about George Bush: he's a good president
I admit that he is bad with America's money (with the American people in mind, he's helping out a bunch of other countries with it, which is what Jimmy Carter did) but that's the only critisism I can find about him
I'm not going to repeat myself over and over about the war because no one listens, but he is a good president, but no one likes a president while they're in office
Yeah, that and the entire governments late response to Hurricane Katrina, and his stupid tax cuts in all the wrong places. One thing he did I was really fond of was the No Child Left Behind act, that was a really good program and its still working very well. Congress needs to suck it up and accept the fact that oil dependency is an issue and actually listen to some of his plans about that.
what freaks me out is this, the americans go on and on about george bush but didnt they vote him in for a second term? Make your minds up how you want it bush or no bush.
The way the electoral college is set up, the popular vote doesnt always win, its weird, I know, but it is fair.
Then how do they win? And how is it fair is the popular vote doesn't win?
Ok, each state has a certain number of members in the electoral college, equal to their number of senators and Represenatives. Now, the population of the United States is not equally divided, so most of it is on the coasts, where all the bigger cities, there are cities sprinkled throughout the midwest that are fairly big, but the coasts hold the majority of the voting population. So, if we voted by majority rule, the Coasts would always win, always, and their needs would be met and it would result in the rest of the country not having a say, and getting neglected. So the electoral college is set up like that for a reason, its fair, but the majority doesnt always win, its the majority of electoral votes, not necisarrily the citizens themselves.
I hope I explained it well, and didnt just confuse you
Ok, I sort of got that, is it like in Australia? Where they have a representative for each party in each area, and you vote for which representative you want to get into parliment, and the party with the most representatives becomes the ruling party.
I think that John Howard does some stupid stuff and I would never vote for him (Greens all the way for me) but he does look after our economy pretty well, as he used to be treasurer before becoming prime minister.
what freaks me out is this, the americans go on and on about george bush but didnt they vote him in for a second term? Make your minds up how you want it bush or no bush.
The way the electoral college is set up, the popular vote doesnt always win, its weird, I know, but it is fair.
Then how do they win? And how is it fair is the popular vote doesn't win?
Ok, each state has a certain number of members in the electoral college, equal to their number of senators and Represenatives. Now, the population of the United States is not equally divided, so most of it is on the coasts, where all the bigger cities, there are cities sprinkled throughout the midwest that are fairly big, but the coasts hold the majority of the voting population. So, if we voted by majority rule, the Coasts would always win, always, and their needs would be met and it would result in the rest of the country not having a say, and getting neglected. So the electoral college is set up like that for a reason, its fair, but the majority doesnt always win, its the majority of electoral votes, not necisarrily the citizens themselves.
I hope I explained it well, and didnt just confuse you
Ok, I sort of got that, is it like in Australia? Where they have a representative for each party in each area, and you vote for which representative you want to get into parliment, and the party with the most representatives becomes the ruling party.
I think that John Howard does some stupid stuff and I would never vote for him (Greens all the way for me) but he does look after our economy pretty well, as he used to be treasurer before becoming prime minister.
all politicians are dishonest and most are likely to be corrupt and have secrets that they don't want the general public to find over. go to say though, some of the most corrupt politicians are in africia.
It was thought up by rich Southern guys so that they could count in their slaves as part of the voting...even though they couldn't vote. Every slave counted as 3/5 of a person. This added to the population of the South enough for the rich landowners to control the elections.
Why we go by this convoluted, outtdated, unfair system I cannot fathom.
North Korea?
They have a power crazed dictator with nuclear weapons.
And it's a communist country.
Why do I dislike communism?
The idea is fine.
Everyone is equal.
But the way people have used it, instead of making everyone rich, it makes everyone equally poor.
So...yeah.
Be glad our leader is just stupid.
He could be crazy AND stupid.
Be glad our leader is just stupid.
He could be crazy AND stupid.
Assuming you are talking about Bush. I'm sorry but George bush is smarter than you (and I) will ever be.
There is a difference between being smart and having knowledge.
Being smart would be what GW is.
He's been to great schools.
And his father was president.
What he's done hasn't been very knowledgeable.
But that's just me.
Be glad our leader is just stupid.
He could be crazy AND stupid.
Assuming you are talking about Bush. I'm sorry but George bush is smarter than you (and I) will ever be.
There is a difference between being smart and having knowledge.
Being smart would be what GW is.
He's been to great schools.
And his father was president.
What he's done hasn't been very knowledgeable.
But that's just me.
So...cha'
Good and good!
"You went to the finest schools, all right Miss Lovely/But you know you only used to get jucied in it..."
Bush has book smarts at most. He's got no practical knowledge that benefits America. And if he does, he's sure hiding it somewhere safe. Probably in an undisclosed location with Uncle Dick.
Be glad our leader is just stupid.
He could be crazy AND stupid.
Assuming you are talking about Bush. I'm sorry but George bush is smarter than you (and I) will ever be.
I doubt that.
And anyway, being smart isn't everything. George Bush may be smart but he has very little common sense which I think is vital when you are a figure of authority.
Be glad our leader is just stupid.
He could be crazy AND stupid.
Assuming you are talking about Bush. I'm sorry but George bush is smarter than you (and I) will ever be.
I doubt that.
And anyway, being smart isn't everything. George Bush may be smart but he has very little common sense which I think is vital when you are a figure of authority.
Aside from the 'I doubt that' (I'd like to see any of us have the intellectual intelligence he has- it just isn't going to happen), I think you're got it in one. It isn't just intelligence you need (which he has), but you need to be able to apply it.
So is Bush stupid? not by a long way.
Does he use his intelligence wisely? that is more than questionable.
A little bird told me he went to Yale and got better grades than Kerry. Now, I don't know if that means anything to you, but It says something to me.
True, but I read somewhere that Yale is the 11th best University in the World and Oxford is the 8th.
What happens if you end up going Oxford and getting a top first class degree?
A little bird told me he went to Yale and got better grades than Kerry. Now, I don't know if that means anything to you, but It says something to me.
True, but I read somewhere that Yale is the 11th best University in the World and Oxford is the 8th.
What happens if you end up going Oxford and getting a top first class degree?
Then you can come back in ten years time and hit me with a very big piece of bamboo and tell me I was wrong.