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:
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
A second term for any President in todays corrupted system is just an opportunity to collect bigger bribes without having to worry about accounting to the People.
Hi, Toothsome!
It was far from foolish; it was cynical realism. It was a last minute proposal and it was done only because we would have lost Florida and the election without it.
So, it boiled down to, Do you want a more limited prescription drug program and President Bush, or Do you want an unlimited prescription drug program and President Gore.
That was the choice.
It was necessary in order to win.
Based on what? His stance on immigration? What else qualifies him as a president? Why has his light been under a bushel for this long if he is the conservative savior that we breathlessly await? OR could it be that he has just picked a hot button issue and is milking it for all it is worth?
Much ado about nothing, imo. Seems you are buying the Demo spin that Bush is somehow responsible for every societal ill and every natural or man-made disaster that occurs during his tenure. As if there had never been business scandels in this country before. Those who excessively bemoan financial corruption miss the big picture -- that in this country, corporated criminals get caught and punished, unlike the mobocracies and kleptocracies that rule most of the world's nations, or the socialist nations that have no business scandals because they have outlawed free enterprise!
They were the margin in the last election, so thanks for your vote there in 2000, if you voted Bush.
I see RLK as shallow, unintelligent, vain and insecure. His opinions are unworthy of any thinking person's consideration.
Where's the opposition to big government now?
I believe more people of the "good sized contingent on Free Republic" are disappointed with Bush's troubling immigration policies than any other issue.
And I don't think that's strictly a forum phenomenom. For example, my brother, sister, and father are all Republicans, know nothing about FR, and have expressed exasperation with Bush's stance on Illegals and Mexico... and they didn't get it from me.
I've heard others out of this loop with the same concern.
Yes, could be. But Gore is such a blithering idiot, the Democrats have two bad choices: (1) keep Gore (I don't believe he'd win if the DOW hits 100) or (2) replace Gore, which is a crap shoot in that it would represent something of a reverse, but at the same time would be their only chance realistic chance at victory.
There is a war going on, and Bush has done quite well at it so far. I think in their hearts even liberals know that Gore is incapable of leading in wartime. After 9/11 you heard some fairly vocal (and bipartisan) sighs of relief that it was Bush and not Gore in charge.
And this economy is the result of things that happened on Clinton's watch, it is the same lack of morality of "teflon presidents" like Clinton who is proven a rapist but gets away that inspires all the Enron, WorldCom, etc.: that message needs to be driven home.
The only real challenge is the short attention span and pack mentality of the liberals, but I think it's quite surmountable in terms of the presidential race. It's the others we have to worry about.
The tech sector started declining during the end of the Clinton administration, and I'd hoped that President Bush would take steps to reverse that trend. Unfortunately, he did not and it is dragging the rest of the economy down - and it has been a contributing factor in the recent financial scandals.
The President should have taken steps early in his administration to avoid these economic problems - and I understand the war has been a more urgent priority - but if he fails to address the source of these problems, he could lose the election in 2004.
The main thing he needs to do is get rid of FCC Chairman Michael Powell, and appoint someone who will restore a competitive environment to the telecommunications industry. Killing off everything but the Bell companies is a bad policy. That is what Michael Powell is doing, and that is why the tech sector is in a major depression.
So I guess you want to do away with primaries? There were 12 original candidates, maybe 8, that started out and Bush beat all of them. Just exactly how is it that the "GOP" is forcing anyone on the people?
Uh Bauer threw his support to McCain in NH in 2000. Learn up on your political history.
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.