Bush Extremely Strong With Base (06/01/2002)

ap via newsday ^ | 5/31/2002 | Will Lester

[TLBSHOW]

WASHINGTON -- Occasional grumbling by some prominent conservatives about President Bush sometimes overshadows his extremely solid support among stalwart Republicans and conservatives around the country.

Many Republicans and Democrats seem to agree that support by itself does not tilt the 2002 elections toward the GOP. Some, however, say it could offset the gains the party out of the White House -- Democrats, in this case -- historically has made in midterm elections.

[Texasforever]

Let the rest of the world make their own bed. The rest of us will watch how well you've done. We have no one to vote for right now. I'm not pouting. I'm being realistic.

So NO ONE is worthy you and your church's support? It seems to me that you take the apocalyptic view of the future. Your name appears to be changed. You are not "concerned" you have just given up.

[Tuor]

Ouch. I guess not. Nevermind then. Since I don't support Bush, I guess I'm not his base by definition, eh?

Tuor

[jimtorr]

his ties to the criminals at Enron

No, no, that was last month's script. It's already been conclusively shown that that dog won't hunt. Name one thing that GW has done for his so-called budies at Enron since becoming President.

[Sabertooth]

I was disappointed on CFR as well. I thought he would veto it.

However, I have thought about this a lot. If he had vetoed, I think there is a good chance it would have been overridden, given the climate with Enron and the timidity of many of the Senate Republicans, who cannot bear to have the media fussing at them.

Well, since we seem to agree that cowardice among Senate Republicans is a problem in our party, who better to lead the counteroffensive than a war-time President at over 80% (at the time) in the polls?

Do you really think he wouldn't have gotten 34 votes?

[Tuor]

But *no one* expects the Spanish Inquisition!

Tuor

[Howlin]

OK, so he'll have to do without the three of you.

I can name ten people right off the top of my head who will more than make up for that -- ahem -- "loss."

[WRhine]

Well, he wont get my vote come 2004. His wanting to amnesty millions of Mexican Invaders was the final straw for me. Not to mention his support for racist "affirmative action". Not to mention his support for welfare for noncitizens.

Big Time Bump. If this president continues to pursue his insane open borders, near unlimited 3rd World immigration policies against the backdrop of Islamic terrorism that has now reached our shores he can count my family out for 2004 and as many people I can convince between now and then. All Bush is offering vs. the democrats is a slower death for America, as we knew it.

[Texasforever]

wish we could reincarnate Washington, or Teddy Roosevelt, or Reagan. I think we need better men than what is currently available.

LOL All of those men had the same things said about them that you are saying about Bush. There is nothing more seductive than a myth. As to PJB given your libertarian tendencies you would really be cussing him if he were ever elected.

[RickyJ]

Tom Tancredo and Bob Barr would be good choices.

[Texasforever]

Who do you believe is the best man for the job?

[TLBSHOW]

IMO

Sure they did! What planet are you coming from?

[Texasforever]

Tom Tancredo and Bob Barr would be good choices.

Why?

[concerned about politics]

We have the choice ( of the very few left) to choose not to vote unless there's a deceint canidate to speak on our behalf. So far, there is none.
After all, there's a "separation of church and state", so we'll keep it that way for awhile until that changes. We'll give them what they want.

[deport]

Now Howlin, let concerned be concerned about politics as that seems his/her appointed job at the moment. I suspect they are planning to get involved at the local level and get things rolling be getting the best candidate elected from dog catcher on up to US Senator. That way we can begin to implement change for the lowly mongrel all the way to the elite of Washington. I can see the peanut brittle sales being organized right now.

[concerned about politics]

Your name appears to be changed. You are not "concerned" you have just given up.

No. Just waiting for a good canidate.

[Miss Marple]

I think it quite likely. My own Senator, Lugar, voted for it, despite a heavy call in organized by central Indiana talk radio. The Indianapolis paper was really pushing it, as was local television and the networks.

It isn't that most of the general public cared about it one way or the other; it is the MEDIA that they are afraid of. That is a hard nut to crack.

The thing is, I think he realizes he can only make so many stands and the big one, war with Iraq, is comming. The dems are going to be dragged kicking and screaming to vote on that, and he needs all his capital for that battle.

He might have been able to veto and get it held, but I think the cost was too high....lookung at what else is coming.

My opinion only, of course. Unlike many here, I do not KNOW what the President is thinking.

[Texasforever]

After all, there's a "separation of church and state", so we'll keep it that way for awhile until that changes.

And you believe that will change with liberals in control?

[Howlin]

Oh, I know.....you're much rather have a Neo-Nazi in the Oval Office, slashing and burning, deporting, denying, delaying, race baiting, all that.

[Texasforever]

No. Just waiting for a good canidate.

You are very passive aren't you?

[WRhine]

I can name ten people right off the top of my head who will more than make up for that -- ahem -- "loss."

You are a bridge burning fool but I suspect not all that different than the court jesters that run the RNC. I guess memories really are short in politics. 1992 seems like a forgotten lesson of what happens to RINOs when they burn their conservative base repeatedly. GUESS WHAT? We Stay Home On Election Day.