On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 00:57:19 -0800, "gregpresley"
wrote:

Not that anyone cares at this point in the thread, but it's clear that there
were 5 main groups voting strongly for Bush. People who earn more than
$200,000, people who believe that the only real business of government is
defense/(offence), people who think that sticking to one point of view (no
matter how discredited) is more indicative of leadership than flexibility
is, people who live in small towns with perhaps less access to a variety of
news sources, and people who are religious conservatives. There are some
overlaps between these groups, notably the religious conservatives and small
town groups.
What can be said unequivocably is that Bush could not have won this election
without the religious conservative vote. Just subtract their numbers
(20,000,000 or so) and you get a Kerry over Bush victory 56,000,000 to
39,000,000. So on issues which could be argued on a rational basis, you have
a significant, but smaller group of Republicans. Even though I disagree with
those voters, at least we could argue political philosophy, numbers,
motives, cost/benefit, etc. Once you get into the realm of which candidate
truly believes "Jesus Christ is my personal Savior", and how you would prove
that, you've lost the ability to have a rational political discussion.

A Christian is by definition someone who believes that Jesus Christ is
their savior. Are you saying that Christians can't be reasoned with,
that they can't understand complex topics? Are Christians irrational?

It sure does sound like you're a religious bigot, though that seems to
be a politically correct form of bigotry these days. Shouldn't people
vote based on their personal beliefs?

Swyck