Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Vanity: [FR Poll] If it's Kerry vs Bush how will you vote?
2/7/2003 | FR

Posted on 02/07/2004 4:46:02 PM PST by 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.


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: 2004; bush; elections; gwb2004; kerry; traitorsinourmidst
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 761-775 next last
To: yonif
I'm voting for JOHN KERRY because:

1) He will reverse the tax cuts,

2) He will place our security in the hands of the U.N.,

3) He will reinstate all the Environmental regulations Bush has did away with,

4) He will suspend the deployment of the Missile shield

5) He will rejoin the ABM Treaty

6) He will appoint liberal judges

7) He will appoint a panel to find out why the terrorist dislike us and do what it takes to win them over

8) He will sign the Kyoto Treaty

Now if you can't bring yourself to vote for John Kerry, vote for a Libertarian or a Constitution party nominee, it's the same thing

61 posted on 02/07/2004 5:18:42 PM PST by MJY1288 (IF JOHN KERRY IS THE ANSWER, IT MUST BE A STUPID QUESTION)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo
Theoretically, one could say that the Republicans could do the same thing, when Kerry will try to appoint his.....
62 posted on 02/07/2004 5:18:43 PM PST by yonif ("If I Forget Thee, O Jerusalem, Let My Right Hand Wither" - Psalms 137:5)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson; yonif
Yep, that's about the results of being "undecided" about whom to vote for, I'd say.
63 posted on 02/07/2004 5:18:54 PM PST by nicmarlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: yonif
Just did a poll in my house and it was a landslide. Bush 100% Kerry 0%. Take that Newsweek.
64 posted on 02/07/2004 5:19:37 PM PST by TonyM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
When America sees what hell is like under a pure Marxist/socialist government, then they'll suddenly wake up, forget everything they learned at universities like Berzerkly, see the light (wow!) and rebel. Yeah, that's the ticket! Viva la revolucion!! Viva Liberte!!

BTT

65 posted on 02/07/2004 5:19:41 PM PST by Neets (I always feel like somebody's watching me.~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: yonif
Remember Florida?
66 posted on 02/07/2004 5:20:22 PM PST by GailA (Millington Rally for America after action http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/872519/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: WhiteGuy
I'll gamble everyone who doesn't say bush, gets suspended.....

How does it feel to be a loser?

67 posted on 02/07/2004 5:21:02 PM PST by Neets (I always feel like somebody's watching me.~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: yonif
What Republican Congress? I wouldn't count on them holding the majority for that long.

Best forget about that nonsense and drive a stake through the Democrat heart while we have a chance. May never have another golden opportunity like this for the remainder of our lives (short all out revolucion, of course. LOL). Yeah, baby, bring it on!!
68 posted on 02/07/2004 5:21:18 PM PST by Jim Robinson (I don't belong to no organized political party. I'm a Republycan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
And if that's not you cup of tea, well, vote for Kerry because this way the country can go to hell right away and we won't have to wait for the Republicans to develop the backbone to dump the NEA.

In general, I am with you, and as I said I will vote for Bush. But let's face it: When there was a Democrat president we came close to eliminating the NEA. Now that there is a Republican president, the budget calls for a massive increase for the NEA. What gives? I am not one of those guys who demands 100% allegiance, but why on Earth would Bush possibly promote increasing the NEA budget? I truly think they have gone nuts over there and have thrown all concepts of right and wrong out the window in order to answer the focuse groups (on domestic issues, anyway).

69 posted on 02/07/2004 5:21:20 PM PST by Rodney King (No, we can't all just get along)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Rodney King
I agree Joe Lieberman is the only one of them running (over now) who has a shread of decency. I don't agree with everything that GWB has been doing but not to vote for him is crazy. You think you don't like things now just wait if Kerry gets in. All of the 'healing' we will do with other nations will be enough to make you sick. Bush it is.
70 posted on 02/07/2004 5:21:38 PM PST by math=power
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Columbine
It's on his campaign site. All you have to do is use Google and go read it. Come back and tell us if you like it better.

I didn't say that. I was quoting someone else.

71 posted on 02/07/2004 5:22:17 PM PST by Rodney King (No, we can't all just get along)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: yonif
Theoretically, one could say that the Republicans could do the same thing, when Kerry will try to appoint his.....

That's in theory....we already know that no Rat president will attempt to appoint ANY conservative judges...so, what you're looking at is ALL liberal judges, but the rabid ones might not get appointed.

72 posted on 02/07/2004 5:22:27 PM PST by nicmarlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: AM2000
We are coming back from a Clinton recession. Tax cuts are just the start. Interest rates are at an all time low. Do you own a home? Did you refinance at a 5% interest rate?

Think about the Reagan years. If we didn't have a dem congress with out of control spending on social programs, imagine what could have been accomplished.

The president isn't solely responsible for spending as many here think. It's a joint effort. Our founding fathers created it so one man could not become dictator. The way many of you think, you want a dictator. Be careful for what you wish for, because if Bush can wave a magic wand and correct the ills of the past, so too could a democrat president.

The Bush administration protected this country from more terrorist attacks after only having been in office 9 months. Do you think a dem (gore) could have done better? We'd be kowtowing to the Islamic radicals as we speak, oh wait, we wouldn't be speaking. We would have lost our ability to post on FR. Don't think the dems wouldn't love to shut FR and others like us down. They're trying their damnedest with Rush.

Bush is cutting taxes to increase the revenues. Also, remember, we have only had 2 years of a republican controlled house and presidency. Check out the 75th congress. We've come a long way, we have a longer road ahead. We can not expect one man to change the course of a nation when so many have been manipulated into thinking the socialist way is the right way.


Growth From Reagan Tax Cuts

Tax cuts do not create federal deficits; greater government spending does. That is the message tax-cut supporters must hammer home, according to political analysts and economists. Otherwise this truth will be drowned out in the media in a deluge of confusion.

Politicians are expected to repeat the mantra, "Reagan tax cuts were responsible for declining revenues and soaring deficits in the 1980s," but no such thing occurred, according to budget analysts.

* Receipts from individual income taxes rose to $446 billion in fiscal 1989 -- President Reagan's last budget -- from $286 billion in fiscal 1981, the year Reagan began to slash personal tax rates -- a 56 percent increase.

* Annualized, tax receipts grew faster than that period's 4 percent inflation.

* During the same period, federal spending rose from $678 billion to $1.143 trillion -- a 69 percent increase.

From 1981 to 1983, personal income tax receipts rose 1 percent -- while spending surged 19 percent. This was during a bad recession. After the recession, the Reagan tax cuts worked and revenues soared.

* From 1984 to 1989, growth in personal tax receipts outstripped growth in spending, 50 percent to 34 percent.

* And the deficit fell from 5 percent of gross domestic product to 2.9 percent.

* After 1989, the deficit ballooned again as revenues dried up following an increase in tax rates.

* From 1989 to 1993, personal tax receipts rose just 14 percent, while spending rose 23 percent

Then there is the evidence of the beneficial economic effects of President Kennedy's tax cuts.

* In 1964, the economy grew by 5.8 percent -- followed by 6.4 percent growth the following two years.

* The increasing tax revenues following from the surging economy led to a balanced budget by 1969 -- the last time that the government was able to balance its books.

But either sloppy thinking or purposeful confusion perpetuates the myth that tax cuts produce higher federal deficits.

Source: Editorial, "The Supply-Side Deficit Myth," Investor's Business Daily; and Donald Lambro, "Unstrung Tax-Cut Lamenters," Washington Times, August 12, 1996.

73 posted on 02/07/2004 5:22:40 PM PST by Indy Pendance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: yonif
Dub.
74 posted on 02/07/2004 5:22:51 PM PST by Killborn (I'd rather have Big Bizniz than Big Guvmint. [ Good ole Dubya. :) ])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rodney King
Most of the new gov't workers were the airport screeners...a RAT idea.
75 posted on 02/07/2004 5:23:00 PM PST by GailA (Millington Rally for America after action http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/872519/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: 34512a
You must have slept through September 11.
76 posted on 02/07/2004 5:23:20 PM PST by buccaneer81 (Rick Nash will score 50 goals this season...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Rodney King
My apologies. I see now that your were replying to someone else.

Let's hope all the pouters see it instead.
77 posted on 02/07/2004 5:24:40 PM PST by Columbine (Bush '04 - Owens '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81
You must have. If Sept 11th taught us anything it is that we need stricter controls on who comes into this country. And it also taught us that blowback is a bitch. Our nation building in Iraq could mean a Sept 11, 2012.
78 posted on 02/07/2004 5:25:27 PM PST by 34512a
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: 34512a
Also, GW had a terrible tie on last month. It clashed-- gotta go Kerry-- here is a good site to check out:
http://www.youdontknowwhoiam.org/youare.swf

79 posted on 02/07/2004 5:25:27 PM PST by Mark (Treason doth never prosper, for if it prosper, NONE DARE CALL IT TREASON.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Rodney King
The problem of the NEA pales in comparison to all else that is going on. The Democrats are maybe one Suprememe Court Justice away from ushering in complete 100% socialism and world government. Give them two and it's all over for America as we know it.

80 posted on 02/07/2004 5:27:16 PM PST by Jim Robinson (I don't belong to no organized political party. I'm a Republycan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 761-775 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson