Bush is the best thing to happen to .....

[dmadman43]

Originally posted by ripleysmom
"He is the one who let our miliatry go down by the numbers"

That would be incorrect. The biggest military cuts happened during Bush 41's tenure, not Clinton's

But Clinton didn't do much to make up for it.

 

[dmadman43]

Originally posted by ThAnswr
And General Eisenhower or Jacob Javits or Kenneth Keating would be recognized by anyone in the Republican Party. Hell, Barry Goldwater, with his pro-choice/anti religious right stance, wouldn't be recognized by anyone in the Republican party.




The Republican Party of today isn't even the Republican Party of Ronald Reagan no matter how much lip service this current crop of Republicans pay to Reagan.

Well, true. But, which party has had more success in the past 50 years in winning the presidency?

Both of you are in for a shock on election day. Bush will be lucky to get the percentage his old man got in 1992. I don't believe this election is going to be close at all. As a matter of fact, the 2004 election is starting to look like the 1980 election. When it was time to stand up and vote, people deserted Carter because of the sense the country was headed in the wrong direction.

The difference there--if there is one---is that people were voting FOR Reagan, not AGAINST Carter. Reagan offered a clear vision. Kerry offers....what? "I'm not Bush but I served in Vietnam"?

This is what too many don't get. This election isn't about Kerry. This election is about George Bush. People are emotionally deserting Bush in droves. Once that connection starts to break, people don't look back. I can't tell you how many Republican I've heard use the words "I can't vote for Bush." Well, they're either going to vote for Kerry or they'll stay home and Democrats can't wait to get to the polls. None of this bodes well for Bush.

Like I said, come election day, you and DD are in for a shock.

Well, the polls don't support the "droves" theory, but if you got some data that suggests otherwise, I'd love to see it. Nevertheless, if your theory is true, I think the country will be sorry for voting AGAINST Bush. Like they say...careful what you wish for.

 

[dmadman43]

Originally posted by ripleysmom
"Bush is the best thing to happen to ..... Haliburton."


Saffron, you owe me a diet pepsi!! LOL!!

You, as well as anyone, should know how to read a 10K and see that the Haliburton comment doesn't make logical sense. Haliburton is hardly getting fat off Iraq.

 

[ThAnswr]

Originally posted by dmadman43

Well, true. But, which party has had more success in the past 50 years in winning the presidency?

I thought the issue was whether or not JFK would be recognized by the Democratic party.

Originally posted by dmadman43

The difference there--if there is one---is that people were voting FOR Reagan, not AGAINST Carter. Reagan offered a clear vision. Kerry offers....what? "I'm not Bush but I served in Vietnam"?

So, all those crossover Democrats voted FOR Reagan? I don't think so.

Originally posted by dmadman43
Well, the polls don't support the "droves" theory, but if you got some data that suggests otherwise, I'd love to see it. Nevertheless, if your theory is true, I think the country will be sorry for voting AGAINST Bush. Like they say...careful what you wish for.

There's an undercurrent of discontent that is not showing up in the polls and my guess is it won't show up until election day. Strictly my opinion, but I don't think there are going to be many who've decided to vote against Bush who are going to change their minds and vote for Bush. However, there seems to be more and more Republicans who, 1 year ago, planned to vote for Bush, but who now say they cannot vote for him.

As far as I'm concerned, Bush has been a disaster for this country and we cannot afford 4 more years of his incompetence, his arrogance, or his ignorance.

This country also cannot afford 4 more years of an administration that pays lip service to accepting responsibility, but in reality, never suffers any consequences whether the screw-ups be intelligence, war planning, etc.

 

[dmadman43]

Originally posted by ThAnswr
I thought the issue was whether or not JFK would be recognized by the Democratic party.

True. But the point is, obviously your examples did not have such a dramatic affect on the Reps and the moderates.

So, all those crossover Democrats voted FOR Reagan? I don't think so.

So, the defintion of a "Reagan Democrat" would be someone that merely voted AGAINST Carter? We'll just have to disagree on this.

There's an undercurrent of discontent that is not showing up in the polls and my guess is it won't show up until election day. Strictly my opinion, but I don't think there are going to be many who've decided to vote against Bush who are going to change their minds and vote for Bush. However, there seems to be more and more Republicans who, 1 year ago, planned to vote for Bush, but who now say they cannot vote for him.

I was hope for something more tangible than that. Oh well. We all believe what we wanna believe.

As far as I'm concerned, Bush has been a disaster for this country and we cannot afford 4 more years of his incompetence, his arrogance, or his ignorance.

This country also cannot afford 4 more years of an administration that pays lip service to accepting responsibility, but in reality, never suffers any consequences whether the screw-ups be intelligence, war planning, etc.

Look. Don't get me wrong. I'm far from his biggest fan. His domestic policies are horrible. But, given the options on the table, I'd much rather vote for a man that at least has a plan rather than someone whose platform is: "I'm not Bush, and I served in Vietnam" The next time I hear him say "I served in Vietnam", I want to say "So did Ho Chi Mihn! What's your point?"

 

[Saffron]

Hey dmadman43! Now THIS comment doesn't make "logical sense".

"The march to war hurt the economy. Laura reminded me a while ago that remember what was on the TV screens — she calls me, 'George W.' — 'George W.' I call her, 'First Lady.' No, anyway — she said, we said, march to war on our TV screen." —George W. Bush, Bay Shore, New York, Mar. 11, 2004





LOL!

 

[dmadman43]

Originally posted by Saffron
Hey dmadman43! Now THIS comment doesn't make "logical sense".

"The march to war hurt the economy. Laura reminded me a while ago that remember what was on the TV screens — she calls me, 'George W.' — 'George W.' I call her, 'First Lady.' No, anyway — she said, we said, march to war on our TV screen." —George W. Bush, Bay Shore, New York, Mar. 11, 2004





LOL!

No, it doesn't. But neither does Kerry's: "I voted for the $87 Billion before I voted against it!" or "I don't fall down" - after falling down.

or

"President Clinton was often known as the first black president. I wouldn't be upset if I could earn the right to be the second." -- John Kerry, 2004

Or "I don't own an SUV...the family owns it"

"If you don't believe ... Saddam Hussein is a threat with nuclear weapons, then you shouldn't vote for me." -- USA Today on 2/13/03







LOL!

 

[Saffron]

"I want to thank my friend, Senator Bill Frist, for joining us today. You're doing a heck of a job. You cut your teeth here, right? That's where you started practicing? That's good. He married a Texas girl, I want you to know. Karyn is with us. A West Texas girl, just like me." —George W. Bush, Nashville, Tenn., May 27, 2004

Well now! I guess we were fooled! Looks like there's no need to fear that one day a "girl" might become president -- apparently one already has!

Those Kerry ones are pretty funny, but none of them bet Bush!