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.
Clinton basically sold this country out with the Red Chinese being given free access to our nuclear weapon technology. Now Bush is allowing these same Reds guidance system technology, insisting that the PRC have easy access to anything and everything they want, so that Boeing can build airplanes in Red China.
Ultimately, what the hell's the difference? It is beyond belief that people here think that Bush is a conservative.
We are being gutted, and the GOP enthusiastically supports this disembowelment. Why can't the present President be placed under the same scrutiny that his predecessor was.
The mind boggles. He sold out our country. If Bush is our savior then we are absolutely, positively, doomed.
I think you need to rethink your view on tax cuts! You think like a democrat.
Even if you do, for that matter.
Do you seriously believe that the RATs will gain a greater-than-60-seat majority in the Senate even under the worst of outcomes?
Sounds like a bit of a stretch to me. Please avoid hyperbole, it doesn't contribute to the debate.
Now, as to that sixty seat business -- we've had drummed into us incessantly the idea that so long as the GOP doesn't have more than 60 seats, the party is hamstrung, blocked, neutered, etc., and styied in all efforts to get anything done.
So explain to me why that reality would not also apply if the tables were turned?
Not necessarily, unless you actually believe that there are zero people who would not vote under any circumstances for either of the two front runners.
If you accept that there are voters who won't vote for one of those two candidates, than if those people vote for "any other person", they're certainly not dwindling the number of votes for either of the front runners.
To: yonif
If you're undecided about voting for Bush, then it's a vote for the democrats...obviously, no third party will win. So no vote for Bush IS a vote for the Rats.
you'd see my initial comment was addressed to yonif. Then, if you'd connect the dots, you'd have a "grasp" of what I was discussing, i.e., voting against Bush, voting for Kerry, voting for a third party, ratios, you'd see I was discussing proportions and protest votes against Bush, etc. Nowhere did I intimate that anybody who was devoutly against Bush, or Kerry, to begin with, would effect any ratios....that came out of thin air with your post.
I'm married to one.
The teachers teach the test and little more. The entire year is spent being able to parrot a bunch of memorized answers sufficient so that the teacher and the school system can still get their grants and subsidies.
It's worse than that. I've even heard of kids being shown the answers to the test immediately prior to "taking" the test, with the teacher (no, not my wife!) going over the anwers one by one to make sure they know what they're to remember.
"No Child Left Behind" is a travesty -- a sick joke.
You can crack snide comments about it, but the reality is that there are significant numbers of "the base" who are very disappointed in Bush2/1.0
Some of them say they'll hold their noses and vote for him anyway. Some say they won't vote for him. Some tell us that they are undecided. Others (including myself) are of the belief that the secret ballot is a critical foundational element of any free society, and refuse to say how, or even if they will vote.
In all fairness, that scumbag lying POS LBJ (hey, where are all the "If he's from Texas, you know he's good!" people when you mention that name?), he didn't start the Vietnam war, although he certainly did turn it into the most profitable meatgrinder in history.
LOL!
That makes two of us.
That's what I don't understand.
Why is it that it doesn't ever matter "how many GOP'ers we [have]" in Congress?
No matter which way the deck is stacked, we always lose. Why?
I see people saying that the GOP is stymied in Congress because we don't have a greater than 60 seat majority in the Senate, yet, we're also told that if the RATs get that same slim majority, we'll still be stymied.
Either there's something really tricky written into the rules, or our guys need to grow a set, and pronto!
Well, you see, that's the funny thing. I don't think Israel would have any problem at all taking care of its own backyard. The thing is, it's the USA that gets bent out of shape about it, insisting that they don't handle things on their own, that they let us handle things for them, our way.
So you might want to think that one through a bit more carefully next time. I mean, do you really want Israel to clean up its own neighborhood, the way it sees fit to do?
Remember, you can't have it both ways. You can't demand that they do things our way, and at the same time tell 'em they're on their own.
Why should I? After all, I don't care about it.
But since you obviously do, you have my permission to initiate such a poll on your own.
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.