assmonkey Posted February 9, 2004 Posted February 9, 2004 He's vain and dishonest about his vanity: Link. He's a gold digger: Link. He's out of touch with the populace (Kerry was a Yalie and a member of Skull and Bones (1966), just like Bush I and II): Link. He's wishy-washy: Link. He's got a bad rep on his home turf: Link. He's a career politician: Link. Plus, he looks French: Link. The RNC will crush him by virtue of the above list, and more. If this is truly a fight for votes from those who occupy the middle of the political spectrum, Kerry doesn't have a chance. They are the demographic that is most susceptible to standard RNC smear campaign tactics. He's been around too long and has too many skeletons to effectively run against the Shrubbies: Link. I could be wrong on this. Clinton proved that being a douchebag does not mean political death. But I have my hopes set very low. Plus, don't forget that Osama bin Laden will be captured and put on display sometime in the August to October timeframe, thus propelling Bush's approval ratings through the roof. Anyway, given a choice between Bush, Kerry and Nader, I would probably vote Nader. But I heard yesterday on NPR that Nader has officially declined a presidential bid in '04, so you guys are in luck. Quote
Lars Posted February 9, 2004 Posted February 9, 2004 Kerry is a douchebag just like the rest of 'em Quote
jack_johnson Posted February 9, 2004 Posted February 9, 2004 (edited) Way can't one of the numerous political parties in the United States come up with a good candidate for the president's seat? Do they all have to such low pieces of flotsam that only then do they make it to the top of the septic tank of choice. God I am sick and tired of voting for them. By the way I think I see a Kennedy arm or hand up his back running things. Edited February 9, 2004 by jack_johnson Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.