Bush Opens a Double-Digit Lead!
Find a Conversation
Bush Opens a Double-Digit Lead!
| Fri, 09-03-2004 - 3:46pm |
New York: For the first time since the Presidential race became a two person contest last spring, there is a clear leader, the latest TIME poll shows. If the 2004 election for President were held today, 52% of likely voters surveyed would vote for President George W. Bush, 41% would vote for Democratic nominee John Kerry, and 3% would vote for Ralph Nader, according to a new TIME poll conducted from Aug. 31 to Sept. 2. Poll results are available on TIME.com and will appear in the upcoming issue of TIME magazine, on newsstands Monday, Sept. 6.
http://www.time.com/time/press_releases/article/0,8599,692562,00.html
Edited 9/3/2004 4:13 pm ET ET by iminnie833

Pages
I dont get it?
If Kerry was even HALF as smart as Bush, the election would be a lot closer.
Clinton was the punch line for the planet for 8 years and a disgrace to America.
BTW, Clinton launched at least TWO pre-emptive strikes against Iraq. Where were you? Do you need proof of that? Would you even look at the links?
Edited 9/8/2004 4:34 pm ET ET by janeigh
So come Nov. 3, I'll either be leaving my Kerry/Edwards bumper sticker on my car, or dusting off my "Don't Blame Me, I Didn't Vote For Him" one!!!
Oh, you forgot to answer my question. Was this an issue for you during the Bush Sr/Clinton election? It's a pretty clear cut question with a simple one word answer.
"If it wasn't important you wouldn't be making such a big deal out of it. Also I have said many times that I don't put a lot of stock in whether a president served in a war or not. But many do and therefore it is an issue. And when people start tearing apart a man's military service in a war and hold up their man who conveniently dodged the whole thing as much as possible, as did many many young men then, it is then important. And shameful I might add (the tearing apart of someone who valiantly served). The Republicans seem very good at judging others so long as they don't have to turn the mirror onto themselves."
Edited 9/8/2004 5:37 pm ET ET by alicia2210
"You must also believe that the 2nd Amendment means something entirely different than it says, too! Perhaps that it applies to the National Guard that was formed many years after the amendment was written? "
Did I mention the 2nd amendment, or are you confusing me with everyone else in your life you're ever disagreed with?
Mark my words, Hillary won't be the nominee in 2008.
I think you need to read Kerry's words more closely. When he says...
"'A cocky feeling of invincibility accompanied us up the Long Tau shipping channel because we hadn't been shot at yet"
...he's talking about himself and the new crew of the PCF-44 as a group. His purple heart was awarded while he was with a smaller crew on a different boat (a "skimmer" called "batman") He's talking about their feeling of invincibility as a group. He's also trying to be a bit poetic about it, which seems to confuse alot of people looking for dirt.
To read this as some sort of legal statement about whether Kerry himself had never been shot at is absurd.
********************************
Look at how you interpret Kerry's words to mean something different than what he said. The "group", not himself and "a bit poetic". How sweet and how nice to be able to know what Kerry REALLY meant, despite his words.
If you've got the stomach for it, even his campaign admits Kerry's 1st purple heart was self-inflicted. http://www.massnews.com/2004_editions/08_august/082504_kerry_purple_heart.htm
******************
Now let's look at the 2nd amendment and common leftist interpretations:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Leftists often argue that "the people" in the 2nd amendment context refers to a formal state militia, usually the National Guard, which was formed in 1903, and the constitution in 1783. http://www.guncite.com/journals/senrpt/senrpt24.html
*********************
Are you still confused, or just eager to defend Kerry against all logic and reason and especially himself????
Edited 9/8/2004 6:30 pm ET ET by janeigh
Pages