• We should now be fully online following an overnight outage. Apologies for any inconvenience, we do not expect there to be any further issues.

Bush's qualifications

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

cKGunslinger

Lifer
Nov 29, 1999
16,408
57
91
Originally posted by: RBachman
Originally posted by: raildogg
Bush's resume:

2 term president!


Demoncats' resumes combined:

lost to Bush twice!


these Democrats must be really sore!

Says more about the intelligence of the average voter than the men themselves.

Does this mean that you too subscribe to the elitist notion that today's liberals are simply too smart to appeal to the poor, unwashed masses? I bet the voters admire your pity. :roll:
 

zendari

Banned
May 27, 2005
6,558
0
0
Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Does this mean that you too subscribe to the elitist notion that today's liberals are simply too smart to appeal to the poor, unwashed masses? I bet the voters admire your pity. :roll:

And yet those same liberals want convicted felons and 16 year olds to vote.
 

Kalbi

Banned
Jul 7, 2005
1,725
0
0
Yale + Harvard MBA > you

Most of the "accomplishments" on that site is mainly Congress' doing. Presidents don't create law.
 

BBond

Diamond Member
Oct 3, 2004
8,363
0
0
Originally posted by: zendari
Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Does this mean that you too subscribe to the elitist notion that today's liberals are simply too smart to appeal to the poor, unwashed masses? I bet the voters admire your pity. :roll:

And yet those same liberals want convicted felons and 16 year olds to vote.

And for the past two presidential elections you 'conservatives' have prevented legally registered voters from excercising their right to vote by erroneously including them on lists of felons.

The sixteen year old nonsense is news to me. First I've heard of it. Would you mind providing some information on that?
 

zendari

Banned
May 27, 2005
6,558
0
0
Originally posted by: BBond

And for the past two presidential elections you 'conservatives' have prevented legally registered voters from excercising their right to vote by erroneously including them on lists of felons.

The sixteen year old nonsense is news to me. First I've heard of it. Would you mind providing some information on that?

In the past 2 presidential elections you "liberals" have taken it upon yourselves to vote in multiple states.

Actually, I take it back. It's 14
 
Feb 16, 2005
14,080
5,452
136
I know, I know the repugs are so clean in there voting records and allowing everyone a vote(that deserves one). Lemme ask you this, what qualifies an 18 year old more than a 16 year old, there's a strong chance both are still in High School, so neither of them have much 'worldy experience'. I don't think a 14 year old should be allowed to vote, but why not 16, you are competent enough to drive a one ton weapon at high speeds, why not get the chance to vote? Are you not competent enough to punch a hole in a card or flip a switch or hit a touch pad? I voted when I turned 18, and have been voting since. And would have voted when I turned 16 if it was legal.
Infomation is much more widely available now. A 16 year old who has a job pays taxes, why not get to vote? It's not the worst idea out there.
 

OneOfTheseDays

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2000
7,052
0
0
have any of you actually listened to politicians these days? nobody answers questions anymore, and nobody is accountable for anything. i'm disgusted at the state of politics right now. instead of demanding more from our politicians, and the people who represent us, we are bickering amongst ourselves. it's exactly what the politicans want us to do. for all the "apparent" differences between the left and right, were not so damn different. the politicians have just managed to magnify the differences and obstruct any kind of meaningful political conversation in this country.
 

CKent

Diamond Member
Aug 17, 2005
9,020
0
0
Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
Originally posted by: RBachman
Originally posted by: raildogg
Bush's resume:

2 term president!


Demoncats' resumes combined:

lost to Bush twice!


these Democrats must be really sore!

Says more about the intelligence of the average voter than the men themselves.

Does this mean that you too subscribe to the elitist notion that today's liberals are simply too smart to appeal to the poor, unwashed masses? I bet the voters admire your pity. :roll:

You obviously haven't even read my posts in this thread. Please do so, and if you want to rescind your post & apologize, I'll understand and accept it.
 

zendari

Banned
May 27, 2005
6,558
0
0
Originally posted by: Sheik Yerbouti
I know, I know the repugs are so clean in there voting records and allowing everyone a vote(that deserves one). Lemme ask you this, what qualifies an 18 year old more than a 16 year old, there's a strong chance both are still in High School, so neither of them have much 'worldy experience'. Are you not competent enough to punch a hole in a card or flip a switch or hit a touch pad?

Adulthood. As for punching a hole, take a look at the butterfly ballot issue in 2000. Gore voters couldn't even figure out how to punch it properly!
 

CKent

Diamond Member
Aug 17, 2005
9,020
0
0
Originally posted by: zendari
Originally posted by: Sheik Yerbouti
I know, I know the repugs are so clean in there voting records and allowing everyone a vote(that deserves one). Lemme ask you this, what qualifies an 18 year old more than a 16 year old, there's a strong chance both are still in High School, so neither of them have much 'worldy experience'. Are you not competent enough to punch a hole in a card or flip a switch or hit a touch pad?

Adulthood. As for punching a hole, take a look at the butterfly ballot issue in 2000. Gore voters couldn't even figure out how to punch it properly!

And the (mainly republican) Florida voters couldn't figure it out either... seriously, if you're going to be this petty, why post?
 

LLCOOLJ

Senior member
Oct 26, 2004
346
0
0
Originally posted by: RBachman
Originally posted by: zendari
Originally posted by: Sheik Yerbouti
I know, I know the repugs are so clean in there voting records and allowing everyone a vote(that deserves one). Lemme ask you this, what qualifies an 18 year old more than a 16 year old, there's a strong chance both are still in High School, so neither of them have much 'worldy experience'. Are you not competent enough to punch a hole in a card or flip a switch or hit a touch pad?

Adulthood. As for punching a hole, take a look at the butterfly ballot issue in 2000. Gore voters couldn't even figure out how to punch it properly!

And the (mainly republican) Florida voters couldn't figure it out either... seriously, if you're going to be this petty, why post?
Because this is the only place where he gets any attention.
 

cKGunslinger

Lifer
Nov 29, 1999
16,408
57
91
Originally posted by: RBachman
Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
Originally posted by: RBachman
Originally posted by: raildogg
Bush's resume:

2 term president!


Demoncats' resumes combined:

lost to Bush twice!


these Democrats must be really sore!

Says more about the intelligence of the average voter than the men themselves.

Does this mean that you too subscribe to the elitist notion that today's liberals are simply too smart to appeal to the poor, unwashed masses? I bet the voters admire your pity. :roll:

You obviously haven't even read my posts in this thread. Please do so, and if you want to rescind your post & apologize, I'll understand and accept it.

I assure you I've read each and every post in this thread. I am sorry that you can't seem to express a coherent thought in a single post and must attempt to rely on the abilities of your readers to collect your multitude of conflicting expressions and assemble them into a somewhat unified theme in order to comprehend the overall meaning of a single post. I don't believe that you will have much luck getting too many posters to jump through so many hoops for what routinely turns out to be a lack-luster "reward" of your deciphered ideas. Perhaps if you could simply do us the favor and try to maintain some semblance of consistency in your work, the discussion could proceed more smoothly?

Regardless, I afford you the opportunity to explain your original post to which I was responding, as you obviously feel there was some apparent meaning that I failed to grasp. What exactly are your feelings on the "intelligence of the average voter" as it relates to the past 2 elections?
 

CKent

Diamond Member
Aug 17, 2005
9,020
0
0
Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
Originally posted by: RBachman
Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
Originally posted by: RBachman
Originally posted by: raildogg
Bush's resume:

2 term president!


Demoncats' resumes combined:

lost to Bush twice!


these Democrats must be really sore!

Says more about the intelligence of the average voter than the men themselves.

Does this mean that you too subscribe to the elitist notion that today's liberals are simply too smart to appeal to the poor, unwashed masses? I bet the voters admire your pity. :roll:

You obviously haven't even read my posts in this thread. Please do so, and if you want to rescind your post & apologize, I'll understand and accept it.

I assure you I've read each and every post in this thread. I am sorry that you can't seem to express a coherent thought in a single post and must attempt to rely on the abilities of your readers to collect your multitude of conflicting expressions and assemble them into a somewhat unified theme in order to comprehend the overall meaning of a single post. I don't believe that you will have much luck getting too many posters to jump through so many hoops for what routinely turns out to be a lack-luster "reward" of your deciphered ideas. Perhaps if you could simply do us the favor and try to maintain some semblance of consistency in your work, the discussion could proceed more smoothly?

Regardless, I afford you the opportunity to explain your original post to which I was responding, as you obviously feel there was some apparent meaning that I failed to grasp. What exactly are your feelings on the "intelligence of the average voter" as it relates to the past 2 elections?

Yeah, "myself, being an independant" must've been real tough reading... 4 - count 'em, four - whole syllables in that word! :laugh:
 

1EZduzit

Lifer
Feb 4, 2002
11,833
1
0
Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
Originally posted by: RBachman
Originally posted by: raildogg
Bush's resume:

2 term president!


Demoncats' resumes combined:

lost to Bush twice!


these Democrats must be really sore!

Says more about the intelligence of the average voter than the men themselves.

Does this mean that you too subscribe to the elitist notion that today's liberals are simply too smart to appeal to the poor, unwashed masses? I bet the voters admire your pity. :roll:

LOL, you try and put words in someones mouth to define the argument you want to argue?? You sound like a Bush supporter with a guilty conscience.

Maybe the truth hurts??
 

cKGunslinger

Lifer
Nov 29, 1999
16,408
57
91
Originally posted by: RBachman
Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
Originally posted by: RBachman
Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
Originally posted by: RBachman

Says more about the intelligence of the average voter than the men themselves.

Does this mean that you too subscribe to the elitist notion that today's liberals are simply too smart to appeal to the poor, unwashed masses? I bet the voters admire your pity. :roll:

You obviously haven't even read my posts in this thread. Please do so, and if you want to rescind your post & apologize, I'll understand and accept it.

I assure you I've read each and every post in this thread. I am sorry that you can't seem to express a coherent thought in a single post and must attempt to rely on the abilities of your readers to collect your multitude of conflicting expressions and assemble them into a somewhat unified theme in order to comprehend the overall meaning of a single post. I don't believe that you will have much luck getting too many posters to jump through so many hoops for what routinely turns out to be a lack-luster "reward" of your deciphered ideas. Perhaps if you could simply do us the favor and try to maintain some semblance of consistency in your work, the discussion could proceed more smoothly?

Regardless, I afford you the opportunity to explain your original post to which I was responding, as you obviously feel there was some apparent meaning that I failed to grasp. What exactly are your feelings on the "intelligence of the average voter" as it relates to the past 2 elections?

Yeah, "myself, being an independant" must've been real tough reading... 4 - count 'em, four - whole syllables in that word! :laugh:

Please identify where I ever assumed your political affiliation. Go ahead, I'll wait.
 

zendari

Banned
May 27, 2005
6,558
0
0
Originally posted by: RBachman
Originally posted by: zendari
Originally posted by: Sheik Yerbouti
I know, I know the repugs are so clean in there voting records and allowing everyone a vote(that deserves one). Lemme ask you this, what qualifies an 18 year old more than a 16 year old, there's a strong chance both are still in High School, so neither of them have much 'worldy experience'. Are you not competent enough to punch a hole in a card or flip a switch or hit a touch pad?

Adulthood. As for punching a hole, take a look at the butterfly ballot issue in 2000. Gore voters couldn't even figure out how to punch it properly!

And the (mainly republican) Florida voters couldn't figure it out either... seriously, if you're going to be this petty, why post?


Quite a bit less than the Gore voters!

Text

The confusion hurt Bush, too: 1,631 people punched Bush and Buchanan, whose hole was below his on the ballot. But Gore was the bigger loser: the two Gore combinations, minus the Bush-Buchanan votes, totaled 6,607 lost votes for Gore, the Post found.

Mainly republican? Florida was like 45% Dem in the last election.
 

CKent

Diamond Member
Aug 17, 2005
9,020
0
0
Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
Please identify where I ever assumed your political affiliation. Go ahead, I'll wait.
Here:
Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
Does this mean that you too subscribe to the elitist notion that today's liberals are simply too smart to appeal to the poor, unwashed masses? I bet the voters admire your pity. :roll:
That clearly implies that I must be a liberal, since only a liberal could possibly dislike Bush. I can't stand that argument, it's patently false and nothing more than an attempt to troll.

The man is as dumb as a rock and responsible for the needless loss of nearly 30,000 human lives. It doesn't take much to hate him. Certainly blind party affiliation isn't the only means to that end, though it's one you seem to understand quite well ;)
 

CKent

Diamond Member
Aug 17, 2005
9,020
0
0
Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
this post is just another reminder of how juvenile this forum is.

Juvenile? What, like, calling people names instead of contributing to a post? :p
 

cKGunslinger

Lifer
Nov 29, 1999
16,408
57
91
Originally posted by: RBachman
Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
Please identify where I ever assumed your political affiliation. Go ahead, I'll wait.
Here:
Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
Does this mean that you too subscribe to the elitist notion that today's liberals are simply too smart to appeal to the poor, unwashed masses? I bet the voters admire your pity. :roll:
That clearly implies that I must be a liberal, since only a liberal could possibly dislike Bush. I can't stand that argument, it's patently false and nothing more than an attempt to troll.

The man is as dumb as a rock and responsible for the needless loss of nearly 30,000 human lives. It doesn't take much to hate him. Certainly blind party affiliation isn't the only means to that end, though it's one you seem to understand quite well ;)

Umm, try reading that line a few more times until it sinks in. Again, I'll wait.

Your "clear implication" of being labeled as a liberal is nothing more than a self-erected strawman and faux cry of victimization. While I did conjecture to attribute you as an elitist, or at least one who might have subscribed to an elitist ideal, the only people I was calling "liberal" were those candidates that lost to Bush in the last 2 elections - namely, Gore and Kerry - as a counter-argument to your direct implication that the intelligence (or lack thereof) of the voters is the reason why neither of these two gentlemen managed to defeat Bush.

If this is an example of your intelligence and reading comprehension abilities, I'd tread a bit more carefully when throwing out "dumb as a rock" insults if I were you. Also, your assumption-abilities leave much to be desired if you instinctly believe from these few posts that I am Republican, voted for Bush, or have succumb to "blind party affiliation."
 

CKent

Diamond Member
Aug 17, 2005
9,020
0
0
I'm at a loss for words. I doubt anything I say could insert reality into the world in which you live. Have a good one.
 
Sep 12, 2004
16,852
59
86
Originally posted by: RBachman
I'm at a loss for words. I doubt anything I say could insert reality into the world in which you live. Have a good one.
Reality is accepting the fact that people have died in the past for this country, are doing so today, and hopefully will continue to do so in the future. When people stop having that will, that's the day this country really dies.
 

CKent

Diamond Member
Aug 17, 2005
9,020
0
0
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: RBachman
I'm at a loss for words. I doubt anything I say could insert reality into the world in which you live. Have a good one.
Reality is accepting the fact that people have died in the past for this country, are doing so today, and hopefully will continue to do so in the future. When people stop having that will, that's the day this country really dies.

The key word being "for". What we're doing now is harming this country, thus the word & concept eluding you is "against".
 
Sep 12, 2004
16,852
59
86
Originally posted by: RBachman
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: RBachman
I'm at a loss for words. I doubt anything I say could insert reality into the world in which you live. Have a good one.
Reality is accepting the fact that people have died in the past for this country, are doing so today, and hopefully will continue to do so in the future. When people stop having that will, that's the day this country really dies.

The key word being "for". What we're doing now is harming this country, thus the word & concept eluding you is "against".

You confuse your opinion with fact.