General Question

brownlemur's avatar

Remember 2000 and 2004? Are you telling your friends and family who voted for Bush, "I told you so?"

Asked by brownlemur (4086points) January 28th, 2008

Not to stir up a bunch of controversy, but I look back at the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections and think, “How did this happen?” Sure, hindsight is 20/20, but what do you all think? I’m not rubbing it in the faces of those friends and family members who voted for Bush, but sometimes I want to.

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

23 Answers

sjg102379's avatar

A lot of people who voted for Bush (not me, but my father, for one) don’t regret it, as they don’t think Gore or Kerry would have put us into a better situation.

sndfreQ's avatar

I don’t ‘cause “them is fightin’ words”...

vanguardian's avatar

@sjg – good answer. I guess it was the lesser of the dumb asses. Who knows. All I “do” know is, how the hell did we get to this level, when we have these ridiculous (in my opinion) choices. Its saying something when most people vote just to keep another out of office, not because they have faith in their choice.

brownlemur's avatar

vanguardian, I agree with that. I liked Gore in 2000, but in 2004 it really was as if the democrats (myself included) were just voting against Bush, not for Kerry.

ketoneus's avatar

I’d love to rub it I’m their faces, but honestly haven’t found it necessary. Most seem to be suffering from enough guilt/internal remorse.

adam1689's avatar

I am not remorseful. I do not think Bush has been a great president, but I do think he was better than the alternatives. I was under the impression that this site was for people to ask honest questions and for the purpose of seeking honest answers rather than to berate the opinions of people who disagree with you publicly.

brownlemur's avatar

There is a wonderful cartoon by Gary Larson dedicated to his critics and those readers who registered complaints against the Far Side, but I couldn’t find it online. But this will do.
No ill will intended towards you adam1689, but I think it’s important to keep a sense of humor in this. If you disagree with my opinion or that of others on this forum or any other fora, then you should make your voice heard. But asking others to suppress their opinions is antithetical to what you just posted. It’s quite funny and circular.

kevbo's avatar

I’ve learned that there’s really no convincing a bushie of the error of their ways. What strikes me, though, looking back on the past eight years is the fact of this bloc of voters choosing Bush based solely on a pro-life position and yet the status of abortion in the US hasn’t changed one iota.

I guess a multi-fold increase in funding for abstinence education for teenagers is “progress.”

adam1689's avatar

I don’t perceive any ill will personally. I believe in voicing opinions but not talking down the opinions of others. Nor calling them funny or circular or calling their possessors names. I don’t mind debating at all at the appropriate forum. If this is a forum for that then I apologize and will readily express my ignorance of this site’s mission. Anyway, that’s all I’ll say about it because I really don’t want to turn this into a debate and I do prefer to stay light about about things on this site.

Kevo, I couldn’t agree with you more about the abortion issue. I voted for Bush, in part, because of his pro-life stance I can’t help but feeling lied to about it. By the way, is that Adam from Mythbusters?

kevbo's avatar

Also… the stem cell stand-off. He won that one, too. Point for that, I guess.

cwilbur's avatar

I can’t say “I told you so” to people who voted for Bush; I don’t really believe that Gore or Kerry would have been a better President. They might have been more photogenic and less of a buffoon in public, they might have had agendas I agreed with more, but as far as I’m concerned, both in 2000 and 2004, the American public was given the option of choosing between two zeroes, and we responded both times by choosing one of them.

skfinkel's avatar

I have found that the people I know who voted for Bush don’t feel that he has been that bad. The war, the economy, how America is perceived, all seems to be, well, all right I guess.

Poser's avatar

Don’t blame me, I voted for Satan.

But seriously, as you said, hindsight is 20/20. Had Gore won in 2000, we almost certainly wouldn’t be in Iraq, but it seems a moot point since congress voted to give Bush carte blanch to invade and we’re there. As bad an idea as it was to go in, I have more respect for W. standing by his guns defending his decision than I have for the likes of Hillary Clinton and John Kerry changing their positions—on this and every issue—as the polls shift.

I’ll vote for conviction over cowardice any day.

ketoneus's avatar

@poser: Conviction is great and all, but what about learning from your mistakes? I have much more respect for someone that acknowledges failure, analyzes what went wrong, and learns from it than someone who stubbornly refuses to deviate from their path even though it’s a complete failure.

Poser's avatar

There’s a difference between “learning from your mistakes” (as is now the en vogue phrase for wishy-washiness), and changing your positions based on whichever way the wind happens to be blowing.

Poser's avatar

And to answer the original question, no I’m not telling anyone “I told you so.” Doing so is childish and misses the point.

It was Clinton’s Secretary of State Madeline Albright, remember, who explicated a more proactive military presence around the world—one that had been acted upon for years, but articulated by her State Department. She once asked Colin Powell, ‘What’s the point of having this superb military you’re always talking about if we can’t use it?’’

Bush’s Iraq invasion is simply the natural progression of precedents that were set years ago. Rather than second-guess decisions made based on faulty ideals, maybe we should question the (unconstitutional) ideals that permit a pro-active military world presence.

Poser's avatar

If I may elaborate on my first point (and review elementary-level social studies), it’s the job of Congress to provide the checks on the President’s power. Congress handed Bush the keys to Iraq. Criticizing him now for using the keys is akin to criticizing a teenager for being irresponsible after his parents gave him a souped-up sports car and a case of beer.

In other words, I hold the members of Congress as responsible for the war (if not more so) as I do the President.

vanguardian's avatar

Albright should be on trial…nevermind

@poser – I agree with the fact that Bush stayed true to what he believed in. His approval rating tanked, the media belittled him and is perceived by many arm-chair presidents as a bigger problem than o.b.l.
That being said, he truely thought and still believes that what he is doing is good. By know means am I saying he’s doing a good job, but at least he’s not trying to win a popularity contest. I do not think that Gore or Kerry would have done any better. I think any of the candidates would of had their hands full with a post 9/11. With the alternatives, I have to say I feel more confident with bush protecting the u.s.

Let’s hope this next election, someone can emerge as a true leader and bring America back. Unfortunately, right now, I see very little promise. Just the same ole rhetoric and poll pleasing B.S.

Poser's avatar

@ vanguardian—True ‘dat.

kevbo's avatar

Just finished reading Larry Kolb’s America at Night: The True Story of Two Rogue CIA Operatives, Homeland Security Failures, Dirty Money, and a Plot to Steal the 2004 U.S. Presidential Election – by the Former Intelligence Agent Who Foiled the Plan. (whew) And, I thought I was cynical before.

It peels the sheets back on connections between the Bush White House and two of the dirty tricksters you might imagine being clandestinely employed by Rove to cause Kerry some political damage. Specifically, they were setting up Kerry’s campaign manager (who was slated to take the reigns of a telecom company) so that it would look like the same company also had money laundering connections to al Qaeda. They’re linked directly with Reagan, Bush 1 and Bush 2 via different deals and meetings over the years the presidents were respectively in power. The guys in question also happen to be ex-CIA turned con men to the globally rich and famous, so the story is not only about their work for the Republicans, but their ability to freelance their swindling and stay out of jail thanks to protection from above.

Kolb, himself, is ex-CIA and states in his book that he’s voted both R & D in past elections, but unequivocally believes that thanks to the Bush/neocon agenda “America is less safe now from terrorism and cataclysm than it ever was.”

(cataclysm such as Katrina)

vanguardian's avatar

@kevbo – not being rude, but what exactly is your point?

trainerboy's avatar

Told them what? Did I know 9/11 was going to happen? No. Did I know there would be a recession? I could have predicted one no matter who was President. It happens in economic cycles.
I don’t believe anyone can say “I told you so” because nobody knew what was going to happen.

flipper's avatar

I have told them, “If you think things are bad now, imagine hwo much worse they wouldhave been with Gore or Kerry?”.

Answer this question




to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther