[Anitius Severinus Boethius]

I'm sure this makes me a Bushbot. But if you didn't vote for Bush last time, he didn't "betray" you. And if you have already decided you aren't going to vote for him this time, why should he try to get your vote?

There are plenty of undecideds out there, that's where the focus should be.

[cyborg]

I'm voting for him.

[KarlInOhio]

Those who ... read the Congressional Record highlighting every "UnConstitutional" act or statement are not the target for his "securing the base" step.

I usually find it helpful to just keep a bucket of yellow ink to drop each new copy of the Congressional Record in.

[theFIRMbss]

>I'm sure this makes me a Bushbot

If you looked like this, then people would say you looked like a bush baby . . .

[Servant of the 9]

Those who would close our borders completely, who worry about the price of Gold in Botswana, or read the Congressional Record highlighting every "UnConstitutional" act or statement are not the target for his "securing the base" step.

That is because there aren't enough of them to fill a football Stadium, much less a Political Party.

So9

[Publius]

MOst of his base are belong to us.

[Always Right]

Unfortunately, both parties are controlled by the polls and both are afraid to wonder too far away. Republicans do offer an slight advantage on taxes, regulations, and a larger advantage on foreign policy. The real power in government though lies in the judicial branch, where once in position judges are unaccountable to anyone and can usurp any law they wish. Now if the GOP only had the backbone to fight as hard as the Democrats do in this area, they might be worth their salt.

[ladtx]

Hmmmm. Let's see. Bush-Kerry-Bush-Kerry-Bush-Kerry. Easy, unless I'm a flaming liberal it's Bush.

Next question?

[spookycc]

I thought I was a Bushbot until he proposed the immigration plan. I oppose that, but I still think he's the best bet we have in 2004.

[kevkrom]

For all practical purposes, we have a two-party system in the United States, regardless of the claims from the minor party supporters. There is too large of a base of those who are party loyalists for a mnor party to do anything but be a spoiler. I won't go as far as saying that not voting for candidate "A" means the same as voting for candidate "B" -- that's actually provably false -- but instead, those who choose to vote for neither candidate "A" nor candidate "B" are in effect removing themselves from the process. They are not, as they like to think, "sending a message" or "holding them accountable". Instead, they are marginalizing themselves as easily dimissed "kooks".

[Joe Hadenuf]

As we head into this election, Bush has to do a few things to become re-elected.

First, he must secure his base.

Wonder if Washington ever had to secure his base?

[cripplecreek]

I did'nt vote for him last time, but i will this time.

[MrB]

I'm not so much voting for Bush

as I am voting to keep ANY DemocRat out of power.

[Lance Romance]

Moby, is that you?

[PhiKapMom]

But if you didn't vote for Bush last time, he didn't "betray" you. And if you have already decided you aren't going to vote for him this time, why should he try to get your vote?

Outstanding post!

The funniest thing to me after I found my list of anti-Bush people from 2000 a few weeks ago is to see them post that he lost their vote. You cannot lose something you never had.

Been supporting Pres Bush since he ran in 1994 and am still part of his base! If that is a Bushbot count me in as a charter member.

[livius]

Just shows the Dems are smarter than we are. Deanie baby, who's at the extreme edge of their party, urged extreme left Dems not to vote 3rd party, because every vote is needed to get even a moderate leftist - er, Dem - into office.

We have to remember this, too. The extreme right of the GOP - or even those on the right with no party membership - have to avoid being swayed by seductive visions of a 3rd party triumph (which ain't gonna happen) or of "showing the GOP," which essentially means cutting off their nose to spite their face.

So some folks on Free Republic may be making a might effort (probably Dem agitators) to get conservatives to go off and throw their votes away, but - sorry, no cigar.

[Judith Anne]

President Bush has my vote.

[Docbarleypop]

Too bad my vote for him probally didnt count last time since i absenteed in florida while stationed overseas, this time i will pull the knob myself!

[Jackson Brown]

There is plenty that Bush and the republicans have done to pi$$ me off. (The same can be said with Reagan, at that time).

HOWEVER, we are faced with a real and IMMINENT danger to the country. The the choice of a flawed Bush or the cancer that is the democratic party is what we have...period!!!

If we had a parliamentary system, where multiple parties can hold power, then I might be sympathetic to the idea of supporting a third party...but that is NOT the case.

ANY vote by conservatives for anyone but Bush is a vote FOR the most left wing element in our country to take the White house!

It's a plain and undeniable FACT.

Make noise now to get the Republican's attention...I'm all for that.

However, when it comes time to vote in November...it's BUSH or KERRY...period!

[Truth29]

I voted for Bush in 2000 and was a significant supporter (2K), but unless he does something more effective about controlling illegal alien immigration and not proposing amnesty, there won't be a country to lead. His efforts have been worse than ineffective; they have actually motivated more illegal immigration.

[k2blader]

I voted for President Bush in 2000.

But his stupid stupid stupid amnesty for illegals proposal put me in the ranks of the undecided.

However, if he supports a constitutional amendment to protect marriage as being that between one man and one woman, he's got my vote for sure.