Skip to comments.
Top 10 reasons for President Bush's Re-election
May 4, 2002
Posted on 05/04/2003 7:25:38 AM PDT by paul in cape
1. Dubya doesn't have to deal with George Mitchell purposely sabotaging the economy ("forcing" 41 to break his "No New Taxes" pledge in exchange for a cut in spending, which, of course, never materialized.)
2. If there's a 3rd party candidate, it will come from the left, not the right.
3. Dubya has kept every promise, and is seen as a moral leader. The public cares about this now. They did not in 1992.
4. Dubya was an unknown running against a known quantity with a good economy as a backdrop. Now he's a known positive quantity, while the Dem candidates all have suspect backgrounds one way or another.
5. National platforms. The Repubs control the White House and both houses of congress. The Dems just look like whiners.
6. Judicial Obstruction. While the unprecidented filibuster of judicial nominees may play well in NYC and LA, most people see it for what it is. Meanwhile, more conservative judges are taking their seats, while liberal judges continue to be overturned.
7. The 'Rats have all the vulnerable seats in the 2004 elections. They'll probbly lose 3-4 in the Senate, and 15-20 in the House. Can anyone say "COATTAILS?"
8. Bush has put back in play New York and California electorally. The 'Rats will have to spend a fortune just to hold those 2, which Dubya doesn't really need, leading to
9. The Rats spending a ton of money in the primaries, with little left for the general election.
10.AND THE BEST. I can't imagine anyone who voted for Dubya NOT voting for him again, while those who held their nose and voted for ALGORE are most certainly firmly encamped with the President now. The neo-commies will still vote for the 'Rats, but the great middle loves this President.
TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: 2004; gwb2004
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-58 next last
To: GummyIII
Your #2 is the killer for me. Uncontrolled illegal immigration will result in the destruction of this country. Bush has shown no inclination to deal with the problem of 10 million illegal aliens in this country. The melting pot philosophy that made this country strong is dead. We are becoming something more akin to the former Yugoslavia.
If Bush doesn't change his pandering for the multicultural vote by weakening our borders and devaluing legal immigration channels, t will not vote for him again. I can't stomach voting for a dem, but I'll just go fishing. Bush is taking too much of his base for granted and 2004 is not in the bag.
To those who say not voting for Bush is just bringing on a worse alternative, I say that we must endure the pain to stop the slow, "boiled frog," slide to our destruction.
21
posted on
05/04/2003 8:54:24 AM PDT
by
Truth29
To: GummyIII; jammer
make that three :) ..the AWB ban, border situation worry me most of all.
To: chiller
What indications do you have that he's riding coatails of the war? Do you think this man is stupid, unable to learn from his father's mistakes?Haven't had time for any indications, yet. I certainly hope he's "smarter" than his father in that respect. Smart doesn't mean common sense, however. That was a response to an earlier statement....put it all in perspective.
23
posted on
05/04/2003 9:02:50 AM PDT
by
GummyIII
To: GummyIII
There are three groups we can always count on to trash Bush:
1. The gay left.
2. The poverty pimps.
3. Patsy Buchanan's Black Helicopter Brigadiers.
Nice to see that #3 still hangs out on FR to whine.
24
posted on
05/04/2003 9:19:39 AM PDT
by
Young Rhino
(France delenda est)
To: MatthewViti
Welcome. I suspect that there are more in the "trust, but verify" corner than we know.
25
posted on
05/04/2003 9:24:41 AM PDT
by
jammer
To: ShandaLear
They are all good reasons not to vote Democrat. If Bush doesn't control the borders and promote manufacturing in the USA (jobs with decent pay) is he doing all he can? One other stumbling block. After all the Dems running in the primary (losers)have beaten each other brains in and Crazy Al has gone so far left that he is left of Mao, Hillary will walk up to the mic at the convention and accept the nod by acclaimation for the Democrat candidate for the Presidency in 2004. She won't have to say much of anything all during the primary season except to take potshots at GWB and the "rich" conservatives destroying the country with all their disgusting wealth and religious ideals. I'll tell you now, she will be positioned to steal one and I think this is exactly what the Dems are thinking too.
To: SamAdams76
27
posted on
05/04/2003 9:56:55 AM PDT
by
annyokie
(provacative yet educational reading alert)
To: Young Rhino
ice to see that #3 still hangs out on FR to whine. While I don't belong to that group, I'm glad FR still allows free speech. Peace.
28
posted on
05/04/2003 10:01:59 AM PDT
by
GummyIII
To: paul in cape
Meanwhile, more conservative judges are taking their seats
I was thinking today about the wisdom of the democrat filibustering
Yes, they are keeping some nominees off the bench, but this
may be a mistake. These nominees are only as conservative as
the administration thinks it can get confirmed in the current
political climate. They are not the most partisan out there.
After the upcoming election, it is entirely possible that the Senate
will be so strongly Republican that Bush will be able to install
judges that are anathema to liberals. The dem Senators should
take the moderate judges offered them now and get those seats
filled while avoiding the damage of being seen as obstructionist. These
judges are more moderate than what is coming and the dems
are digging their own graves by stalling until real heavyweights
get confirmed by absolute majorities.
29
posted on
05/04/2003 11:49:52 AM PDT
by
gcruse
(Piety is only skin deep, but hypocrisy goes clear to the soul.)
To: paul in cape
Dubya has kept every promise... How quickly they forget. http://www.nationalreview.com/lowry/lowry022102.shtml. I know, "no one cares", so it probably won't matter. Just like all other violations of the Constitution haven't mattered for over 150 years.
The Repubs control...both houses of congress
You're calling what Limp-Wrist Frist does "control"?
They'll probbly lose 3-4 in the Senate
Four in the Senate, according to Bob Novak's column. Fine with me; all those were there in 1999.
30
posted on
05/04/2003 4:16:23 PM PDT
by
WhaChuLookinAt
(As a matter of fact, I DO put my pants on both legs at a time.)
To: paul in cape
Does anyone else want to vomit when they read election news a year and a half before the fact?
31
posted on
05/04/2003 4:17:49 PM PDT
by
breakem
To: GummyIII; jammer; MatthewViti
You forgot #7.
7. No more campaign promises broken (i.e. un-Constitutional campaign finance restrictions)
Apparently, you and I are about the only ones in that corner in this forum, Gummy
And WhaChu makes four. I have the luxury of voting in a state, AL, that did and WILL go to Bush.
#18 he sure as hell isn't a proponent of bigger govt
Then why did he let Dead Kennedy write the education spending bill?
Cutting taxes will shrink govt. not far down the line
Yeah, right. Worked real well for Reagan, didn't it? As most right-thinkers know, reducing an excessive tax burden to the small degree W has proposed will, probably sooner than later, result in ADDITIONAL revenue, and thusly more, not less, spending. Of course, not changing the Alternative Minimum Tax will eliminate much of that tax cut he worked hard for, so I guess government doesn't get to grow as much - of course, that's less change in your pocket, less economic growth, and less chance of finding better employment. Also, not reducing or even increasing the complexity in the code inherently makes government more powerful.
#24 Nice to see that #3 still hangs out on FR to whine
So expressing concern about continual violations of my inherent rights is "whining". Nice call, Commie.
One question for the "GOP or Bust" crowd: if a President and his party is either unwilling to eliminate governmental violations of Constutitional rights or, worse, contributes to those violations, why vote for them? Why give them credit for sending the military to eliminate imminent threats to our nation and our rights (as was Hussein) when they before, during, and after continue to violate those rights themselves?
32
posted on
05/04/2003 4:41:37 PM PDT
by
WhaChuLookinAt
(As a matter of fact, I DO put my pants on both legs at a time.)
To: Young Rhino
Ridiculous characterization. One day, you'll grow up too. I hope it's not too late for the Republic.
33
posted on
05/04/2003 5:14:39 PM PDT
by
jammer
To: ShandaLear
I would have put in Hillary! instead of Mr. Monkey Business.
34
posted on
05/04/2003 5:18:06 PM PDT
by
StriperSniper
(Frogs are for gigging)
To: Truth29
Re:
The melting pot philosophy that made this country strong is dead. Isolationism doesn't work. Ask the former soviet union and china.
35
posted on
05/04/2003 5:20:30 PM PDT
by
ChadGore
(Freedom is as natural as a drawn breath.)
To: paul in cape
Top 10 reasons for President Bush's Re-election The Best Reason Of All:
The alternative is a Democrat.
36
posted on
05/04/2003 5:25:28 PM PDT
by
okie01
(The Mainstream Media: IGNORANCE ON PARADE.)
To: paul in cape
One reason: He's the best choice that can get elected over absolutely terrible country-destroying alternatives.
37
posted on
05/04/2003 5:27:28 PM PDT
by
wardaddy
(I know you rider, gonna miss me when I'm gone)
To: jammer
Which group are you in anyway?
1. The gay left.
2. The poverty pimps.
3. Patsy Buchanan's Black Helicopter Brigadiers.
Please let me know so that I have point of reference when dealing with your nonsensical ravings.
38
posted on
05/04/2003 5:28:44 PM PDT
by
Young Rhino
(France delenda est)
To: paul in cape
6. Judicial Obstruction. While the unprecidented filibuster of judicial nominees may play well in NYC and LA, most people see it for what it is. Meanwhile, more conservative judges are taking their seats, while liberal judges continue to be overturned. Every day Bush does not start making recess appointments is a day during which that Judge is NOT overruling, overturning and reversing 40 years of Socialism.
PLEASE JOIN ME IN URGING THE PRESIDENT TO PUT ESTRADA AND DOZENS OF OTHERS ON THE COURT WITH RECESS APPOINTMENTS DURING THE FOURTH OF JULY.
To: gcruse
I sure HOPE you are right.
40
posted on
05/04/2003 5:35:20 PM PDT
by
wardaddy
(I know you rider, gonna miss me when I'm gone)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-58 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson