Bush, Republicans losing support of retired veterans

Knight Ridder ^ | 07-28-03

[Poohbah]

I still have seen it flung around here. By some folks who are not here any longer, but it was routine.

Key words emphasized :o)

[snopercod]

I know that just prior to WW II, wives of enlisted men had no medical coverage whatsoever. I have a friend who actually held a gun on a surgeon and forced him to perform emergency surgery on his wife. The doctor agreed, but made my friend assist - here, hold these intestines... The friend later paid back the doctor.

Do you (or anybody) know when spouses came to be covered?

[Poohbah]

Some of those posters are people who have left this forum.

"Left this forum" sounds so...voluntary.

A more correct statement would be "got ridden out of town, on a rail, attired in tar and feathers." :o)

[Brian S]

Bush wouldn't be able to give grants to failing Corporations or $15,000.000,000 to combat aids

Now that you mention it, $15b is just about the figure we handed to the airlines industry after 911 to "save it from collapse"...if I remember correctly.

[Miss Marple]

Well, the ones I recognized were about evenly split between those banned and those who emigrated. All have a decided anti-Bush, anti-FR attitude, however.

[JFC]

I was with 50 international kids from 50 different coutnries the past week. They were here in Texas visiting with host famalies. They all said they hate Bush and he is bad for the World. I tried to get into discussions with them and tell them the whole media bias deal and all of them said that Clinton was the better man. These kids are not dumb and most speak 5 or 6 languages but they made me upset when they know the players but they have the wrong idea of our President. I am beginning to wonder if Bush will be re-elected in 2004. It seems the spin wagon is out in full force.

[xzins]

I do not know. I was never in the service when families were not also covered.

[MattAMiller]

While there are no recent polls to measure veterans' political leanings...

Then how is the headline justified? All the veterans I know are huge Bush supporters.

[Howlin]

All have a decided anti-Bush, anti-FR attitude, however.

Smile for the head copier and paster. Or as he has now started to refer to himself, a "legend Freeper."

They're here to help us, you know.

[Paulie]

You've totally misunderstood the spirit of my post. I would urge you to think a little more or ask for clarification before vomiting out your own misguided response.

[hattend]

Many veterans say they will not vote for Bush or any Republican in 2004 and are considering voting for a Democrat for the first time.

Bull Pucky! What have the Dems done to change the minds of vets? The vets who have never voted Dem may not show up for the Repubs but there is no way they will vote for the Dems.

[verity]

"Life is hard. It's even harder if you're stupid."

John Wayne

[Poohbah]

"He's gone off his chump." :o) </Monty Python Dead Parrot Skit>

[ohioWfan]

The 00 election runup had a lot of independents and C3PO's support Bush on the "anybody but gore" political principle.

President Bush's base is the Republican party, and he still has well over 90% support from them......and it's been as high as 98% at times. He hasn't lost, nor is he losing 'his base,' because Libertarians aren't part of it.

The 'anybody but Gore' voters have been griping since 2001 that if he does this or that he'll lose their vote. It is now, as it has always been, a vacuous threat that has never meant anything because they make up a miniscule percentage of the Conservative voting force.

And the idea that any real socialist would vote for him is downright silly.

[ohioWfan]

DING DING DING! No more calls, we have a winner.

Can the prize be that I don't have to read their sorry old refrain any more? :o)

[semaj]

"It would take a lot more than this issue to dissuade me from my support of this man."

Sadly, that is exactly what GW is counting on. Apparently the vets are a small enough minority that they can be dissed with impunity.

[ohioWfan]

Sadly, that is exactly what GW is counting on.

He told you this personally, did he? And your proof that he is dissing vets 'with impunity?'

I'd like some back up of your statements maligning the character of the President, please.....

[MEGoody]

"Got to tell you man, piss off the Base and you will LOSE the election as their support evaporates."

So which 'base' do you think Bush would piss off if he spent $5 billion to change the retired military pay outs?

[MEGoody]

Take heart. These were children, and not citizens of our country. The Dems are too busy trying to register 'dead' people to go after kids from other countries.

[Jhoffa_]

GW,

Got to tell you man, piss off the Base and you will LOSE the election as their support evaporates.

I don't think so.

I think Dubya is completely beatable in 2004, but the bigger question is: Who would he lose to?

Lieberman? He's a chronic nasal whiner, who could stand THAT for 4 years? Hell, there'd be a revolution.

Kerry? He looks like Lurch and his idea of foreign policy is imposing Koyoto type enviro regs on us to mend the "ties" that Dubya allegedly broke when he dissed our backstabbing and completely worthless UN. On the upside, Kerry did go out of his way to mention that he would cripple us economically without "comprimising the strength of our military" LOL! That's encouraging, isn't it?

Then there's Howard Dean.. He's pro-gun (But so was algor, remember..) and his idea of a Presidential issue is honoring queer marriages from Canada. (and before you ask, the answer is "yes" he is serious)

From a comic relief POV however, it will be interesting if Dean get's the nod.. I mean, can you imagine the campaign commericals? It will be a laugh a minute.

Dubya's biggest asset at this point isn't the loyalty of his base (generally speaking, I think the exceptions are over-represented on FR)) it's the complete and total vacuum from the democrat side of the isle.

PLUS, all of them.. the democrats collectively, in fact, have categorically failed with regard to national security.

They proved beyond anyones wildest dreams that they are simply out of their depth here, and cannot be trusted with life and death, national security matters.

By all right's, algore should have beat dubya in 2000 (good economy, sitting VP, etc..) and the rats should trounce him in 2004. But it won't happen, and it's a disaster of their own design.

He's going 4 more years..

IMVHO.