Skip to comments.
Fred Barnes: Contemplating the L-word
The Weekly Standard ^
| 06/27/03
| Fred Barnes
Posted on 06/27/2003 9:09:40 PM PDT by Pokey78
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-27 next last
1
posted on
06/27/2003 9:09:41 PM PDT
by
Pokey78
To: Howlin; JohnHuang2; Sabertooth; Miss Marple; terilyn; lainde; KeyWest; MeeknMing; ...
Fred ping.
2
posted on
06/27/2003 9:10:57 PM PDT
by
Pokey78
To: Pokey78
We must not become over-confident! Remember all the projections in 2000 that showed Bush ahead....then we had a cliffhanger.
We must all work hard to insure another 4 years for GWB & a greater GOP majority in the House & especially the Senate!
3
posted on
06/27/2003 9:14:26 PM PDT
by
JulieRNR21
(Take W-04........Across America!)
To: Pokey78
To: Pokey78
One can imagine a Democratic ticket--Lieberman-Graham perhaps--that would be competitive Only one can imagine it... and his name is Fred. Unfortunately that thought makes the rest of the article tripe. Bush will fight till the votes are cast, counted, and recounted 8 times if necessary
5
posted on
06/27/2003 9:22:50 PM PDT
by
kylaka
To: Pokey78
It's way too early to be talking about a landslide. People need to remember what happened in 1992 and make sure it never happens again. If any of the 9 dwarfs were to be elected in 2004 it would spell disaster for this country. The democrats can not be trusted with our national security and we must defeat these terrorist, democrats will pass the buck to the U.N. and we all know what that will mean
6
posted on
06/27/2003 9:29:52 PM PDT
by
MJY1288
(The Gifted One is Clueless)
To: Pokey78
"
But you have to like Bush's chances a lot better than any Democrat's at the moment."Yeah, fearless Freddie, but you gotta never forget that 43 percent of the voting public will vote for the democRAT no matter if his name is Adolph Hitler!
To: nightdriver
What should be done with or to that 43 percent?
8
posted on
06/27/2003 9:36:41 PM PDT
by
verity
To: hole_n_one
I caught that earlier tonight and couldn't for the life of me why Fred Barnes would say such a thing. No matter if you liked Nancy Reagan or not, you had to appreciate her love and devotion for her Ronnie.
To be perfectly honest, I didn't care for Nancy much myself, the stories from Ronald Reagan's own staff was enough to make my hair stand on end. But I totally respect her for the way she cared for her husband. I believe Nancy understood that the only person that mattered to her was Ronnie and everyone else could go pound sand. Much like Dubya, Ronnie has a wife that loves him.
9
posted on
06/27/2003 9:36:57 PM PDT
by
MJY1288
(The Gifted One is Clueless)
To: Pokey78; RJayneJ; Lazamataz; Nick Danger; Howlin; Dog Gone; blam; Liz
I would add something else: the Democrats'/Leftists/Big Media's claims about Bush haven't panned out.
Bush didn't turn out to be a drunkard or a coke addict in office. He didn't turn out to be a neophyte at handling foreign affairs. He didn't turn out to be dumb or to stumble in front of political dignataries. He didn't turn out to so "divide" the nation that Washington was held up in some kind of "do-nothing" gridlock, either.
The War in Iraq turned out to NOT be about oil or Haliburton. There was no "quagmire".
China didn't try to start up a nuclear arms race to compete with our ABM system after Bush killed the U.S. - CCCP ABM treaty, as predicted by countless pundits.
Contrary to the wild-eyed claims of the eco-nazis, killing the Kyoto Treaty didn't cause the sea level to rise 18 feet. In fact, 2003 just witnessed the *coldest* recorded Spring in American history.
So you can take all of those failed claims off the table for the 2004 election. Oh sure, a few of the extremists will rehash those failed lines anyway, but they are assured to get no traction from the mainstream public from them now that they have been so discredited.
Moreover, there's no super-secret "scandal" waiting in the wings to be sprung onto Bush's campaign at the 11th hour. The old drunk-driving arrest simply won't replay in 2004.
...And the Democrats couldn't beat Bush back in 2000 when they had a great economy, a great fundraiser, near-total control of the media, as well as all of the above lies and "scandals" with which to attack Bush. In fact, Bush wasn't even a household name in most of America prior to 1999.
None of that applies to today, however.
So not only are the Democrats short on the above ammo, and not only is Bush in a stronger position, but the Democrats have so-far managed to only field a crowd of 9 nobodies to run against Bush.
At best those 9 candidates are mere placeholders. Possibly, just possibly, and due only to his wife's money, Kerry could get tagged for the VP candidacy by Gore.
You haven't forgotten about Gore, have you? Unless Kerry can convince Gore to run and win the governship this year in California, Gore is going to jump back into the Presidential race and "shock" the nation with his timing (likely *after* the Presidential debates so that he won't have to be embarassed by Bush again). Then Gore gets to select from Kerry, Hillary, or Dean for his choice as his VP candidate.
No matter. Gore "shocking" the nation by jumping back into the Presidential race will only be good for two NY Times and Washington Post editorials, plus a couple of TV interviews. Ok, OK, Gore will save the Dems from a 47 to 3 state rout at the hands of Bush/Cheney/Rove. Who knows, Gore might be able to do as well as lose by only 38 states, taking some of the pain away from the Dems losing as many as 6, yes up to six Senate seats in 2004.
You heard it here first.
10
posted on
06/27/2003 9:40:37 PM PDT
by
Southack
(Media bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
To: verity
"
What should be done with or to that 43 percent?"I dunno. What can anyone do with or to some 50 million people? Move away from them?
To: Southack
Great Post :-), Al Gore will stay away from this bloodbath, I guarantee you.
12
posted on
06/27/2003 9:48:17 PM PDT
by
MJY1288
(The Gifted One is Clueless)
To: JulieRNR21
We must all work hard to insure another 4 years for GWB & a greater GOP majority in the House & especially the Senate! Absolutely! Amen
To: Southack
I agree that the Dems will lose up to 6 seats, But I think the house is where the major damage for the Dems will occur. The party line votes in the house will hurt the dems IMHO. The 47 State win for GWB is quite possible, but if the economy keeps improving, unemployment decreases and Saddam and OBL are either captured or killed before Nov. 2004, I predict the dems might win Hawaii if the're lucky
14
posted on
06/27/2003 9:52:30 PM PDT
by
MJY1288
(The Gifted One is Clueless)
To: Pokey78
The biggest event now and in the future is Discredited Media the collapse of their propaganda machinery. The Democratic Crime Syndicate is history.
15
posted on
06/27/2003 9:58:02 PM PDT
by
PGalt
To: Pokey78
The best indicator, the stock market, has soared 20 percent since March. Ugh. The stock market was inflated by a bubble starting around 1995. It did not accurately indicate what the economy was going to do. The correction of the bubble and overinvestment was the main cause of the recent recession, not an indicator for it. The current mini-bubble will deflate even as the economy improves.
16
posted on
06/27/2003 10:05:28 PM PDT
by
palmer
(q)
To: Southack
Unless Kerry can convince Gore to run and win the governship this year in California, Gore is going to jump back into the Presidential race.......Did you fall and hit your head today?
To: Pokey78
L word... I thought you meant Loser or Liberal.
oh LANDSLIDE!
18
posted on
06/27/2003 10:13:24 PM PDT
by
buffyt
(Can you say President Hillary, the Hildabeast, Mistress of ALL Darkness? Me Neither!!!!!!!!!!!!!)
To: verity
Purges??
19
posted on
06/27/2003 10:15:53 PM PDT
by
wardaddy
(DIVERSITY IS BEST SERVED EARNED)
To: palmer
The bubble was in tech stocks and the dot.com bust sorted that one out. Since then, 9/11 has done the world wide economy serious harm.
Not to despair, the war on terrorism is going as well as could be hoped for and there will be a recovery.
Now, if I just had the gumption to move all of my 401K $ to aggressive growth funds. Still on the sidelines and smarting since March 2000.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-27 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson