Vanity: [FR Poll] If it's Kerry vs Bush how will you vote?

2/7/2003 | FR

[yonif]

I thought because there is a poll on FR that says "If it's Kerry vs Bush how will you vote?" it would be good to start a thread on the matter for people to explain how they voted in the poll, if they choose to do so.

[rockrr]

OK.
So, lets see if I have this right.
Some of you on this conservative list are contemplating NOT voting for the most visibly, VIABLE conservative candidate. And the reason(s) why?
Because he spends more than any previous Republican president (although less than any of his competitors are likely to spend).
Because he MAY extend the AWB (or not).
Because he had the sheer audacity to suggest that we look at immigration reform (although you can't really call it a proposal yet because he only threw out a couple of ideas (kinda like a trial balloon, dontcha think?)
Or maybe because he hasn't (yet) gutted the NEA (either of them).
Ouch!
And what would your alternative candidate be?
Sit it out?
Fringe loony?
F'in Kerry ?!?

My path is clear. Bush in '04 because he most closely reflects my interests, values, and concerns. I read elsewhere that the potential fallout for GW's more moderate policies will likely fall to the future of the Republican party, not Bush himself. I'll vote for him because the alternative is unthinkable. If he does the things some of you THINK he MAY do, I will be disappointed. So much so that I will likely walk away from the party altogether. But I choose to give the president the benefit of the doubt.

[nopardons]

Please read Jim Robinson's post #129 on this thread.

[RLK]

I'll say the same to you that I said to that other clown. The Bush family periodically passes through Washington for a few years to install a lackadaisical country club in the White House. That's all they are good for.

I've had it with them. ENOUGH. Send them back to Kinnebunkport in sardine cans.

[stylin_geek]

Your first line is asinine, and you know it.

However, you do make a good second point, and that is a problem. However, will John Kerry prosecute the war on terror? Again, all other issues are meaningless if terrorists are allowed to flourish and obtain WMD. A John Kerry would not even move to register illegals, but would grant any and all of them legal status, without any type of safeguards whatsoever. Would John Kerry talk about activist judges in an SOTU?

To say President Bush is the lesser of two evils is to ignore the fact there are some sharp differences. As I've said, while I don't like some of President Bush's spending, I do think he does have character, and is an honest and God fearing man.

[Rodney King]

Or maybe because he hasn't (yet) gutted the NEA (either of them).

To be clear, he has proposed a massive increase.

[nicmarlo]

You've had it with Bush? Did you have "it" with Reagan, too? Bush is very much like Reagan, IMHO.

[Senator Pardek]

I hope he beats Kerry - but I would not vote for him for anything.

[Neets]

I take that to mean you won't be voting for Bush, right?

[4integrity]

.....not sure Bush can carry NJ....

Glad to hear you'll vote for Bush. And, hopefully you are or will be VERY ACTIVE to get others in NJ to vote for GWB. We all need to do all we can to get out the vote for W. Maybe then he'll have a chance to carry NJ...

[Neets]

As is your right Senator!!

Thanks for a reply!

[LisaMalia]

Hope the fence sitters all have fun at President-elect Kerry's Inaugural Ball. Be sure and say hi to Hanoi Jane and Michael Moore for me...LOL

[billbears]

For the Senate I will vote for the Conservative available on the ticket. For the Presidency I will vote for the Conservative available on the ticket. Being in the state of NC, we do have the Constitution Party available on the ticket. I will not vote by letters but by what the candidate believes

The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.

[Dec31,1999]

Let's hope that GWB doesn't decide to appoint another Liberal to the Court. Reagan appointed O'Connor, and another, I believe. That's all we need, another Lib member of the SCOTUS!

How can we make sure he will appoint a Conservative?

I think that there is something about lifetime-tenure that promotes Liberalism. It's a tough one.

[Godebert]

"No offense, but the constitution Party gets less votes than Mickey Mouse."

Over half a million votes were cast for the Constitution Party in the last presidential election. That number will triple this election thanks to Bush's liberal policies.

[NeoCaveman]

Your tagline is quite an earworm.

[MJY1288]

I think some around here have forgotten the damage Bill Clinton did to this country, they seem to latch onto our big victory in 1994 as if Clinton was held in check and gridlock was the best thing for the country, meanwhile Madeline Albright was toasting Kim Jong Il, Gore was selling our Nuclear secrets to the highest bidder, Klinton had "Mood Lights" installed in the Oval Office. absolutely no response to the terrorist attacks while all this great gridlock was going on.

I don't know about you, but that kind of gridlock brought us 9/11 and the Wall Street corruption Robert Rubin encouraged. I loathe these short sighted .02%rs who would hand the White House over to the Dems, LOATHE THEM

[Jim Robinson]

C'mon, who do you think the liberals will appoint? Guaranteed?

[Neets]

LOL.

[MJY1288]

Because Bush has already stated that Scalia and Rhenquist is what he thinks a SCOTUS justice should be like

[Indy Pendance]

Let's appoint a dictator, a king! Let's rule by iron fist, every one must roll over and obey the dictates of the current president! Is that what you want? Our country was formed with the intent of not having a dictator. Checks and balances were put in place to prevent it. Bush alone CAN NOT change the course this country which has been heading towards socialism for the past 71 years. If that's what you want, then the liberals have in all rights, to do the same when they are in power.