Thread: George W Remains in Office

This was an article that I had to write about the 2004 Presidential Election for my school newspaper. I haven't edited it yet, so nitpick if you want.



George W Remains in Office

After three gruesome debates, a billion dollars for his campaign, and a very close race for Presidency, George W. Bush was re-elected into one of the most prestigious offices in the United States: President of the USA. Winning by a mere three million votes, President Bush took office for yet another four years with a lot to prove to the American people. But how did President Bush win yet another close victory?

I think the answer is simple- President Bush is a very simple man who any average person can relate to. His speech is the same thing- simple words and short answers which are understandable by a chimpanzee. The fact that George W. Bush can't properly use and manipulate the English language may be one of the smartest political ploys in the history of the United States, helping the lowest common denominator to identify with him.

Not many people would agree with the way the President had applied himself after the September 11th attacks, but many people had no clue what a new President would contribute to the political conflicts that the United States is involved in.

So now the question remains why Kerry lost the election. What did he lack? He didn’t lack courage, because that was shown through his service in Vietnam. Certainly not will, because he showed that in Iowa. And he proved that he was more intelligent than Bush in the debates, so what was the reason that he lost?

John Kerry was not simple, like President Bush who had one message to send across, while John Kerry, on the other side of the spectrum, had a dozen points to get across. Bush ended too short without explaining himself; Kerry went on and on, until everyone forgot what he was talking about.

That’s how Bush is still President today. He connected with the average common people, which is no problem, but didn’t convince intellectuals in the country.

On Election Night of 2004, it started off with President Bush claiming more states than the senator from Massachusetts. Soon enough, it came down to four states. By mid-afternoon, Senator Kerry seceded from the Presidential race, giving the presidency to Bush.

Of course, all the democrats in the United States are disappointed in Kerry’s decision, but it took an added weight off of the senator and his wife.

I’m sure that most democrats will also hope that the President won’t make any mistakes in his second term and hopefully he’ll make the right choices and restore America’s place in the world.

Good luck Bush.



-Jam

Hi Beez,

As one who is deeply involved with the political process and watched nearly everything concerning the election, I appreciated your article. It showed fairness and truth to both sides, if simplistic. The only place that I saw a point of conflict was when you said that "Senator Kerry seceded from the Presidential race, giving the presidency to Bush." The truth is that Senator Kerry sent a team of lawyers to Ohio to be certain that the votes were being counted correctly and access his chances of victory there. When they reported back to him that things were being done correctly and that there was no possible way that he could win, only then did he seceded from the Presidential race, giving (the people gave the presidency to Bush) the presidency to Bush.

Also, if I were writing this paper I would not have mentioned Senator Kerry's courage due to his service in Vietnam. That became a hotly contested issue throughout the campaign. In commercial after commercial and documentary after documentary he was made to look like a coward, a traitor and that he fraudulently gained medals according to those who supposedly were in the service with him. Let's not mention his anti war activities after his service was completed where he called fellow American soldiers war criminals.

So as not to seem biased in my opinions, let it be known that I didn't vote for either Senator Kerry or President Bush.

All in all from my perspective it is a well written paper.

Ann

Thanks a lot!

FaIR to both candiates? How do you figure- He painted kerry as being intelligent & having more to say than bush, while he painted bush in dull muited colors & implied that he was an idiot that chimps could understand- Fair? No- this was nothing more than a biased onesided opinion.

If you're going to be a columnist- you might want to forego the personal opinions and rhettoric that generally sullies such onesidedness. Our local newspaper has just found this out the hard way- people are sick and tired of onesided commentary that uses disparaging rhettoric to paint the other side in a bad light- it makes for bad unprofessional commentary & reflects badly on the newspaper regardless of which side you support.

You're better off sticking to facts- George bush is anything but an idiot- his IQ is two points below being MENSA quality, and he averaged a 'C' WHILE partying in a VERY tough school- NOT an easy achievement I assure you. So- you're painting him as an idiot is biased and nothing but opinion that dissregards the truth about the man- You'll recieve more awards for your work if you can manage to be fair and balanced toward both candidates, and get facts that not many people know about- rather than relying on rhettoric that ultimately lost Kerry the presidency- Trust me- people are sick of opinionated, untrue, unfair descriptions of others- our local paper is a prime example of that- Two columnists have lost their jobs because of massive outcry against such stuff.

You use generic words such as "many" & my question to you is- Yeah? Ya did a poll? Cuz the polls I've seen show the majority agreeing with Bush- so here again, you try to make it look as though 'many' dissagree, but infact they don't

Ok, first of all, I didn't know that this would be such a controversial issue, espeically, ESPECIALLY since it's only going to be published in a school newspaper. I wrote this because I was told to and I was told that I could go anywhere with it and if it means calling and labeling President Bush stupid, by all means, he is stupid and Bush did make himself understandable to the lowest common denominator. And no, this is NOT a one-sided biased opinion, because trust me, I have written other things which is most certainly a one-sided biased opinion, which is against President Bush.

Now, as I said, my last intention was to cause people to yell at me and call me a bad person because of what I believe in. President Bush, in simple words, is a pathetic excuse for a President. I do not want to be a columnist. The only reason why I joined the staff of the school newspaper is to gain the experience in writing and forming my opinion, which I have done.

President Bush is an idiot- he received D's in high school and only stayed in school because he was rich- he bought his way through. I am fair, I am balanced, and the world is full of opinions. This is mine.

From the above, it is true, it is a fair description of George Bush.

-Jam

LOL- not one sided? Call it whatever you want- it's STILL onesided & highly opinionated- There's plenty of people that know Bush MUCH better than you & know that he isn't an idiot by any stretch of the imagination- But meh- I guess you'd know better than they

Bought his way through? LOL- wehatever

Originally Posted by Nazareth

FaIR to both candiates? How do you figure- He painted kerry as being intelligent & having more to say than bush, while he painted bush in dull muited colors & implied that he was an idiot that chimps could understand- Fair? No- this was nothing more than a biased onesided opinion.

But Kerry is intelligent, and he did have more to say than Bush! Bush also comes off as an idiot many times, and while I'm not sure, I think he cleaned up the chimp-vote in the election. Telling the truth doesn't make you one-sided, and there's no obligation to covering up the truth when trying to be unbiased.

Originally Posted by Nazareth

If you're going to be a columnist- you might want to forego the personal opinions and rhettoric that generally sullies such onesidedness. Our local newspaper has just found this out the hard way- people are sick and tired of onesided commentary that uses disparaging rhettoric to paint the other side in a bad light- it makes for bad unprofessional commentary & reflects badly on the newspaper regardless of which side you support.

Yah, you should only use these tactics if you're the President, or one of his supporting political groups.

Originally Posted by Nazareth

You're better off sticking to facts- George bush is anything but an idiot- his IQ is two points below being MENSA quality, and he averaged a 'C' WHILE partying in a VERY tough school- NOT an easy achievement I assure you.

Daddy's money, Daddy's rep! I think you missed the part where he wouldn't have made it into the school if his last name wasn't Bush! Check his record in industry before politics, and watch his behaviour during the debates this year. This is not a highly educated, or even controlled individual.

Originally Posted by Nazareth

You use generic words such as "many" & my question to you is- Yeah? Ya did a poll? Cuz the polls I've seen show the majority agreeing with Bush- so here again, you try to make it look as though 'many' dissagree, but infact they don't

Ok, apparently 48% of the population voting against him doesn't qualify as "many"? If just under half of the population disagreeing with someone doesn't register on your radar, I wonder how much respect you'd have for the rights and needs of any minority?

The diction of the paper could use a littl firming up, but the sentiment is bang on. Good job.

It's a little bias, but hey, whatever. I liked it. I love being in school and having political debates in class...it's really cool to know that it's not just my classmates and me that are into politics at such a young age...Anyway...corrections...

Presidency in your first paragraph...I don't think it should be capitalized. I'm not sure though...double check that. I'm pretty sure it shouldn't...

Also, the part where you wrote, "That's how Bush is still president" or something like that...it should be "That's why..." not how.

Last correction, I swear...you wrote a contraction some where in your article. I've always been taught to write everything out and not to use contractions. Of course, journalism writing is a little bit different from writing essays, so I'm not too sure on that...double check that as well.

Other than that, kudos to you!!! I enjoyed your article.

Sentiment bang on for a one sided liberal viewpoint lol- whatever- I aint surprised people are turning more and more to conservative views when statements like "Bush is an idiot" prevail from the extreme left. Heck- even the democrats who know better in congress know they aint dealing with an idiot & have dropped extremist rhettoric knowing that it reflects badly on their party- but meh- rock on

New article- "Kerry is a killer & abandoned his mates in vietnam and endangered their lives by telling lies abnout htem- and his campiagn was filled with empty promisses and vows of retreat in the face of danger. He vowes to cow tow to the popular vote of the dissenting nations because he feels they represent the world & would much rather have their approval than to do the right thing. Kerry couldn't tell the truth if he was pumped full of truth serum. He's a pathological liar that only did as well as he did because the minority of people didn't like bush."

Disclaimer: This isn't opinionated, it's 'just a fair and balanced article" I'm workjing on

okay, I just read your reply at the top...

now...the point of being on the newspaper staff is not to form your opinion...it's to be objective and inform your audience on what is happening. You can not be bias for whatever reason. You must leave out your opinion and just deliver what needs to be said. You have to allow the reader to form their own opinion by not using phrases such as "can be understood by a chimpanzee" and all the other stuff. Also, using the word "many" is a "weasle" word. So you can't really used those words because it can mean numerous things. What many is to you might be a different amount to someone else. You get what I'm saying??

And just because you get D's in high school doesn't mean you're stupid...you could have just not applied yourself...

Oh, and by the way, I'm so totally with you with the whole Bush is stupid thing...I despise him!! LOL

Beez- I'm out of this conversation- Don't care to rehash old rhettoric over & over again- You got your opinion that bush is stupid & nothing will ever change that unfortunately- but the advice is sound. Biased Opinion doesn't sell

Originally Posted by Beez617

I do not want to be a comnunist.

Are you sure, that's not the gist I'm getting from your manifesto?

Just showing you how quickly words can be twisted and misunderstood.

Originally Posted by Nazareth

Sentiment bang on for a one sided liberal viewpoint lol- whatever- I aint surprised people are turning more and more to conservative views when statements like "Bush is an idiot" prevail from the extreme left. Heck- even the democrats who know better in congress know they aint dealing with an idiot & have dropped extremist rhettoric knowing that it reflects badly on their party- but meh- rock on

For the record, I'm an extreme conservative. Many Bushites seem to confuse Bushism with Conservatism. It's possible to maintain a conservative mentality and still hate Bush. He's the wrong man for the job. Kerry isn't necessarily the best man for the job, but he was the BETTER man for the job this time.

I'd rather go with the clown that ~might~ screw up than the clown that ~has~ screwed up.

[ot:ce7c2297a3]A friendly reminder from the moderator:
Folks, please remember that this topic is to discuss the merits of the writing. Please don't get side-tracked into off-topic political debates.

Thank you.[/ot:ce7c2297a3]