The GOP's Worst Nightmare

[Capt Dizle]

Originally posted by DanS
Washington DC runs on integrity. If you don't have it, you won't last long. I bet you guys have much less knowledge about this than you believe.

You can have personal integrity within a corrupt system. Once you get in you can't see out, your perspective is narrowed to see only one way. Looking at the outside from the inside.

On the outside, folks can only look in. So you have two extreme ends, like a long tube with people peering at each other. The truth is somewhere in the middle but we are too fat to fit in the tube.

Analogy of the day.

[Sprayber]

I wonder if Kerry speaks Chinese

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by jimmytrick
I have been amazed by the folks here who think that a Bush-Kerry race will be competitive. But, and I hit myself on the side of the head when I realized this, from the perspective of the median poster here why shouldn't it be close.

The median poster here is young, more radical in their views than the public at large. We have a huge foreign voice here that the public at large never hears.

Few people here voted for Bush last time. People here have an axe to grind with Bush. Most people here are upset about the war. Most people in the public at large supported the war and will support the continued occupation of Iraq for at least another presidential term.

The political center, as defined by the majority here, would be found just off the left edge of the map being used by the American public.

Sure, you folks think Kerry has a chance. I think he better hold on to his senate seat.

JT

You underestimate the eroding confidence that folk like Berz and I have. I'm wouldn't consider myself young (more approaching middle years), consider myself fiscally conservative and as a consequence feel more than slightly betrayed by actions of Bush of late. Will it be enough for me to either a) throw away my vote to the libertarians or b) God forbid vote Dem? I can't say until more evidence in.

Your point about the leftist leaning in general of this forum is well taken, but more to the original intent of this thread conservatives are ticked as well.

Og

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Berzerker
But Bush has cured me of any illusions of voting for him, the man signs spending bills like a liberal weenie.

I call BS. If you were ever really planning on voting for a party other than Libertarian, I'd be shocked and awed.

[Capt Dizle]

Originally posted by MrFun


Just like you have an ax to grind with Northern Democrats??

Not at all. I am shopping for a candidate that I can support as I am not pleased with Bush. I am just pointing out that a northeasterner can't win in the south.

My issue is jobs and I would trust Edwards more than Kerry to really do something postive on that front.

[Docfeelgood]

hypocrits?hypercrits?


yall know what I mean

[GePap]

The number of people who think Bush should be re-elected are lower than the number of people who think he should not be re-elected.

There are polls out now that have Kerry ahead.

While a poll at this point is poor evidence at best, it is still some evidence that Bush is not particualrly popualr with anyhone outside his given base (where he is widely popular)

So the one not showing anything is you.

[DinoDoc]

I'm suprised anyone is actually paying close attention to polls this far out in the process. It's an eternity between now and the election. I'll grant you that Bush does need to work on those numbers though.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by jimmytrick


Not at all. I am shopping for a candidate that I can support as I am not pleased with Bush. I am just pointing out that a northeasterner can't win in the south.

My issue is jobs and I would trust Edwards more than Kerry to really do something postive on that front.

ok

[GePap]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
I'm suprised anyone is actually paying close attention to polls this far out in the process. It's an eternity between now and the election. I'll grant you that Bush does need to work on those numbers though.

The number for him when it comes to should be reelected, should not, have remianed the same, or gotten worse, for like 6 months. Even when Dean was the presumptive opponenet and bUsh was said to be winning by like 10 points, still more people said he should not be reelected than wanted him back.

Outside his core base, there isn;t much love for him.

[Shi Huangdi]

"There are polls out now that have Kerry ahead."

Yes, and polls at this time in Clinton and Reagan's first term that showed them fare behind and with far less in the way of approval ratings.

Kerry has his own weaknesses. He has an extremely liberal voting record, even on security issues, and he has taken a number of unpopular positions that won't be popular in the general election.

But more importantly, voters are prospective moreso then retrospective. Voters aren't go to base their selection on what the candidates were doing 30 years ago.

Remember, Bush defeated McCain, a Vietnam POW, even though at one time he was far behind him in the polls. And that was among the strongly pro-defense Republican primary electorate.

[Shi Huangdi]

Also keep in mind the 2002 GA Senate Race. Again in an electorate more likely to look favorably upon military service then the nation as a whole, voteres picked the candidate who took a stronger position on defense issues then the one who was a triple amputee.

Military Service is a nice plus for a candidate, but Kerry will be disappointed if he thinks it gives him a blank check to take whatever position he wants and still be seen as strong on Defense.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Shi Huangdi

Kerry has his own weaknesses. He has an extremely liberal voting record, even on security issues, and he has taken a number of unpopular positions that won't be popular in the general election.

But more importantly, voters are prospective moreso then retrospective. Voters aren't go to base their selection on what the candidates were doing 30 years ago.

Remember, Bush defeated McCain, a Vietnam POW, even though at one time he was far behind him in the polls. And that was among the strongly pro-defense Republican primary electorate.

A lot of things have happened since the 200 election- Bush has a record now as president (plus democract still remember the outocme of that election). And that Bush record has significant problems for which the electorate is more than willing to judge him on. Maybe they won;t judge on what happened 30 years aog, but they will certainly keep the last 4 years in mind.

[Docfeelgood]

A lot of things have happened since the 200 election- Bush has a record now as president (plus democract still remember the outocme of that election). And that Bush record has significant problems for which the electorate is more than willing to judge him on. Maybe they won;t judge on what happened 30 years aog, but they will certainly keep the last 4 years in mind.

bout sums it all up

[Boris Godunov]

Kerry's now in the WH's line of fire, so the dirt will keep coming, of course.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...erry_big_dig_5
http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/op...ists/17337.htm

[DanS]

Story #1 wasn't dirty. Hard hitting. Factual.

Story #2 was dirty. Teddy Roosevelt ran as (and was) a populist, after all.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Kerry's now in the WH's line of fire, so the dirt will keep coming, of course.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...erry_big_dig_5

This one does seem to be a very good example of the actions he rails against on the campaign trail.

[GePap]

Well, nice to see the press (sadly, i guess the NYPost counts as press) is now going after Kerry.

What a like about Dean is that, when the press took Dean to town on every little or not little thing, at least nothing like this came up.

ON Dean, the anti-special interest line works.

I wonder if edwards will have the same unflaterring light cast upon him?

[gunkulator]

Originally posted by jimmytrick
I am just pointing out that a northeasterner can't win in the south.

Hopefully, this ridiculous southern stranglehold on presidential elections will come to an end this time. Gore came very close without carrying the south. More and more, a candidate needs to look west to win.

I, for one, am hoping Kerry takes up the trumpet call Dean started about Bush's shoot first ask questions later foreign policy. Throw in some facts and innuendo about Bush giving tax cuts to the rich and encouraging big business to ship jobs overseas and he just might pull it off.

[DanS]

More and more, a candidate needs to look west to win.

Why so? The South is where the population is growing.

[GePap]

Originally posted by DanS


Why so? The South is where the population is growing.

The fastest growth was in Nevada, No?

The population is growing rapidly in the southwest, and the west has more people then the south, and more money as well.

[DanS]

The fastest growth was in Nevada, No?

Yes, but that's a modestly-sized state.

While not uniform in the South, some states are growing fast. Texas and Florida are large states that are growing at a 2.5% annual pace. Georgia is a substantial state that is growing at the same pace too.

California is still growing at a good clip, but the Dems seem to have a lock on it already.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Berzerker
Spiffor - the Libertarian candidate of course If I vote for either the Dems or Repubs I'm giving my tacit approval to the future incarceration of millions of people for drug use and I can't do that.

This is one of the issues where Libertarians show their noble colors

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by DanS
Story #1 wasn't dirty. Hard hitting. Factual.

Story #2 was dirty. Teddy Roosevelt ran as (and was) a populist, after all.

"Digging up dirt" doesn't infer the stories are dirty, but rather the actions of the person being investigated are.

I've felt all along Kerry was just another lifetime politician, and this stuff is just reinforcing my belief.

[Ned]

Berz, I don't fully understand your antipathy to Bush. You cite his spending, but because of it you are willing to vote for a party that wants to spend more?

Actually, Bush is a phenomenon. He is showing the Republican party a new ideology in "compassionate" conservatism. I frankly like it. The social safety net is important. We should expand it and support it to the extent we can afford it. At the same time, we need to be true to our beliefs that competition is necessary to keep quality up and prices low. Thus Republicans will introduce new programs with competition built in. Democrats will not. The difference is important.

The war record is important if we were writing on a blank slate and wanted to find out where these people stood on issues of security and character. I think Bush has done very well. I also think highly of Kerry for what he did. But his record in the Senate has been anti-war and anti-security.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Ned
Berz, I don't fully understand your antipathy to Bush. You cite his spending, but because of it you are willing to vote for a party that wants to spend more?

The Libertarian Party wants to spend more than the Republicans? I doubt that somehow...

[Agathon]

If I were an American of any political leaning other than a fundamentalist warmonger I would elect anyone but Bush.

The man is a diplomatic and financial incompetent.

The rest of the world is waiting to see what you all do. If you elect Bush again, you will think that current anti-Americanism is mild in comparison. I wish I could explain to you how much that man is hated by most of the rest of the world, including many who really quite liked America and would do so again. If you think it's good policy to alienate all your friends, then so be it. The US isn't big enough economically or militarily to do without friends. Both Clinton and Bush pere were pretty good diplomats and managed to accrue a great deal of soft power to the US - and that is what really makes the difference when it comes to most things you want from other countries. Most importantly, if you want to hunt terrorists you need people on your side. But if you are going to use 9/11 as an excuse for patently ridiculous, destabilizing wars, no one will want to help.

Outside the US Bush is widely viewed as a lunatic. The fundamentalist rot he spouts may play well at home, but it makes everyone else's stomach churn. I'm not talking about radical left wingers either - I'm talking about ordinary conservative Joes who just don't believe him.

[chequita guevara]

DanS, Georgia and Florida are growing because liberal NorthEasterners are moving here. Florida has a majority Dem population, and Georgia will become more liberal as the population of metro-Atalanta grows.

[CharlesBHoff]

Originally posted by jimmytrick
I have been amazed by the folks here who think that a Bush-Kerry race will be competitive. But, and I hit myself on the side of the head when I realized this, from the perspective of the median poster here why shouldn't it be close.

The median poster here is young, more radical in their views than the public at large. We have a huge foreign voice here that the public at large never hears.

Few people here voted for Bush last time. People here have an axe to grind with Bush. Most people here are upset about the war. Most people in the public at large supported the war and will support the continued occupation of Iraq for at least another presidential term.

The political center, as defined by the majority here, would be found just off the left edge of the map being used by the American public.

Sure, you folks think Kerry has a chance. I think he better hold on to his senate seat.

Bush will lose the public support for the war with the america people. First to many american Bush commitee perjury with then about the WMD in Iraq. Forget about the legal mean of prejury go by how the public feel about the last SOTU speech where Bush said Iraq have WMD. Second the american taxpayer will foot 90% and up cost of rebuild Iraq as we broke it we pay to repair, the oil in Iraq willnot even come close to covering the cost of rebuilding Iraq, They are finding that there might be less oil there than they thought due to Iraq not know how to or haveing assec to modern methord of oil drilling. The cost of rebuilding Iraq will be around 500 dillion dollar. Many america are saying why we must use our money to rebuilt Iraq.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by DanS


Yes, but that's a modestly-sized state.

Calling Nevada a modestly-sized state is like saying a grain of salt is somewhat small.