Twenty-one Reasons Why Bush Will Win

ElectionProjection.com ^ | 2/7/04 | Scott Elliot

[LowCountryJoe]

I see Kerry's long face just above Hanoi Jane. Look at her adorning look, "impart on us additional wisdom, Mr. Jones!" just before the koolaid and cookies.

Hey, is that Springsteen to the left?

[reformedliberal]

Tell us how Kerry will bring back any jobs?

Exactly what actions by GWB led to these people losing their jobs?

If the answer is that Kerry has no answer and that it wasn't the fault of the POTUS that the jobs went overseas, what factors will influence these people voting against Bush besides job loses? Can you explain how these are former GOP votes that have been lost?

[Iron Matron]

It's ok for the govt to provide legal guidelines for how corporations operate

Absolutely! But not "where they can operate" (excluding Cuba perhaps)am I right?

[NYC Republican]

Excellent points.

[1stFreedom]

Sure -- anything is game. You have to understand that the power of a corporation is derived from the government which recognizes it.

Ultimately, the government has every right to regulate a business. A corporate entity, while founded by entreprenuers, is a creation of the State and subject to it's regulations.

[Remole]

Thanks for the list--great work.. so let's see:

Positive indicators for Bush: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11.

Negative indicators against Bush: None that are obvious.

Kerry and the Dem machine will harp on nos. 9, 10 and 13: War in Iraq is a continuing failure (10) on account of deliberate misleading of the public (9); Kerry is a war hero (13).

[x]

Good article that provides a look at the electoral arithmetic that most armchair theorists ignore.

NYC, you make a good case, but it's too early to say whether some of your keys could work for President Bush. A lot can happen on the international scene, and an election-year recovery didn't help the President's father in 1992. Charisma is also tough to judge: few thought Bush charismatic in 2000.

The impression Elliot makes isn't the most reassuring, though. George Bush looks more than a little like Richard Nixon -- a president who can win reelection because of international tensions and the weaknesses of his opponent, but who doesn't change the terms of domestic policy debates very much -- more of a status quo man than anything else, in spite of the administration's real departures in foreign policy.

[LowCountryJoe]

1stFreedom,

I get so tired of this "outsourcing" rhetoric and how we need to protect the manufacturing or whatever industry. Then you protectionists call the free traders, "free traitors" and "closet socialists".

Question: Is the Heritage Foundation conservative enough for you?

If you answered "yes", go to their areas on trade policies and brush up on the benefits of trade and "outsourcing".

If you answered "no", then go set up the "Buchananite Republic" where you people can post away!

[jstolarczyk]

>>Point of Fact, workers i.e. you and I are commodities.

Thats your first mistake. Humans are not commodities. Commodities are used, abuse, and destroyed. Do you think any corporation can kill (destroy) someone? By your reasoning, they can, just like a lab rat which has outlived it's usefulness.

Regardless of what you think of yourself and your opinions, you (and I) are not on the same level as Thomas Sowell or Walter Williams when it comes to Economics. They have both described workers as commodities. Stop taking a philosophical view, you can be laid off at any point because it is no longer financially viable to keep you. Farm subsidizes go way beyond your description. You need to wake up. They are not subsidizing tobacco so I can have cigars (which I like). Look at the farm bill! So you are on record in favor of the Government forcing companies to not lay you off. Didn't work real well in Communist China, they have since backed off from that rule, failed in the USSR and in Socialist India. It cost the governments too much (read: your tax dollars) You should read "Applied Economics" by Thomas Sowell.

[reformedliberal]

Tancredo is supporting the POTUS. GWB has signaled by his own proposals and directly stated that he will sign a guest worker provision that is close to Tancredo's and which can get thru Congress.

I have read tons of angry posts and articles concerning the President's immigration proposals. This is not an amnesty. GWB has specifically stated this is not an amnesty and the Dems are promising an amnesty and open borders.

We do not have the ability to militarily close the borders. We cannot go on a roundup and deport millions of people via plane, train or van...the political fallout would be horrendous and much worse politically than 10% of Republicans protesting.

Can you detail for those of us who cannot follow the logic just how many Americans are desirous of working in meat packing or chicken processing plants, fruit orchards, vegetable fields,as day labor on construction sites, as janitorial workers or under the table cleaners and landscapers who cannot get into these positions specifically because of illegals? I'll accept anecdote, if I can check them out, so include name of the town, name of the plant, name of the contractor/or description of the construction job so we can check this out & forward to the Department of Labor.

Every individual worker who has been denied employment due to illegal hiring needs to document the situation as extensively as possible and forward it to every talk show host in America. Savage would be happy to have these folks on the show. So would G Gordon. Again, these complaints need to be specific.

I will add that my nearby town (SW WI) refused a chicken processor who offered to pay for a complete upgrade of the sewer/water system just on the grounds that did not want an illegal magnet here. This was done by lobbying the town council, who wanted desperately to get the sewer upgrade and threatened (and implemented) higher taxes/water fees to do just that. This town is overwhelmingly Democrat.

I fail to see how refusing to vote or voting 3rd party sends any message to the GOP except that some people are unappeasable.

[LowCountryJoe]

Bad link. Try this one: http://www.heritage.org/Research/TradeandForeignAid/index.cfm

[ambrose]

bump for later

[jstolarczyk]

The venom will carry over for years on both sides. I can no longer listen to Alan Colmes or others because I despise them. I use to enjoy the give and take, no longer. Take heart, the Electoral College decides not popular vote. This election will be a state by state battle for electoral votes. Kerry may win NY, but republicans there need to force him to spend money there.

[reformedliberal]

I am free. I will vote straight ticket Republican. I was not as free under Clinton. I will be less free under any Democrat. I will be sold out by any 3rd party because they cannot win and so will just siphon votes away from my candidates or, if by a miracle, they win in 20-30 years, I will be too old/dead and not able to enjoy the hypothetical freedom they offer.

The freedom offered by the hypothetical future 3rd party is as illusory as the preference for a generic Democrat in the snapshot polls. It is a blank frame w/a projection of perfection contained within, not a reality.

Here are a few of the blessings I enjoy under the present Administration, compared to the available alternatives:

I pay less tax.
I control more of my own property.
I have fewer restrictions of gun ownership.
My President is dedicated to my country's defense.
America is still a sovereign nation.
America's economy is better than any other in the world.
America's military is superior to any other in the world.
America's healthcare system is better than any other in the world.

There are more, but I have other things to do at the moment.

[reformedliberal]

Then point out to them that the Republicans have taken a great risk in this timing as several states will have to pass exemptions in order to get GWB on the ballot, as their constitutions demand this be done in August.

If not for the former occupant of the WH, there would have not been a 911 attack of which to take advantage.

Also ask them if they would prefer that NYC lose the revenue gained from the Republican Convention?

Nothing about any Republican and especially about GWB will make these people happy. Nothing at all. So why worry about them?

[reformedliberal]

They are not.

Kerry-2%
Libertarian-3%
Constitution Party-6%
Sit Out-2%
Undecided-4%

2+3+6+2+4= 17%

Subtract the Libertarians who had no intention of ever voting for GWB or any Republican=14%

Subtract the undecideds, as they can change their minds=10%

The Kerry votes I will leave in, but they are 2% and most likely represent the Dem trolls on FR, effectively leaving 8%. 6% of those are Constitution Party and a portion of those were Buchanan or Keyes supporters in 2000. The Keyes supporters have to factor in GWB's stance on abortion and the fact that Dr Keyes is supporting the POTUS.

I will bet that after the election, it will turn out that 5%
were base supporters who are having a tantrum over some single issue or other. Of that 5%, it is my personal opinion that at least half have been punked by single issue hijackings on single issue boards.

[NYC Republican]

Sean Hannity is on the warpath... GOOD for him! He's saying the gloves must come off, and the GOP MUST fight back. So obvious to everyone, except Rove, Bush, and Cheney!

[NYC Republican]

the Clintons will sink the 'not too Swift Boat commander" Kerry

I can't believe how many of our fellow FReepers actually buy into this theory... There's NO way the Clintons would prefer that Kerry loses, just to satisfy Hillary's blind ambition... They wouldn't risk another 4 years of GOP power for the POSSIBILITY that Hillary may win in 4 years.

[reformedliberal]

More military personnel will be home than will be deployed, from what I can tell. Military pesonnel have GWB to thank for increased pay and benefits. The military will do all they can to not go thru the *invalid/no postmark* agony this time around.

[Havoc]

Right. You just keep believing that. Remember a term: "Reagan Democrats"