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

Skip to comments.

A Bush Hater's Poll
Jim Robinson

Posted on 07/10/2002 11:27:06 PM PDT by Jim Robinson

This is an unofficial quick and dirty presidential poll. Apparently, there is a good sized contingent on Free Republic that believes that President Bush is:

  1. Not conservative enough
  2. Not pro-life
  3. Is a gun-grabber
  4. Is a federal power-grabber
  5. Will appoint liberal judges
  6. Is a globalist
  7. Is in it just for oil
  8. Is too soft on immigration
  9. Is too soft (or too hard) on Israel
  10. Is a crook
  11. All of the above
  12. None of the above
  13. Other (you name it)

Please list the numbers that best match the reasons you don't like Bush (or state other reasons if not on the list) and state whether you believe that President Bush should be defeated even if it means installing a Democrat in the Whitehouse.

Conversely, if you believe President Bush should be re-elected, please state why.

Please state who you would like to see win the Presidency in 2004 and whether or not you believe he/she has a chance of winning.

Thanks,
Jim


TOPICS: Breaking News; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 421-440441-460461-480 ... 1,421-1,426 next last
To: Jim Robinson
I feel Bush is way too left leaning on national policies. I'd like to see action on morality rather than just words. Words are good, but eliminating, rather than funding, for left wing groups would be much better.
I'd certainly not like to see a Democrat in the White House, and will vote my conscience when the time comes. I know I'll vote right wing, anyway.
I've never been a very good sheeple.
441 posted on 07/11/2002 7:53:24 AM PDT by concerned about politics
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
8,13 .... too soft and chummy with the liberals BUT he is better than the alternatives
442 posted on 07/11/2002 7:58:56 AM PDT by clamper1797
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Types_with_Fist
Extra. Is average phony on his Christianity...

Be careful.

443 posted on 07/11/2002 8:00:37 AM PDT by rdb3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
#8.
444 posted on 07/11/2002 8:01:33 AM PDT by occam's chainsaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #445 Removed by Moderator

To: RLK
What desperately needs to be done is cull the entire country over for leadership and form a third party.

In other words, just reinvent the wheel.

446 posted on 07/11/2002 8:04:47 AM PDT by rdb3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: Amelia
After the dumb questions you kept asking it was apparent that it was you that didn't read the article. So I feel forced to post the highlights.

Bush's policy barred the use of federal grants for research on stem cells taken from embryos after Aug. 9, 2001. Bush said the decision was based on his moral opposition to destroying additional embryos for research purposes. But that restriction does not apply to research on stem cells obtained from fetuses, according to officials at the National Institutes of Health. Such work falls under less-restrictive Clinton-era rules, which Bush never revised.

Here's a good one.

"Some opponents of abortion say Bush should have tried to stop all funding of work using embryos and fetuses. Bush signaled his position in 2000, responding to a candidate questionnaire from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. "I oppose using federal funds to perform fetal tissue research from induced abortions," he wrote. Some conservatives expect him to honor that".

He could have banned funding, he didn't. He's a Harvard man he knew the research would not confine itself to existing lines when he ok'ed funding. As far as his being "unaware" here is more.

"In another rare step for a relatively small grant application, NIH officials notified the White House staff when Gearhart's proposal was approved, said administration spokesman Scott McClellan."

Have a nice day.=o)

447 posted on 07/11/2002 8:05:15 AM PDT by MissAmericanPie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 436 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
#12

When I think back to January of 2001 and remember the GAO having withheld the keys from the new administration, I knew President Bush would have an uphill battle to fight. With Jefford's defection and leadership ala Daschle (they did manage to vote themselves a raise), the hill has become a mountain. Top it off with terrorist attacks killing thousands of innocent Americans and an economy in a downward spiral (both of which are being blamed on our Republican administration), it appears to me to be unsurmountable. Jeezemennety, the man has got his hands full. Why can't we conservatives band together and stand behind this man, defeat the democratic majority in the Senate, and battle the press and the left that I consider responsible for most of this mess?

God bless President Bush.

448 posted on 07/11/2002 8:06:08 AM PDT by Quilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 437 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
All I ever have to do is to say, "President Gore" and I always see the BIGGER picture!
449 posted on 07/11/2002 8:07:20 AM PDT by antivenom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 270 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
First of all, I don't "hate" Bush. I voted for him and thank God every day there is no such thing as "President Gore".

1) Not conservative enough - But as far as I know, he never said he was a Conservative.

8) Is too soft on immigration - Especially too soft on "illegal immigration". I think the best was to approach this is economically. In other words; those who hire illegals should be heavily fined and pay all INS costs. That would stop more than half the flow in its tracks.

However, there maybe method to his madness. At the time he was proposing some pro-immigrant legislation, the Democrats were tripping over themselves to say he did not mean what he was saying and not to listen to him. Maybe they were right.

As of today, I'd vote for him again.

450 posted on 07/11/2002 8:08:10 AM PDT by Barnacle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
I also believe the Bush popularity is based on the war on terror. If the war were to end tomarrow, Bush would have very little support left.
I believe because of this, the war will drag on until at least the 2004 election. I don't see where all action is taken to prevent it now. Boarders are still wide open, and we're constantly reading about new enteries who have been arrested. They just keep comming in, and they just get shipped back out.
451 posted on 07/11/2002 8:09:43 AM PDT by concerned about politics
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 441 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
To accomplish what is required to reverse decades (at least 1/2 century worth) of failed policies and Liberal misdirection, The President needs to have support in the Senate and in COngress. This election is critical. If he can get the support, (win all the houses) then he has a small window of opportunity to push agressive conservative agenda. If this occurs and if he immediately moves towards this goal, then not only will he be reelected, but he will be remembered in the history books as one of the greatest presidents that ever lived.

The track record of the republicans in congress and in the WH does little to even suggest any "agressive conservative agenda".

It has long been an poor excuse by "elected officials" that much could be accomplished if there were just more dollars to throw at the problem. Now it seems that we're told, "if we just hold our nose and elect republicans, no matter how "moderate" they are an aggressive conservative agenda will be launched.

I'd love to believe, but I don't.

452 posted on 07/11/2002 8:11:25 AM PDT by WhiteGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 426 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Just #4 for me. But I still support him.

For years I wrote in my own name for every office, because none of the canidates sufficiently represented my views. Buy you know what, I never won anything. Now I just pick the best guy available.

Bush is far and away the best guy available in the last go-round, and will almost certainly be the best guy available in the next go-round.

BUSH/CHENEY 2004

453 posted on 07/11/2002 8:12:12 AM PDT by gridlock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bloggerjohn
Jesse Ventura got elected on an Independent ticket.

By people who should never be allowed within 4 miles of a voting booth.

454 posted on 07/11/2002 8:12:40 AM PDT by Valin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
No, it's going to take a much larger majority. We need a landslide for Bush and a much larger margin in both the house and senate. Give the Republicans a mandate to dismantle the federal bureaucracy. As long as we have a chance of a large block of Demos to join the Republican moderates we'll never get anywhere. The Republicans must have the majority so they can control the committees and the agenda and they must have a large enough majority to override the moderates.

That sums it all up very nicely. No matter who becomes the president, he will either attempt govern the country within the range of political realities or he will not govern at all. If we want to effect political change in this country, we just can't ignore the need to build public and political support for the change. There is no magical shortcut. If Ron Paul (or Pat Buchanan or Alan Keyes or anyone) were to somehow wake up tomorrow as president (and everything else was unchanged), he would either begin governing differently than he now speaks or he wouldn't begin governing at all.

So let's elect ourselves some better representatives this November!

455 posted on 07/11/2002 8:13:54 AM PDT by ned
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: ned
So let's elect ourselves some better representatives this November!

RADICAL CONCEPT ALERT!!! :-)

456 posted on 07/11/2002 8:16:32 AM PDT by Valin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 455 | View Replies]

To: BureaucratusMaximus
From what I've seen and heard, there's a LOT of armchair politicians on FR. They expound their theories and pound the pulpit of self-righteousness; reality and the process of law do not concern them.

Worth repeating.

The most laughable are the ones who proudly proclaim that they intend to waste their vote on "principal." Been there, done that. Learned from it--to vote for the person who has a chance of winning and who "most" represents my beliefs.

It's easy to live in a dream world and support presidential candidates who, if elected, couldn't do anything. At the same time, they can't influence a precinct meeting or elect a county commissioner.

457 posted on 07/11/2002 8:18:24 AM PDT by lonestar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 428 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
No. 8 ... Immigration, immigration, immigration!!

g

458 posted on 07/11/2002 8:19:01 AM PDT by Geezerette
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
#8 for me, but I shall vote for him again.
459 posted on 07/11/2002 8:20:44 AM PDT by humblegunner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Bush should be re-elected:
1. Tax cut
2. No to ICC
3. Brilliant handling of war on terror
4. Ashcroft reaffirming 2nd Amend rights
5. Good attempt at Energy Bill
6. Quality people at most places
7. Pressure on Palestinians (six months for Arafat?)

There have been a few disappointments, but over all good.

460 posted on 07/11/2002 8:27:14 AM PDT by BOBTHENAILER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 421-440441-460461-480 ... 1,421-1,426 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.

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