How Interesting
One of the major points of contention this election cycle has been candidate stance on the economy. Supporters of both sides tend to claim that theirs has the answers whereas the other is, alternately, a pinko-communist or a tool of the corporate oppressor. Apparently, we’ve all been wrong this whole time.
“The economic impacts of the Bush and Kerry budget plans are so close as to be almost indistinguishable,” said Nariman Behravesh, [Global Insight]’s chief economist.
Yet more evidence for a foreign policy only election? I report, you do what ever it is you do.
Heh.
Who are you, anonymous one? I like your joke about Bush’s spending habits.
A real distinction between the two is that one owes his soul to the evangelical right, believes we are in the ‘end of times’ (which explains why he has never vetoed a spending bill), and belives he is carrying out god’s plan. The other is Kerry.
Kerry gets my vote. If your still on the fence consider this, If Bush is right and we elect him we’ll be without a president come the rapture. Something to consider..
‘The problem is that one has voted and advocates progressive policies, where the incombant has signed progressive legislation. Kerry is worse than Bush, so that’s why W gets my vote.
More evidence for a foreign policy only election? Not exactly. If, like me, you find the candidates’ foreign policy distinctions meaningless, news that their economic distinctions are also meaningless just further narrows the range of issues worth considering. Soon this range will be whittled down to none, and my brother’s decision to vote for neither, on the basis of “Bush’s idiot smirks and excessive blinking” versus “Kerry’s giant nose and insufferable Massachusetts bouffant,” will seem a rather lucid and penetrating analysis.