Of course the GW backstabbing posters on this thread will never post what would happen if their buddy, moi Kerri was elected.
Here is a current thread on FR showing what their butt buddy moi Kerri would do to jobs in the red zones:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1186409/posts
The Rolls-Royce Affair: The candidate isn’t up to speed in Detroit
National Review ^ | July 29, 2004 | Cesar Conda & Trent Wisecup
Posted on 08/06/2004 10:38:52 AM PDT by SunkenCiv
By any objective measure, Senator Kerry is one of the Big Three's most hostile opponents in Washington, D.C. In 2002, he introduced legislation that would have increased corporate average fuel-economy standards (CAFE) from 24 to 36 miles-per-gallon. The Energy Information Administration estimated that Kerry's proposal would have eliminated 450,000 jobs in the United States and resulted in lost economic input of $170 billion. Kerry's CAFE increase would have hit Michigan's economy especially hard because GM, Ford, and Chrysler are more dependent on the profits from low-mileage SUVS, pickups, and minivans (light trucks) than their foreign competitors. This reliance on light trucks is directly tied to the enormous labor costs associated with paying UAW negotiated wages, health benefits, and pensions. Detroit can't cover its labor and legacy costs by selling sedans.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1186409/posts
These third party losers in life would have us not vote for GW and allow their butt buddy moi Kerri to come in and really run our economy.
It is up to them to name one thing moi Kerri would good for our economy.
The first thing he would do is to raise taxes. That would bring the days of Carter back really quick.
I could not possibly agree with you more, in this instance!!!
Keep squashin them there pissants, budy!!!
However, as much as I despise the guy, let's be realistic: the economy to an extent is out of the hands of any Pres or Congress. For ex., I thought Clinton would cause a huge recession. What I did not (nor did anyone else) see was that continued low oil prices would help fuel a boom; that the opening of Eastern Europe (thank you RR) would open a vast new market for U.S. goods; and that the continued impact of computers in driving down prices would OFFSET the (relatively minor) Clinton tax hikes.
Grandpa, grow up. Who said I or any of the others are GW backstabbers. Sticking your head in the sand and believing your own rhetoric isnt going to get Bush elected. He's got to deal with the real world. Saying its all a media conspiracy and the Dems fault isnt going to get Bush elected. He's got your vote and he's got mine. We have to convince the squishy independents.
And after all the problems with WMD and Ridges faultering PR efforts this past week at Homeland Security, do you really believe that Bush still has the credibility to redefinine employment gains to his favor? Dont look at that man behind the curtain, look at my new definition of employment. Its not the one we traditionally use but its new and oh by the way it does show my efforts in a better light.