Our own election: Bush vs. Kerry

Your choice for President of the United States

  • [b](I'm a registered American voter): George W. Bush[/b]

    Votes: 37 51.4%
  • [b](I'm a registered American voter): John Kerry[/b]

    Votes: 14 19.4%
  • [b](I'm a registered American voter): Ralph Nader[/b]

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • [i][color=blue](I'm a non-registered American): Geroge W. Bush[/color][/i]

    Votes: 3 4.2%
  • [i][color=blue](I'm a non-registered American): John Kerry[/color][/i]

    Votes: 1 1.4%
  • [i][color=blue](I'm a non-registered American): Ralph Nader[/color][/i]

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • [color=red](I'm a non-American): George W. Bush[/color]

    Votes: 6 8.3%
  • [color=red](I'm a non-American: John Kerry[/color]

    Votes: 8 11.1%
  • [color=red](I'm a non-American: Ralph Nader[/color]

    Votes: 3 4.2%

  • Total voters
    72

CPangracs

Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2003
Messages
1,588
Reaction score
6
Location
Within My Means
Country
llUnited States
The Doctor said:
Kerry may not have pledged to be an "outsider", but he has pledged to be a "uniter". Bush started out trying to do what he did here in Texas - reaching out to Democrats. The long time Democrat Lt. Gov. Bob Bullock actually campaigned for W's re-election as Gov. "No Child Left Behind" was more or less written by Ted Kennedy. He gave Daschle everything he wanted in the Farm Bill. If I have a complaint about the President, it's that he has spent too much money on the domestic side.

I seriously doubt John Kerry would make even a fraction of the effort W has in reaching out to the other party.
Although the NCLB bill is being assailed as a failure, why doesn't anyone point to a failing school system LONG before Bush got into office? Why can't anyone agree that Bill Clinton, who's home state of Arkansas was almost LAST in the country in education while he was Governor? Why doesn't anyone point out the fact that social promotion in our schools has lead to an upcoming generation with less education and skill than any other before? Why doesn't anyone point to rising test scores almost across all regions, and even among all races, over the last 2 years?

WHY IS NO ONE PLACING ANY BLAME ON A FAILURE OF TEACHERS TO TEACH AND PARENTS TO PARENT?!

Just like healthcare, where does it say in the constitution that my government MUST educate me, and if it DOES say that, then why do I have to pay a dime for college? We try to provide an education in our society because education is a cornerstone to the foundation of future success, and this is the reasoning by NCLB - holding the schools accountable, or else they are closed and the children are given education options through vouchers! I don't see any harm at all in allowing competeion between schools to actually DO THEIR JOBS! It shouldn't be, but that's what the education system has come to. I still think we could solve 90% of the funding problems for our schools by trimming the administrative positions just by 1/2 and increase teacher pay, retain the teachers who perform and send the ineffective tenure-trackers packing to Burger King.

Why should I pay for substandard education when I WON'T pay for substandard food, housing, or medical care? Why shouldn't I have the right of taking the $3,000 PER CHILD/PER YEAR currently being spent in the public school system and shop around for a school that will perform for a little bit more and be accountble to ME instead of anyone else?

This is an issue very near to my heart, Doc, and I'll wrestle with anyone who wants on the issue!
;)
 

purdyrc

Duke Nukem
Joined
Aug 10, 2004
Messages
278
Reaction score
3
Location
Virginia
CPangracs said:
Although the NCLB bill is being assailed as a failure, why doesn't anyone point to a failing school system LONG before Bush got into office? Why can't anyone agree that Bill Clinton, who's home state of Arkansas was almost LAST in the country in education while he was Governor? Why doesn't anyone point out the fact that social promotion in our schools has lead to an upcoming generation with less education and skill than any other before? Why doesn't anyone point to rising test scores almost across all regions, and even among all races, over the last 2 years?
Because Bush's policies actually made it worse! At their worst, the other guys simply left it alone. They didn't actively meddle in it and screw it up even worse than when they got there.

CPangracs said:
WHY IS NO ONE PLACING ANY BLAME ON A FAILURE OF TEACHERS TO TEACH AND PARENTS TO PARENT?!

Just like healthcare, where does it say in the constitution that my government MUST educate me, and if it DOES say that, then why do I have to pay a dime for college? We try to provide an education in our society because education is a cornerstone to the foundation of future success, and this is the reasoning by NCLB - holding the schools accountable, or else they are closed and the children are given education options through vouchers! I don't see any harm at all in allowing competeion between schools to actually DO THEIR JOBS! It shouldn't be, but that's what the education system has come to. I still think we could solve 90% of the funding problems for our schools by trimming the administrative positions just by 1/2 and increase teacher pay, retain the teachers who perform and send the ineffective tenure-trackers packing to Burger King.
Curt, it doesn't work like this. Think about the worse schools in your town/city/county. Invariably, they are in the predominantly black and immigrant latino communities. The residents of these same districts are also the ones who are earning the smallest incomes in your community as well. Because they are living at or below the poverty line, their salaries are some of the lowest in the country. Because they are low, that means the taxes you can squeeze out of them are some of the smallest tax revenues in the country as well. And since these are the smallest tax revenues, they don't buy a lot of new books or pay for a lot of teachers. They don't fix crumbling ceilings or paint over the graffitti-sprayed walls outside. They don't pay for security so kids who want to learn don't have to run the gauntlet of gang members outside just to get to and from schools. These schools are among the most under-performing in the country. That means the kids who actually do graduate can't get into the better colleges (if they can afford to go at all). They get the lower paying jobs, have kids, and the cycle starts all over again. Bush's message is "shape up or ship out" and it shows a pathological ignorance of the reality that these kids face.

CPangracs said:
Why should I pay for substandard education when I WON'T pay for substandard food, housing, or medical care? Why shouldn't I have the right of taking the $3,000 PER CHILD/PER YEAR currently being spent in the public school system and shop around for a school that will perform for a little bit more and be accountble to ME instead of anyone else?
Because even if you can afford to pay for those better schools, most others cannot. And when you take your kids and leave, your tax dollars go with you. This leaves even less for the school and cycle continues, but at a rapidly worsening pace. If you want a better school, you should move to the better district, not move your kids and your money and leave the rest to fend for themselves. That's what it means to be a part of a community. You don't abandon your neighbors the first chance you get. That's what school vouchers do.

- Rick
 

chrisvalla

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2004
Messages
645
Reaction score
1
Location
San Antonio, Texas
Country
llUnited States
Actually, Texas has a wonderful issue over school funding and the 'Robin Hood' plan that just got axed. What it came down to was that the 'poorer' school districts had such dismal tax bases that their rates were at the state maximum and yet they still couldn't bring in enough money so the 'richer' districts fed money into a pot in Austin (anyone see a problem with that already?) which was then divied back out to the 'poorer' ones. Needless to say it didn't work very well (did it work... sort of, but not very well). Socializing education didn't work (at least in this manner); people moved their kids to districts and schools that did better overall (mostly but not always due to having more money), and things got worse for those left behind.

Of course school board favors, handout, payoffs, and construction contract awarding 'issues' didn't help any. School boards and superintendents here are just about as powerful, if not more so, than any mayor and city council when it comes to school district taxation and rates... only the state holds them back from claiming your house as theirs and letting you have permission to live in it and (if you have them) send you kids to their school. The power of school districts in Texas is quite frightening in comparison to how much affect educational organizations should have on your everyday life. but then again, we also don't have a state income tax... so the districts get their money almost exclusively through property taxes... and lottery ticket sales... :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:

Marines

Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2004
Messages
1,017
Reaction score
0
Location
Surrounded By Commun
purdyrc said:
No, I was making a joke. Damn, I have to start using more winking smilies in my posts!
;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;)
But I was humorously trying to point out that this forum will be skewed. While there are those in here who have heard the "crack" of the bullet, I would wager that most have not. For these folks, war is still a simulation and pictures of stuff blowing up on the news is exciting rather than sad. That's all.

- Rick
Hey it’s hard to differentiate between sarcasm, humor and sometimes anger through the written word at times.
 

Marines

Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2004
Messages
1,017
Reaction score
0
Location
Surrounded By Commun
The Doctor said:
FYI-

Early voting in Texas has broken records and it appears heaviest in Republican counties. I went to a Dallas County Early Voting site this morning a 0630 - 30 min. prior to open - I was about 50th in line.

Very heavy turnout in a state where the EVs are already in the Bush column. There is no Senate race and only a few House races are seriously in question.

Republican turnout appears very high. Turnout in 2000 was pretty low here in Texas.
I waited for about an hour to vote here in Grapevine and this was last week!

Have you or anyone else for that matter seen the military polls? As of right now it sits at around 80-20 in favor of Bush.

BUSH '04 baby!
 
Joined
Apr 9, 2004
Messages
144
Reaction score
0
Location
Walla walla, Washington
Country
llUnited States
i remember after 9/11 when bush told us about the cominng war.he said this will not be an easy war,nor a quick war....remember?our troops...our wonderful troops have gone to foreign countries and literally kicked a$$ not only in the name of retribution,but in the name of freedom.we have made a difference.bin laden is close to standing alone,and he knows it.he hates bush, i wonder why,he is becoming a general without troops,and his videos do not scare me.do what you must,hurt us if you will,you are a walking dead man.like it or not bush is the man to finish this.
 

CPangracs

Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2003
Messages
1,588
Reaction score
6
Location
Within My Means
Country
llUnited States
purdyrc said:
Because Bush's policies actually made it worse! At their worst, the other guys simply left it alone. They didn't actively meddle in it and screw it up even worse than when they got there.

Curt, it doesn't work like this. Think about the worse schools in your town/city/county. Invariably, they are in the predominantly black and immigrant latino communities. The residents of these same districts are also the ones who are earning the smallest incomes in your community as well. Because they are living at or below the poverty line, their salaries are some of the lowest in the country. Because they are low, that means the taxes you can squeeze out of them are some of the smallest tax revenues in the country as well. And since these are the smallest tax revenues, they don't buy a lot of new books or pay for a lot of teachers. They don't fix crumbling ceilings or paint over the graffitti-sprayed walls outside. They don't pay for security so kids who want to learn don't have to run the gauntlet of gang members outside just to get to and from schools. These schools are among the most under-performing in the country. That means the kids who actually do graduate can't get into the better colleges (if they can afford to go at all). They get the lower paying jobs, have kids, and the cycle starts all over again. Bush's message is "shape up or ship out" and it shows a pathological ignorance of the reality that these kids face.

Because even if you can afford to pay for those better schools, most others cannot. And when you take your kids and leave, your tax dollars go with you. This leaves even less for the school and cycle continues, but at a rapidly worsening pace. If you want a better school, you should move to the better district, not move your kids and your money and leave the rest to fend for themselves. That's what it means to be a part of a community. You don't abandon your neighbors the first chance you get. That's what school vouchers do.

- Rick

Seeing as how you haven't a clue about my community (natch), I will point out that you are absolutely wrong. I study education as a hobby (I'll be going for a Masters soon), and I see only one thing - teachers being held accountable, students being sent forward for performance, not to "hold up their self-esteem", and I see better and more dedicated teachers entering the work force.

As usual, you are advocating having the community do everything, even when the people being paid to do a job continually fails to do the job.

It's kind of like the big dig in Boston,...sure, it gives certain people jobs and others a LOT of kickback money, but in the end, all you have to show for it is, well, a big hole.

If someone's going to continue to pay me for doing substandard work, where is the incenti9ve to work harder? If I'm going to get shuffled-off to the next grade without doing satisfactory work, why should I try to work harder?! Also, if I'm busting my but to get an A in a class and move on to the next grade, and another guy is doing absolutely jack, and moving on to the next grade, how does that make you feel?

You will, under what you propose, absolutely suck the life and spirit of acheivement and competition this country was founded on, and create a society of "just good enough" workers.

Again, you are scaring me, and probably quite a few others here with your ideas - which is why people like me will do everything in our power to prevent the type of social engineering you desire in our school system.

EDIT: Oh yeah, you also claim that students from the worst schools can't get into college? BS! There are numerous colleges that accept underperforming minorities as well as others solely based on race and/or ethnicity who either come from these schools OR go to decent schools, but don't perform well. Unfortunately, these very same programs then totally screw someone else who HAS performed and earned the right to a scholarship or at least admittance, but can't,...solely due to THEIR race or ethnicity, or more pointedly, their lack thereof.

Socialism and reverse prejudice at its glaring best,...something you obviously support. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:

CPangracs

Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2003
Messages
1,588
Reaction score
6
Location
Within My Means
Country
llUnited States
chrisvalla said:
Actually, Texas has a wonderful issue over school funding and the 'Robin Hood' plan that just got axed. What it came down to was that the 'poorer' school districts had such dismal tax bases that their rates were at the state maximum and yet they still couldn't bring in enough money so the 'richer' districts fed money into a pot in Austin (anyone see a problem with that already?) which was then divied back out to the 'poorer' ones. Needless to say it didn't work very well (did it work... sort of, but not very well). Socializing education didn't work (at least in this manner); people moved their kids to districts and schools that did better overall (mostly but not always due to having more money), and things got worse for those left behind.

Of course school board favors, handout, payoffs, and construction contract awarding 'issues' didn't help any. School boards and superintendents here are just about as powerful, if not more so, than any mayor and city council when it comes to school district taxation and rates... only the state holds them back from claiming your house as theirs and letting you have permission to live in it and (if you have them) send you kids to their school. The power of school districts in Texas is quite frightening in comparison to how much affect educational organizations should have on your everyday life. but then again, we also don't have a state income tax... so the districts get their money almost exclusively through property taxes... and lottery ticket sales... :rolleyes:

Chris,

This is EXACTLY why I would propose to slash the administrative hierarchy by at LEAST 50%! I would also make the position of Superintendent and school board member as electable by the popular vote with a spending cap of $1000 of PERSONAL money to run for the positions, as well as a cap on salaries for any paid positions NOT to exceed the highest teacher salary in the district! This way, there is LESS incentive for an "administrative track" in the education system and more emphasis on keeping educators teaching!

But then, that all makes entirely too much sense, so even if I CAN get into some kind of position to do this here, it will never happen for the reasons you described in your own area. :confused:
 

purdyrc

Duke Nukem
Joined
Aug 10, 2004
Messages
278
Reaction score
3
Location
Virginia
CPangracs said:
Seeing as how you haven't a clue about my community (natch), I will point out that you are absolutely wrong. I study education as a hobby (I'll be going for a Masters soon), and I see only one thing - teachers being held accountable, students being sent forward for performance, not to "hold up their self-esteem", and I see better and more dedicated teachers entering the work force.
I would love to be proven wrong about your community and all the other major metropolitan communities in the country. Unfortunately, I am correct. The poorest communities have the poorest schools. That is because of a tiny tax-base that cannot hope to compete with the other more afluent neighborhoods. This is a financial constant all across the country. Unless your community is the statistical and financial anomoly, I would wager dollars to donuts that it is the same where you live too.

Poor counties = small tax base = under-funded schools = poor performance

CPangracs said:
As usual, you are advocating having the community do everything, even when the people being paid to do a job continually fails to do the job.
No, what I am advocating is recognizing that not all communities are equal. I think we can agree that we all love our kids, but the kids from a poorer county cannot compete with the kids from the affluent counties in terms of computer training, sports programs, hiring competent teachers, and buying newer and updated textbooks. These are all facts of the dollar, not my opinion.

The community (and you) need to recognize that if our neighbors kids are not performing, it affects all of us. These "under-performing" kids go on to get "under-paying" jobs. They contribute less in terms of taxes to the local, state, and national infrastructure and, quite often, actually become a drain on resources with welfare and other programs forced to step in and fill the gap. If we contribute more money and take an active interest in their education from the start, we give them a better chance at a better life.

And if you insist on looking at it from a selfish point of view, look at it this way. If the kids from under-funded and under-performing schools don't secure a good education, statistics prove that they are more likely to turn to crime, end up on welfare, and pay less in taxes. All of this means that you will be assessed higher taxes to make up the shortfall. So therefore, it would be in your own self-interest to spend a few dollars now rather than a lot more later. Again, this isn't my opinion, this is the conclusion of numerous education and labor studies.

CPangracs said:
If someone's going to continue to pay me for doing substandard work, where is the incenti9ve to work harder? If I'm going to get shuffled-off to the next grade without doing satisfactory work, why should I try to work harder?! Also, if I'm busting my but to get an A in a class and move on to the next grade, and another guy is doing absolutely jack, and moving on to the next grade, how does that make you feel?
These comments show a complete lack of understanding of the problem and real-world difficulties faced by our students and educators across the country. No one, myself included, is advocating paying any substandard teacher for poor performance. The REALITY is that underperformance is most often the result of the under-funded school environment, not the teachers (although this does happen even in the best school systems). When the poor school systems can afford to pay a teacher $22,000 and the better county next door pays starting teachers $38,000, which school system do you think is going to be able to attract and retain the better teachers? It's no contest. And on top of the lower salaries, the teachers in the poor systems often have to face crime, drugs, and even violence on a daily basis. All of these things conspire to prevent teachers from working there and they also prevent students from learning as well.

CPangracs said:
You will, under what you propose, absolutely suck the life and spirit of acheivement and competition this country was founded on, and create a society of "just good enough" workers.
Not even close. What you propose is that these kids in the poor districts need to just "suck it up" and get a little tougher and work out the myriad problems they face on their own. What you fail to notice is that these kids have no control over the poverty and crime they face each day. In an urban setting, statistics have shown that fewer than half of all black males make it through graduation from high school and go on to higher education. Even worse is the statistic that shows that almost a third of them will have a criminal record and/or be incarcerated by their 21st birthday. But we can't be bothered to worry about what happens in other communities, right? Every man for themselves, right? Knuckle down and fix your own problems, right?

CPangracs said:
Again, you are scaring me, and probably quite a few others here with your ideas - which is why people like me will do everything in our power to prevent the type of social engineering you desire in our school system.
Well, if I scare you, you depress the hell out of me. I fear that your comments reflect the feelings of people in positions of power in your communities and it saddens me to think that so many people don't care enough to try to fix what has become a major problem in our country. Why is it that we have millions of people in jail right now? How do you think it got that way? It's easy to reason it away by calling them "lazy" or "stupid" or any other thing that makes us feel better about our superior position in life. The reality is that all of us who "have" are blessed and fortunate to be in this position. All it would take for most of us to be pushed over the edge is a few bad breaks in life. A little more compassion for our fellow man would go a long way towards helping the problem.

CPangracs said:
EDIT: Oh yeah, you also claim that students from the worst schools can't get into college? BS! There are numerous colleges that accept underperforming minorities as well as others solely based on race and/or ethnicity who either come from these schools OR go to decent schools, but don't perform well. Unfortunately, these very same programs then totally screw someone else who HAS performed and earned the right to a scholarship or at least admittance, but can't,...solely due to THEIR race or ethnicity, or more pointedly, their lack thereof.
No, read it again. I said they can get in, they just can't afford to stay in. And for the record, most kids from these poor districts don't get in, regardless of race. Check your facts again before you make comments like this.

CPangracs said:
Socialism and reverse prejudice at its glaring best,...something you obviously support. :rolleyes:
No, care for my fellow man and a desire to correct a bad situation that is beyond these kids' control. That's what I support. I'm truly saddened to see that it is something you do not support. Well, as long as you and your family have yours, right?

- Rick
 

last_cav1971

Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2004
Messages
160
Reaction score
0
Location
West Virginia
Country
llUnited States
Bariman said:
I'm a non-registered American voter (don't turn 18 until March), and I vote for George W. Bush.
Good job.....at least you are voicing your opinion. :thumup: :flag:

Mark
Deo Vindice
 

Richa333

Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2004
Messages
86
Reaction score
0
Location
Olympia, WA
Country
llUnited States
Bush of course.

I am a 42-year-old male, homeowner, married, 3 teenage daughters, Bachelor of Arts degree, civil servant for state Medicaid agency & small business owner. Most important, I am a fundy ("born-again") Christian.

The only demographic that doesn't track my vote accurately is: I are an African-American. I bust the "norms" both by virtue of: I still have my franchise (about 1/3 of African-American men don't), I'm registered (most eligible African-American men are not), & I vote in every election & every by-election (a plurality of registered voters only vote during Presidential election years).

Hardly goes without saying that I'm pretty much a single-issue voter this time around. Namely, I think about which candidate do I believe has the greatest chance of winning the War On Terror, as well as a corollary issue: which candidate has the best chance of NOT creating another Vietnam. And on both the main & secondary issues (which are connected), Kerry fails miserably: others including Nader etc. don't have a realistic chance of getting elected so they don't "count" for my narrow issues: and while he certainly makes a ton of mistakes, Bush is absolutely the Right Man with the Right Plan at the Right Time fighting the Right Wars in generally the Right Way (not perfectly, but generally).

It's not about what they say -- who can really trust a politician? -- but absolutely is all about what they Do, and what they are Capable Of.

4 More Years!
 

gobeavs

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2004
Messages
1,860
Reaction score
0
Location
West Coast USA
Country
llUnited States
I voted Bush as a non-registered american...being that I'm only 15. I would like to vote, but I guess I gotta wait a couple years.
 

last_cav1971

Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2004
Messages
160
Reaction score
0
Location
West Virginia
Country
llUnited States
DevilDawg said:
Non-Registered <Only 16>, Voted for George W. Bush.

Good job......proud to know that the younger guys are even thinking of the vote.....much less keeping abreast of the political issues. :thumup: :flag:

Mark
Deo Vindice
 

last_cav1971

Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2004
Messages
160
Reaction score
0
Location
West Virginia
Country
llUnited States
typo

gobeavs said:
I voted Bush as a non-registered american...being that I'm only 15. I would like to vote, but I guess I gotta wait a couple years.
Like I said to the other two younger guys.......good job.....feel proud that you are thinking about the vote and paying attention to the politics. :thumup: :flag:

Mark
Deo Vindice
 

CPangracs

Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2003
Messages
1,588
Reaction score
6
Location
Within My Means
Country
llUnited States
purdyrc said:
You ARE wrong about so much in your post it's not even funny. Worst of all is your contention that one of the reasons you want people to get a better education is so they can pay MORE taxes to,...fund education.

Face it - you support redistribution of wealth and the suppression of a free market and the right of every American to get an education they can afford, and to to help those who CAN'T generally afford it a chance to shop around for the best alternative.

Yeah, I have worked hard for the last 25 years to get where I am and provide for my family, but I also have helped others along the way - I have no guilt at all about doing what is best for me and my family FIRST. In fact, I would feel guilt if I felt for one nanosecond more compassion for someone other than my family.
 

last_cav1971

Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2004
Messages
160
Reaction score
0
Location
West Virginia
Country
llUnited States
It's not about what they say -- who can really trust a politician? -- but absolutely is all about what they Do, and what they are Capable Of.


Exactly right.........and Bush has the experience.......look what he has done since 9/11.......what has Kerry done?

Mark
Deo Vindice
 

gobeavs

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2004
Messages
1,860
Reaction score
0
Location
West Coast USA
Country
llUnited States
last_cav1971 said:
It's not about what they say -- who can really trust a politician? -- but absolutely is all about what they Do, and what they are Capable Of.
That is my thinking. You know what Bush is going to do. You can only hope you know what Kerry is going to do...sometimes, I even get confused with all that SAYS he will do.
 
Top