How often does this happen in an election...

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

NFS4

No Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
72,636
47
91
Originally posted by: KarenMarie
Originally posted by: loki8481
I think Kerry is a great canidate. I definetly don't see the '04 election as a choice between the lesser of two evils.


this election is gonna be the lesser of two weasles!

Exactly. Neither one of them are anything to write home about. It's about picking which turd smells the least offensive.
 

T2T III

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
12,899
1
0
EITHER McCain or Bradley would have been a better alternative to those two knuckleheads.
Lately, it seems like McCain doesn't know which party he's for. I guess we'll soon find out when McCain gets offered the VP role under Kerry and he moves fully to the left.
 
Nov 7, 2000
16,403
3
81
when u have a winner take all system, it pretty much guarantees that both candidates will be be similar. no matter how they start off, the parties will start to make concessions to appeal to a larger crowd. there is no reward for second place so why not widen your platform to attract the most voters as possible. hence the republicrats. other countries that have proportional representation (ie if a formal party gets X% of the votes they get X% of seats) have much more distinct party lines. hence they also have distinct candidates of which you might think one does not obscenely suck.
 

db

Lifer
Dec 6, 1999
10,575
292
126
McCain won't be doing that. He just doesn' want to fall in line with intolerable bullsh!t
 

KarenMarie

Elite Member
Sep 20, 2003
14,372
6
81
Originally posted by: Tiles2Tech
EITHER McCain or Bradley would have been a better alternative to those two knuckleheads.
Lately, it seems like McCain doesn't know which party he's for. I guess we'll soon find out when McCain gets offered the VP role under Kerry and he moves fully to the left.

He turned it down flat and is hot on the campain trail for bush these days.
 

Rob9874

Diamond Member
Nov 7, 1999
3,314
1
81
Originally posted by: KarenMarie
Originally posted by: Tiles2Tech
EITHER McCain or Bradley would have been a better alternative to those two knuckleheads.
Lately, it seems like McCain doesn't know which party he's for. I guess we'll soon find out when McCain gets offered the VP role under Kerry and he moves fully to the left.

He turned it down flat and is hot on the campain trail for bush these days.

Exactly. Where have you been for the last few weeks?
 

mugs

Lifer
Apr 29, 2003
48,920
46
91
Originally posted by: Marlin1975
Originally posted by: mugs
Originally posted by: Marlin1975
Everybody says this every election.

Of course most people that say this rarely, if ever, has voted in primary or most local elections.

You want to change something, get off you butt and do something about it. Either join a campaign or run yourself.

The media has entirely too much influence over the outcome of the primaries. Look at this year's democratic primaries, Dean would have still been in good shape after Iowa if the media hadn't declared that it was impossible for him to win because he went a little overboard in a speech. I don't think that speech would have made one bit of difference if the media hadn't made such a big deal out of it.

Of course you can't really blame the media for their influence, you have to blame the simple-minded people who let the media tell them who can and can't win.



I disagree.
The media MADE Dean who he was. He NEVER had the support of the inside dem's and Kerry was everybodys Fav. The only reason the average person thought dean had a chance is his name was on the news everday. Kerry had the support of long time Dem's, dean brought out the internet vote and sparked some debate, but that was all.


Also don't forget, that speech came AFTER he lost all the early Primary's. So he was never really in the race. The media juts gave him more life then he really had with long time dems.

IIRC, the only primary that had taken place was Iowa, which is hardly "all the early primaries." The media's attention to Dean before the primaries was a legitimate reaction to his enormous popularity, particularly on the Internet. Dean got people excited, Kerry... well there's a reason loki8481 is the only person who actually likes the guy. He totally lacks charisma.
 

skywalker66

Banned
Nov 5, 2001
695
0
0
Originally posted by: mugs
Originally posted by: Marlin1975
Everybody says this every election.

Of course most people that say this rarely, if ever, has voted in primary or most local elections.

You want to change something, get off you butt and do something about it. Either join a campaign or run yourself.

The media has entirely too much influence over the outcome of the primaries. Look at this year's democratic primaries, Dean would have still been in good shape after Iowa if the media hadn't declared that it was impossible for him to win because he went a little overboard in a speech. I don't think that speech would have made one bit of difference if the media hadn't made such a big deal out of it.

Of course you can't really blame the media for their influence, you have to blame the simple-minded people who let the media tell them who can and can't win.

lol,

I think this is the best response so far in this thread, because its entirely too true.