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

Skip to comments.

The President’s Re-election Prospects Have Nearly Disappeared
Varied Internet sources, via Google ^ | 9/25/03 | Coop

Posted on 09/25/2003 6:59:03 AM PDT by Coop

Why?

-We’re engaged in a long-term war against an enigmatic enemy, with no end in sight

-American military members are suffering and dying at the hands of terrorists on foreign soil

-The media makes a concerted effort to only portray the President in a negative light

-The President’s job approval numbers are well under 60%, with just over a year left until the election

-The President scores well under 50% on polls asking if he should be re-elected

-The economy is struggling to emerge from a recent recession

-Defense spending is way up

-Budget deficits are a serious concern

-National unemployment is over 6%

-The Democrats have assembled a formidable, diverse group of contenders that criticize the President constantly, including one quote: "If [our soldiers] were sent there to fight, they are too few. If they were sent there to die, they are too many."


TOPICS: Editorial; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: president; reelection
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160161-167 last
To: Coop
"Bush would have been re-elected in 1983? That would have been a neat trick, for father or son."

You're right. Meant Reagan. Was thinking Bush.

161 posted on 09/29/2003 10:55:54 AM PDT by MEGoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
Getting really sick and tired of seeing old sign up dates with new screen names

Whaaaa!!! Sniff Sniff... Mr. Modewator...sniff...sniff...That bad man is using a name I haven't seen before, and he's criticizing George Bush whaaaa!!!! How pathetic. I've always had the same screen name since the first day I signed up. Go sell crazy somewhere else. We're all stocked up here... Just my two cents, too.

162 posted on 09/29/2003 12:41:12 PM PDT by Orbiting_Rosie's_Head
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: MEGoody
So you'd classify Bush as a RINO. Well, get ready, because if you and those like you cause Bush to lose, you keep your principles, but you'll pay out even more in taxes for an even bigger Medicare prescription benefit.

Oh, so then you are admitting Bush is guilty of the same egregious socialist agenda, it's just a matter of scale. How easy it must be to not have any principles, or ones that are easily bought by offering a softened incremental version of socialism rather than full-bore pinkoville. If George W. Bush loses, it will be because of George W. Bush and the robots that support him no matter what he does, not because of people like me.

163 posted on 09/29/2003 12:55:19 PM PDT by Orbiting_Rosie's_Head
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: Dane
Wow, eight months into office. While for 8 years his democratic predecessor(Clinton) refused 3 times to take the mastermind of 9/11(osama bin ladin) into American custody when he was going to be handed over by Sudan.

What? I've got no argument with that. I don't think you've been following the thread. I got no problem with GWB's war on terror, nor do I lay even the slightest bit of blame at his feet for 9/11, which was completely a Klintoon debacle. We were discussing what the response would have been from the Great Ronaldus Maximus had he been in office during 9/11.

164 posted on 09/29/2003 1:05:37 PM PDT by Orbiting_Rosie's_Head
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: Stallone
#149 Finally somebody gets it. We don't want W out, we want him to grow a darned spine and stop selling out. He'll never do it as long as everyone keeps acting like BBFMs® (BushBot Flying Monkeys)
165 posted on 09/29/2003 1:09:59 PM PDT by Orbiting_Rosie's_Head
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]

To: Orbiting_Rosie's_Head
"Oh, so then you are admitting Bush is guilty of the same egregious socialist agenda, it's just a matter of scale."

LOL I never called Bush's agenda "egregious socialist,' but you can if you want to.

The issue is, not one person in the United States is ever going to be completely satisfied with everything that the current President does. Come election time, we just each choose the lesser of the evils as it were.

Personally, I like a lot of the things Bush has done. Not everything. But come 2004, I will be voting for him again over the Democrat.

So far, Libertarians and Constitution Party loyalists haven't been able to present me with better, more viable options. I wait with baited breath. :)

166 posted on 09/29/2003 2:20:17 PM PDT by MEGoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: MEGoody
There are some on here who think Reagan wasn't conservative enough to vote for.

Yeah, and that's pretty scary. Lots of folks who think he was too much of a moralist, too.

167 posted on 09/29/2003 3:01:35 PM PDT by Mr. Silverback (Free Republic--Heartland Values, Think Tank Intellect.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160161-167 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