The argument that John Kerry would be worse is not sufficient.
In fact, one can make the argument that we are better off with divided government. If we are not going to make progress with Republicans in control, if the only thing we can hope for is to slow the decline, then give me divided government! Less will get done.
I believe we can do better. But we will not do better if G. W. Bush feels he can take his conservative base for granted. He is first and foremost a politician. If he is not under constant pressure from the base he will move to accomodate the Libs. You are not doing Bush or anyone else a favor by letting him get away with squandering the best chance to restore some of our liberty in decades.
Don't get me wrong. I will vote for Bush. But I am very disappointed that he and his Republican colleagues have not made any real progress. In fact, in many important ways they are implementing policies ( e.g. campaign finance reform, medicare, immigration) that we would all vociferously oppose if they were put in place by Democrats. This to me is definitely "getting screwed."
Glad to hear it, but why on earth would you do that, if you think he "governs like a liberal" and you say the argument that Kerry would be worse "is not sufficient"?
I think you generalize too much. In some ways, yes, he has governed to the left - but in other very important, very significant ways, he has governed to the right. Give him credit for that, okay?