I’m asking the big Bush supporters like ZEB (sorry ZEB didn’t mean to single you out)and others. I mean I kind of think he will win but he really isn’t doing that good now (in the polls, that is). Is it team loyalty like when a sports team thinks it will win every game or are you really that confident? If you are really that confident what leads you to think that way?
Just wondering.
By the way I consider myself to be a moderate democrat but would vote for a republican, just not this one.
I’m a Bush supporter, but I’m not ‘sure’ he will win.
I will say this:
Bush has a chance to cast himself as much more moderate than his critics suggest - Medicare expansion, AIDS funding, education reform, as examples - helpful in a general election.
The economy continues to improve, and jobs are coming back. Of course, educated voters know that the President has little direct power over the economy, but it is always an issue. The strengthening economy helps Bush.
Bush is more likeable than Kerry. For all of Bush’s communication issues (and he does have them), he has a disarming sense of humor and can connect much better with the common person than Kerry.
Bush is direct - love him or hate him, what Bush stands for is much more crisp and clear than Kerry. Kerry has a difficult time coming across as straightforward.
Bush has the South.
Just a few reasons I think Bush has a good chance to win, but it’s going to be a close election, in my view.
I am a supporter of Bush and definetly going to vote for him. But I do not feel it is a “sure thing” he will win.
Kerry is doing some smart political manuevers. He hasnt attacked Bush on Iraq, other than saying Bush went in alone (which Kerry then says, he would have gotten France and Germany on baord, not that he wouldnt have gone in). He has the more fringe left, like someone like Michael Moore, and make these outrageous clamis against the war, but yet still supports Kerry even though he voted for the war, and said it was the right thing to do, except we should have gotten the French and Germans on board. And then Kerry never distances himself from these guys either. And he picked Edwards, I doubt he picked him because of Edwards experience, or that they have personal chemistry together, probably picked him to balance out Kerrys lackluster personality.
It just seems alot of Kerrys supporters support Kerry just because they hate Bush. Take Howard Stern for example. He has supporter the war on terrorism and Iraq since 9/11, even saying we arent being as aggresive as we should be. But now is actively trying to get Bush out because Clear Channel kicked him off stations because the FCC is cracking down on guys like him (which, BTW, I oppose what the FCC is doing). Yet, I have never heard Kerry say, this is all ridicoulous of the FCC to try to hike fines to an unbelievable amount because of janet Jackson showing off her tit, and we shouldnt be trying to shut down Howard Stern, let the free market do that. Kerry is silent on this issue.
same as the war. he voted for the war. Made numerous speaches how we should get rid of Saddam Hussain, that he has WMD’s yadda yadda yadda. And he still hasnt said he was aganist the war, and Bush lied to him about WMD’s. He says he is for the war, but he would have gotten France and Germany on board. Yet, guys like Michael Moore give the impression Kerry always knew there were no WMD’s and we should have never gone to war at all.
Presidential elections are won in the center of the spectrum. Reagan was a master at recruiting the ‘dixiecrats’ and other moderate democrats.
Clinton did much the same thing.
I think Bush will win because he has proven his willingness to appease the center - tax cuts, medicare reform, etc.
I think he is closer to the center than either Kerry or Edwards and therefore will get their vote in November.
Kevin:
This is a excellent question to ask the group. And I will be very happy to share with you my thoughts and opinions on it. I am a huge Bush supporter. Matter of fact, I work with the Bush campaign here in Pennsylvania. As I stated in a one post I am also someone that has a degree in History. But I look at both sides of the coin. I have studied and constantly read on the state of affairs, the world from the past to the present. And see both sides of view.
When those towers came crashing down, this country became unifed, the likes we never were, since Dec 7, 1941. ANd we stood tall and firm, did not back down. Did not bury our heads in the sand. We were one country. And it was just so beautiful to see.
But many people have forgtten what happened that day 9/11. Right now fingers are being pointed in all directions. WHo is to blame. Was it the CLinton Admin? The Bush Admin? The AMerican people? Yes it is important to find out the hows and whys. But it is more important to stand tall and firm, and say we are not going to back down. And not be divided. For the only way terrorism can be defeated, is if we stand firm and remain united. As one, country, even one world. Can you imagine what this world would be like if we were United?
But sadly this country is not United…
And the truth is not being brought out.
I mean my best friends neighbor I talked with who is in the Special Forces of the Army. Working with the Press Corp. Or journalists on special assignemnts. And he was so so angry with what is going on. He said to me, “Joe I cannot tell you how distorted this message is getting out!”
And when I call them up or email them, and ask them WHY are you doing this? Why are you distorting the truth. They say my Superiors changed it. He was banging his fist, on the table when he was telling me this. He said , “The truth the message is not getting out, as to what is going on.” He said you take these reenlistments you are hearing about. THis has been going on.
All along. Not just at this time. He told me and showed me pictures of people, handing them flowers. People running up wanting their pics taken with them. He said to me when he was in Khandahar, this one baker, knew he loved this certain cookie. And he would make each week, a batch just for him. To thank him. He said you should see how the country changed. The cell phones, pizza shoppes cafes… Mean just truly amazing. People are free. Not oppressed anymore… And none of this is getting out.
He told me, “People in the US have no idea who this enemy is. How dangerous they are. And what they are cabable to do.” “They do not care if you are Dem or Rep. Or what party affiliation you are. They will kill you. Destroy you.
And because we are only getting one side of the coin, the picture, so anti, this is what America is hearing, that they are against the War.” He told me, about the mounds of documents that have been discovered and tried to be destroyed. How all along, with Iraq, time after time, from the Halls of Congress, previous admin, people from all walks of life, have stated time and time again, even before, Bush attacked Iraq, what Sadaam was up to. And what was happening in Iraq. Reread Senator Libermans’ unbelieveable speech. See what the reasons are we went to war…
Bush is a man that sees both sides of the coin. He is a man that does not back down. Or run with his head in the sand, like Neville Chamberlian did with Adolf Hitler. Or go with the policy of appeasement. America in the 1990’s was in like the roaring 20’s. Sept 11. 2001, was like the stock market crash of Oct 13, 1929. A reawakening for America. And the only way, we can show these terrorists we mean business is with a storng leader, who won’t be an appeaser. Again a Neville Chamberlain.
Also I am helping with the Bush campaign, because of what I am seeing in America. Again you look at how this country is moving to the left, all throughout history. Where the push for more socialistic programs, are wanting to be enacted. (Case in point, look at Hilliary Clinton and her push when Clinton wsas Pres for Universal heatlh care.) More and more Federal governemt making our decisons. Saying this is what is right and good for us. And when I see the records of Kerry of Bush, and see their liberal rankings. You might say oh he will never lead us down that path. Both you look at their records, and how they are ranked. YOu think CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, MSNBC, newpapers, etc. will bring this out? No…
It is going to be such a tough fight. Because oh so many are against Bush. Want to see him loose. And will continue to villify him. Rip him to shreds, and continue to distort the truth. With the War. How many have gone back in history, and read what truly went on. Get the big picture.
When this report comes out from the 9/11 commisison, it will just add more salt to the wounds…
I do hope and pray America will wake up and smell the coffe. That would could happen, to this country… How so amny things will be undone. And you might say oh Kerry’s hands will be tied. But what he wants will be enacted, eventually. He will be in office then for 4 years. And with new elections…
Also the foreign policy? How would that change? Lots of things will change…
And move more to the left…
But just like I am a member of the Friends of Gettysburg, help protect defend, and preserve the battlefield, I am ready for a fight…And in the end, Bush will prevail and win over it all… For America will wake up down the road, cut away from all the lies untruths, distortions, and see the big picture… 
Impossible is nothing
Stay Laced and True
CHUCKSmanjoe
“Joe”
Fair question,I have gone on record on several occasions claiming that President Bush will be reelected. Briefly, here’s why:
The economy-As the economy goes so goes the election. Ask the former President Bush who won a great victory by pushing Sadam back into Iraq, but lost the election because the economy tanked. This time around we are in a recovery, which will only get stronger as November approaches. On this issue alone Bush will win the election. However, there are other reasons.
John Kerry- While certainly a good man, he comes off as a boring elitist-a high brow. Add that to the fact that he comes from Mass. Remember the last time that a north eastern liberal was elected President? Oh yea…there never was one! (John Kennedy was no liberal-Check the record). Michael Dukakis was…what happend to him? The first George Bush crushed him in the Presidential election!
Iraq-As more time passes and the situation in Iraq gets even better that will cease to become an issue for the democrats. In fact, it will become a strong issue for the republicans. While I am not stating that terrorism will end in Iraq (or anywhere else) at least the terrorists will be killing Iraqi citizens. While this is not a good thing, Americans will not react to it the same way as if they were killing our GI’s.
The actual campaign- Every campaign has a life of it’s own. One side attacks, the other defends etc. I am sure that there are some very smart people behind John Kerry, and I am sure he will garner millions of votes and make it a very close race. However. Bush’s team has been working together for quite a while. They are experieneced, not just as individuals, but as a team. Those who have worked on campaigns know the importance of team work, and being battle ready. If you have to pick a winning team I think that team would be with President Bush.
Money-How many times has the person with less money actually won, at any level? I am not certain on the difference but the Bush team has (I think)at least 25% more funds to spend than the Kerry people. That means millions of more dollars will be spent pumping up Bush and taking Kerry apart. If the voters are swayed by the message and the message can be guaranteed by money, score another one for President Bush!
The debates-I give John Kerry plenty of credit for having a handle on the issues. He is bright and quick. However, he suffers from the same disease (Only worse) that Al Gore had. He is BORING. While that may not bother you and I, most voters have a low tolerance level for watching those who bore them. As soon as Kerry opens his mouth in a debate vs Bush he looses votes! Don’t think so? Just wait and see.
The newest reason that I have for a Bush victory is Kerry’s choice for VP. I know many democrats think that Edwards is a great pick, however they are wrong! Face value Edwards is very personable, handsome and a fine speaker. However, he has one very large problem: he is a trial lawyer and has taken large sums of money from trial lawyers. As soon as the republican machine goes to work on this one the shine comes off of John Edwards faster than a new pair of shoes dragged through a mud pit! You really think people like trial lawyers? They rank between used car salesman and garage mechanics in the respect department(Check out the lawyer joke thread).
Finally, I don’t think there is enough focus given to the amount of bad news that this president has withstood over the past several months. Mostly bad news reported out of Iraq. The prisoner scandal. The Micheal Moore film (I know he’s a dweeb, but a hit film is a hit film). The under reporting of the economic turn around etc. All of this (and more) and Bush’s approval rating still hovers around 50%. I find that very interesting!
When things get so very bad, they tend to begin to get better. The bad news (most of it) has been played out. People want to stay with this Presient. Why? I’m not sure, but consider this: How many times have we changed Presidents during war time? Never! And it will not happen now.
I will once again predict a victory for George W. Bush. I will give him a margin of victory of 2% to 5%. while my margin may change along with the ebb and flow of the campaign, the winner will remain the same. George W. Bush will not be losing to John Kerry! I guarantee it!
[quote]chucksmanjoe wrote:
Yes it is important to find out the hows and whys. But it is more important to stand tall and firm, and say we are not going to back down. And not be divided. For the only way terrorism can be defeated, is if we stand firm and remain united. As one, country, even one world. Can you imagine what this world would be like if we were United?
[/quote]
Does standing tall and firm mean voting republican?
Should we vote Dick Cheaney into office four years later?
If a democrat gets into office ever, would you consider this country united?
I agree with ZEB’s post. I think once Bush is elected again (possibly without getting more votes than the loser again) this country will become very divided, maybe even more so than we seem to be now. But that’s fine with me even though I don’t like G.W. one bit. I just think that is the politics of the future. But I do think the longer this country has this semmingly strict divide the sooner we will fail as a nation.
We need a viable third option soon.
Re: Edwards being a trial lawyer. Lincoln, Taft, Pierce, Buchanon, Filmore, Hayes, Arthur, Coolidge… these presidents were all trial lawyers before becoming president. You think “trial lawyer” seems like a sleazier job description to the general public than “oil baron” (what most of Team Bush is)?
I’m not going to get too involved in this thread because I think it is for Bush supporters (and I am not a Bush supporter). But I wanted to say that a lot of the “facts” being cited about Bush and world events are really just opinions.
For example Chuckmanjoe says Bush “doesn’t back down”
Oh really? What did Bush do when China confiscated one of our spy planes, and wouldn’t give it back? This was in his first year in office. Bush backed down. He didn’t do jack shit. China eventually sent us back our spy plane after they picked it apart, and they made us pay for the shipping.
The USS Cole was bombed 2 months before Bush took office. Clinton sent the FBI to investigate. After Bush took office he called the investigators home. Bush did nothing about the bombing of the USS Cole.
Some people might say that Bush is a strong leader because he forged ahead in invading Iraq without a broad international coalition and without firm concrete evidence of an imminent threat. Other people would call that reckless and terrible international diplomacy with our traditional allies. Since we are backpedalling so hard now on WMDs (gee we really didn’t do it for WMDs after all) and are now literally begging for help at the UN and NATO and international conferences, I am going to think the second viewpoint is more accurate. In polls, the rest of the world views us as the greatest threat to world peace. Under Bush we have lost a massive amount of respect and our moral authority in the world.
Another thing: the so-called strong economic recovery being bragged about seems like it is more hype than substance, again it is a matter of opinion. We are still at a net loss of jobs under Bush, the first time that has happened since Herbert Hoover was president.
If Bush is doing so great, why is he running the most negative campaign in US history? Can’t he say anything good about himself? For example the first day Kerry announced Edwards was his running mate, Team Bush came out that same day with a negative TV ad about Edwards. That suggests that Bush can’t run on his record as president. He has nothing positive to offer.
But I will butt out and let the Bush fans explain why he’s going to win. Say, what is Bush’s plan for health care? Just curious.
Lumpy,
I’m late for dinner so I will give you a quick and dirty response, forgive me:
First of all it’s not the governments obligation to supply health care to it’s citizens. This is not a socialists state. Move to Canada if that is what you want.
The men you mentioned as being trial lawyers were in fact lawyers who lived in a time when the title meant respect! That is not the case now.
China gave back the crew without incident. That was a win for Bush.
Bush is in fact a strong leader-We have invaded two nations in the name of bringing down terrorism. If that’s not strong then what is?
Lastly, I think you better check the economic stats: job growth, etc. before you claim that we are not in a recovery. I know CNN will not report it, but it is a fact!
good post Lumpy.
Bush might win because morons greatly out number intelligent people in this country.
Lumpy,
Always serving up softballs.
Trial lawyers: it’s a matter of context. Edwards may hurt from the perception of the greedy ambulance chaser - not a high perch to speak from these days. Your comparisons neglect shifts in opinion over time.
“What did Bush do when China confiscated one of our spy planes, and wouldn’t give it back?”
Diplomacy. A good instance showing that Bush isn’t in a rush for frontier justice. Moreover, you don’t know what happened behind closed doors, the issue was resolved with parties saving face. You seemed to imply Bush wimped out, but if Bush had been especially belligerent with the Chinese, you’d be lambasting him for being a wild-eyed cowboy. Double standard, as usual, Lumpy.
“…without a broad international coalition…”
You mean without France and Germany?
“Other people would call that reckless and terrible international diplomacy with our traditional allies.”
Odd, you were just complaining that Bush was too timid with the Chinese.
“Since we are backpedalling so hard now on WMDs (gee we really didn’t do it for WMDs after all)”
Backpedaling, like investigating both yellowcake and nuclear materials recently in the news?
“…the world views us as the greatest threat to world peace…”
(sniff)…that’s too bad. For the best decade and a half, all we’ve done is spend blood and treasure to solve problems other countries can’t solve.
“We are still at a net loss of jobs under Bush…”
I know, still a ways to go after inheriting the recession from Clinton. But cleaning up other people’s messes take time.
I don’t believe that, by the way, but do tell: what can Bush do to create more jobs? Surely, since it’s that easy, you can recommend something. After all, Bush maxed out monetary policy with the lowest interest rates in history (courtesy of the Fed) and adopted both a supply-side and Keynesian approach to flood the economy with money.
I’m interested to know what Bush should’ve done to get the labor market going again.
“health care”
Bush’s health care plan probably is eat better, exercise more, and expand tax-deferred Medical Savings Accounts. That is the best health care plan any nation can hope for.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
The men you mentioned as being trial lawyers were in fact lawyers who lived in a time when the title meant respect! That is not the case now.
[/quote]
yes, don’t respect Edwards, he’s only a self-made man…I mean, he doesn’t even hold a candle to the independence and iron will of GWB, an oil-company brat that dodged Vietnam…right, no respect for Edwards…
[quote]FrontFaceLock wrote:
Bush might win because morons greatly out number intelligent people in this country. [/quote]
The ratio of registered Democrats to registered Republicans is about 51% to 49%, respectively, so “greatly outnumber” may be a bit of a stretch, but you’ve got the right idea (2000, popular vote and all that). Incredibly thought-provoking and articulate statement though.
Lumpy, I don’t even know where to start. There’s a reason I stay out of these political threads (zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz). Besides, no one’s changing anyone’s mind. As far as either side is concerned, the other side is plagued by flawed logic and questionable intelligence, and has been mercilessly brainwashed into obeisance by its respective puppet masters. Maybe we can sit down to a beer sometime (really) and have a nice talk about politics, life, the universe and everything. Your views obviously come from the heart and it’s always interesting to talk to people with genuine convictions, whatever they may be.
As for the original question, I’m not sure Bush will win. I did support him in 2000 (evidently I’m a moron), but frankly, on way too many issues he and Kerry are indistinguishable. I think some of his domestic policies may cost him some principled conservative votes (including mine).
Ahhh, bandgeek…
Don’t mean to be a hijacker…
But is that the “Original Scatter”, Ella Fitzgerald, in your new Avatar?
Coool!
Mufasa
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Ahhh, bandgeek…
Don’t mean to be a hijacker…
But is that the “Original Scatter”, Ella Fitzgerald, in your new Avatar?
Mufasa[/quote]
He-he-heee…no, just some lady who appealed to my weird sense of humor.
Now that you mention it, though, I do see the resemblance.
Thunder said
No, just pointing out that Bush is not the swaggering tough guy you try to portray him as being. He’s more like the befuddled looking nerdy guy who sat in the Florida classroom while the World Trade Center burned, until someone on his staff butted in and told him what to do.
[quote]“…without a broad international coalition…”
You mean without France and Germany? [/quote]
No, I mean Tora Bora, New Guinea, The Netherlands, and other powerhouses.
End hijack, I want to hear what the Bush fans say. I apolgize for butting in! Ignore me and please resume your thread!
I am curious to hear why you think Bush will win, even though he is down in the polls.
Lumpy,
You have not refuted any of my reasons, in my original post, as to why Bush will win!
I addressed the reason he is down (only a bit) in the polls.
Lumpy I started this thread to see why bush supporters were “certain” that Bush would win, but never intended for it to only be for Bush supporters. Shit I’m not a Bush supporter.
So post whatever you would like (that is related to the topics being discussed).
Okay ZEB, you asked for my rebuttal to your points. I am aware this is mostly a matter of opinion guys. Who knows who will win. There’s a news story out saying that the US is pressuring Pakistani intelligence to cough up Bin Laden during the Democratic primaries (stealing the spotlight). So who knows what will happen.
The recovery is soft (weak) and it is mostly geared to Wall Street and not towards middle class America. All of the actual job numbers are well below the predicted numbers (we see this kind of news manipulation constantly from this administration! They are constantly revising their estimates downward, after a big PR announcement). Almost all the “new” jobs are in the service sector… in other words “McJobs” as hamburger flippers, etc. (Team Bush wants to call those burger-flipping jobs “manufacturing” jobs! Hey, when you put a pickle on a burger, you’ve built something… a Whopper). Even if the economy comes roaring back in the last few weeks before the election, that will not change the average person’s mind about their experiences over the last 4 years
John Kerry is not as boring as the GOP would like to stereotype him as being. I honestly doubt you’ve seen enough of Kerry to have formed that opinion on your own ZEB! As far as Kerry’s state of origin, I don’t see it as a factor. I just don’t think it will matter in swing states.
I don’t think things are going to change that drastically in the next few months in Iraq, unfortunately. Iraq is going to be in turmoil for years, not months.
The Bush campaign is incredibly negative. That tends to turn people off. Negativity does work, to a point, but it can certainly blow up in the president’s face.
Bush leads in total warchest but Kerry is close enough that it is not going to trump any other factors (like the President’s record, for example).
This is my favorite reason, ZEB. Kerry is a master debater (there’s a joke there) and he is going to make Bush look foolish. Bush will come off looking like a poseur without any real handle on the facts. Edwards will also come off with big wins against Cheney, who strikes people as a scary and irritable grouch. Debating is how John Edwards earned a living as a trial lawyer. I can’t wait to see these debates!!!
First, not too many people will cast their vote in a presidential election based on the Vice Presidential choices. Second, John Edwards seems to have a disposition that people really respond to. If anything, he will be a plus. A lot of people like John Edwards as a candidate… you may not like him, but he was a popular choice with other people.
“Interesting” is one way to describe Bush’s poll numbers. Other people might use the words “alarmingly bad” to describe these pre-election poll numbers for an incumbent president.
The bottom line will be Bush’s record. Bush does not have a record of clear accomplishments he can point to, that do not appear tainted. Every so-called accomplishment could also be described as a liability: The Patriot Act, the war on terrorism, the tax cuts, the prescription drug bill, and so on. These are not clear accomplishments, because many people would describe them as negative (either handled badly or just plain wrong).
Bush also hasn’t spelled out a positive message for the future, at least not yet! Bush doesn’t seem to have a plan, other than “just wait until those tax cuts kick in, and spark a big recovery”. That is Bush’s plan for reducing the trillion-dollar deficits he ran up. I think many people are starting to see that waiting around for the tax cuts to kick in is not enough of a plan.
-Kerry rates evenly with Bush in the polls on security.
-Democrats lead in polls on “who does a better job with the economy”.
-More than half of all Americans believe that the Iraq war is not worth it, and that Bush mislead us into getting involved.
-Well over half of all Americans believe “the country is headed in the wrong direction”.
Those are not good indicators for a second Bush term. Most voters know nothing about Kerry at this point. But a second-term election is a referendum on a President’s first term, and I don’t think Bush will receive a passing grade.