cattle ranchers in Wyoming.

While JohnDubya is right about the Laci Peterson ad, but there's a big difference between that ad and the Swift Boat ads.

The Laci Peterson angle lures you into the room with the shiny coin and asks:

"Surely you've seen this coin before, haven't you? Are you sure? Maybe you've only looked at the other side."

And then shows you it's the other side of the pro-choice coin.

"Your choice. You have to choose one or the other. You can't choose both."

The key is that it's the same coin.

The Swift Boat ads lure you into the room with a fake coin (very fake, in this case, since just about everything they say is a blatant lie), then sweep it away under the desk and lead you to the other coin:

"This is what we really wanted to show you. See, isn't this coin a lot more interesting?"

A tactic more fitting for the Moonies roaming college campuses back in the 70's than for a presidential campaign.
 
  • #51
BobG said:
The Swift Boat ads lure you into the room with a fake coin (very fake, in this case, since just about everything they say is a blatant lie), then sweep it away under the desk and lead you to the other coin:

"This is what we really wanted to show you. See, isn't this coin a lot more interesting?"

A tactic more fitting for the Moonies roaming college campuses back in the 70's than for a presidential campaign.

Exactly which statements have they made that you're claiming to be a "blatant lie"?
 
  • #52
Right on, kat. We have given the SBV's a free pass on this allegation for too long.

And did Kerry lie about his Holiday in Cambodia (with apologies to the Dead Kennedys, who are probably voting for Kerry)?
 

Similar threads

  • Poll
3
Replies
73
Views
11K
  • Poll
2
Replies
40
Views
8K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
14K
Replies
139
Views
15K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Back
Top