W'S WINNING WAYS

New York Post ^ | 11/25/03 | JOHN PODHORETZ

[kattracks]

November 25, 2003 -- ELECTION Day 2004 is 343 days away. A lot can happen in 343 days. But if George W. Bush wins a second term convincingly next Nov. 2, this will be the week that made his victory a foregone conclusion.

[Ophiucus]

The Republican's response to the DemoRats attacks is promising. I hope they have the cojones to stick with it. It is a point where the Dems are indeed extremely vulnerable. As long as the 'defensive' ads don't become petty or trite, they should play well.

The economy is still questionable in my mind. I don't think the President's tax cuts were deep enough and unfortunately they weren't permanent. I've read that they were given an 'expiration date' to force the issue with the Dems for the next election cycle. Unfortunate if so, I don't respect that kind of political machinations.

Speaking of machinations, the area where Mr. Bush is weakest is his willingness to compromise on principles. A huge increase in Medicare, the anti-free speech campaign "reform" bill, the anti-education Kennedy boondoggle, the farmer welfare program, and the anti-free trade steel tariffs are all examples where Mr. Bush abandoned principles and campaign promises for a political gain. He alienates many conservatives but figures they will still vote for him since the alternative is so much worse.

[tkathy]

Whatever his faults, GWB is one heck of a strong leader. Which is exactly what this country needs.

[publius1]

Maybe I misheard something back there in the shrouded mists of the year 2000, but didn't Candidate Bush promise a Medicare prescription drug bill? Indeed, wasn't there a big debate here on Free Republic about it?

It's fine to say the bill is bad in some moral sense (because it expands government, adds to the deficit, has too much pork, etc.), but it is being enacted through a democratic process, and is fulfilling a campaign promise.

After eight years of Clinton, two years of the Daschle majority, the midget nine running for the Democratic presidential nomination, and the Dem's hypocritical votes and posturing on the war in terror, I can understand how you would think that no pol ever fulfills his campaign promises, or that they all lie when their mouths are open, but with this President we have a guy who seems to mean what he says, and to act to do what he said he would do. You may not always like the results, but the character of the man should please you (I hope).

[rintense]

"They have not lead. We will."

What a great reminder quote!

[Tom D.]

"I've read that they [tax cuts] were given an 'expiration date' to force the issue with the Dems for the next election cycle. Unfortunate if so, I don't respect that kind of political machinations."

As I recall, the Dems would not pass a permanent tax cut of the magnatude that was not temporary, or at least one of the selling points that the Republicans used to sell these tax cuts was that they were temporary. In any event, we out dumbed the Democrats and now they are faced with the prospect of making these cuts permanent or being legitimately accused of raising taxes.

My understanding is that the Dems opened the door to these temporary cuts and that Bush et al merely let them walk through that door.

[Phlap]

By attacking the Bush ad the dems identify themselves as thoes attacking Bush for attacking the terrorists. Some things are best ignored.

[Cultural Jihad]

We might have to start paying people to run for office for the Democratic Party just to assure a fair fight. ;-)

[Poohbah]

By attacking the Bush ad the dems identify themselves as thoes attacking Bush for attacking the terrorists. Some things are best ignored.

There's a saying...if one throws a stick at a pack of dogs, the one who yelps first is the one you hit.

[OESY]

This weekend, Wesley Clark said we could find Osama bin Laden "if we wanted to" - suggesting, in other words, that Bush really didn't want to. John Kerry has said that "a dangerous gap in credibility has developed between President Bush's tough rhetoric and timid policies, which don't do nearly enough to protect Americans." Evidently, senior Democrats believe they are permitted to say anything they like about the president - but it's illegitimate for Republicans to fire back on the president's behalf. It's such a pathetic line of argument that it's hard to believe they mean it.

I can handle their pathetic lines of reasoning, but their rank dishonesty and outright demagoguery crosses the line. I'm glad to see some RNC ads challenging Democrat allegations regarding the war and imminence as a cause.

[Puppage]

Whatever his faults, GWB is one heck of a strong leader. Which is exactly what this country needs.

AMEN, to that!

[Leroy S. Mort]

"They have not lead. We will."
What a great reminder quote!

That's hugh....seriesly hugh.

[carton253]

I can handle their pathetic lines of reasoning, but their rank dishonesty and outright demagoguery crosses the line.

Wow! Needs to be restated.

[PGalt]

dubyadubyadubya.terrificpresident

[OESY]

Wall Street was betting yesterday that the revised numbers will show the economy grew even more - not by 7.2 percent, but by as much as 7.6 percent. Statistics like these represent such a profound vindication of the president's economic policies (or, for those who still don't believe, an incredibly lucky rotation of the business cycle) that it's hard to see how Democrats will be able to attack the president effectively on fiscal matters.

I note Dem Dwarfs have stopped mentioning the economy in their debates. This morning we got some very good news on the Third Quarter's Preliminary GNP -- it was 8.2% when the consensus revised expectation was 7.2%. Personal consumption held above 6.0% at 6.4%. But it's not surprising Dems are shocked at the strength of Bush's surging economy. Dems never had a clue in the first place as to how to stimulate the economy, having benefited from a free ride in 1993 that Reaganomics gave them. It wasn't the all-time high tax rate increases.

[TontoKowalski]

Maybe I misheard something back there in the shrouded mists of the year 2000, but didn't Candidate Bush promise a Medicare prescription drug bill? Indeed, wasn't there a big debate here on Free Republic about it?

You didn't mishear. I remember because I didn't like the plan. I incorporated his announced plan into my calculus as to who I would vote for. All things considered, then-Governor Bush still won my vote.

FWIW, I still don't like the plan. But, I knew it was coming because I was told before-hand. The man is keeping a campaign promise. I don't fault him for that.

[JLAGRAYFOX]

I'm overjoyed to see the RNC calling the Democrat Party traitors and guilty of treason. They are calling a spade a spade! Can you imagine, if during WWII, when things were going badly for the USA, the Republican Party attacked FDR, by siding with the enemy and the weak sisters that exist today, the United Nations, France and Germany. FDR and the American public would have lynched them for treason. Our boys died in the thousands to protect our freedom in WWII and our boys and girls are dying now to protect and defend our freedom, in this all out terrorist war helped immensely by the "traitor/treason" Democrat Party! The Democrat Party is enabling our enemies to kill our military folks. This present Democrat party has deserted FDR, HST and JFK. It needs to be totally destroyed at the ballot box next year. I watched the Democrat Presidential debate yesterday and they are one sorry bunch of low-life, traitor/treason losers! How any American that witnessed 911 can ever vote for these defeatists is beyond me! They must have a death wish, because that is just what the Democrat Party will bring to America, DEATH OF AMERICANS!

[Clara Lou]

Bump for later-- heh, heh!

[rintense]

Yeah, well, I replied before having my coffee. Not that it helps. ;)

[OESY]

"I can handle their pathetic lines of reasoning, but their rank dishonesty and outright demagoguery crosses the line."
Wow! Needs to be restated.

OK, I try to accommodate when I can.