News Bush will beat Kerry

  • Thread starter phatmonky
  • Start date
55
2
Bush will beat Kerry....

With the falling strategy.....

1> Paint Kerry as a waffling, flip flopping, dukakis-like liberal. His voting record (90% alignment with Ted Kennedy) is enough to push this point.

2>Make himself out to be strong on defense, remind people that terrorism is still a real challenge, and that swithing president's in the middle of such a thing is risky. Highlight defense, economy strengthening, and positives happening in Iraq.

3>Make a smooth transition in Iraq to the governing council. Start bring troops home, thereby diminishing the number of body bags we are seeing.

If this happens, Bush will seal the deal easily. High gas prices and the WMD fiasco are not enough if the economy and Iraq show hope on the horizon.

:)
 

Zero

In other words, Bush is going to lie, lie lie some more, and then abandon America's responsibility in Iraq, with a little more lying thrown in.
 

selfAdjoint

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
6,764
5
Well item 3 is in trouble already as the Shiites have rejected the governing council's constitution. Smooth as in ....?

And as for the economy, jobs are still in the tank, and no hope in sight according to just about the whole range of economists (except those employed by the White House, of course).

Unreasoning panic about terrorism is slowly fading. Pretty soon it's going to seem retro. That could happen by November if no more atrocities occur here in the states.

So I think this theory is just Republicans whistling past the graveyard.
 

FZ+

1,550
2
3>Make a smooth transition in Iraq to the governing council. Start bring troops home, thereby diminishing the number of body bags we are seeing.
Or for less of a challenge, he can walk on water and raise the dead.

To be honest, I think Kerry will lose. The man just lacks a sense of dashing enthusiasm... When I see him, I can only think of grey, grey, grey... He is an honest man, and will make a good president. But I don't think he can really capture the public's imagination.
 
82
0
I hope your right phatmonky. I'm not a huge fan of Bush or anything but the last thing we need is a Kennedy in office.
 

kat

12
0
Originally posted by FZ+
]He is an honest man
LOl, thanks for the laugh
 

russ_watters

Mentor
18,992
5,146
Originally posted by kat
LOl, thanks for the laugh
In fairness, its tough to be dishonest if you have no ideas in your head to lie about.
 
55
2
Originally posted by Zero
In other words, Bush is going to lie, lie lie some more, and then abandon America's responsibility in Iraq, with a little more lying thrown in.
Great rhetoric, but Bush has a record of begin tough on defense, kerry IS wishy-washy, and #3 is yet to be able to be seen :)
 

Zero

Originally posted by phatmonky
Great rhetoric, but Bush has a record of begin tough on defense, kerry IS wishy-washy, and #3 is yet to be able to be seen :)
Ummmm..."tough" isn't the same as "right", and Kerry being "wishy-washy" is debatable.
 

jb

if gw gets elected again, i think we're going to see the country really start to go to hell in a handbasket... more than before. the only reason bush isn't totally screwing over everyone is because it's an election year. if he gets in again next year, he doesn't have to worry about polls, because he'll be done anyway.

i hope i'm wrong about this, but i have a suspicion that bush might just slightly be responsible for 9/11, kind of how pearl harbor might have been intentionally allowed to happen. he started his own inquiry into that, but that's like nixon investigating watergate. that's definitely impartial. when the other investigations came around, the white house was interfering with them, withholding documents, editing them to their approval, that kind of stuff. the day the attacks happened, bush was reading to schoolchildren. one of his aides told him what happened, and he just kept on reading. not to mention, bush was planning from day one on invading iraq. these attacks just gave him the opportunity to do that, and give his buddies some nice contracts.

bush is ignoring science. no, not ignoring. trying to erase. he replaced reputable scientists on his commitees with unreputable ones who fit his agendas. so much for being bipartisan.

you know there's more to be talked about. but those of you that would listen already know, and those of you that don't agree will just call it spin.
 

Ivan Seeking

Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,093
174
Originally posted by Zero
Ummmm..."tough" isn't the same as "right", and Kerry being "wishy-washy" is debatable.
Most of the biggest jerks I have known were "tough"...a middle aged fast-food store manager for example.

As for Kerry and his ability to change his mind based on new information, yes, if we want to elect the most inflexible then we want Bush.
 
113
16
I recently stumbled across this article which predicts that Kerry will win because he has "bluer" blood than GW. Apparently, th presidency has been won by the candidate with more royal connections than the other for a couple of decades now.

I can just pray...

I'll try and find a link.
 
55
2
Originally posted by Ivan Seeking


As for Kerry and his ability to change his mind based on new information, yes, if we want to elect the most inflexible then we want Bush.

That's a cute way of saying "I am voting for someone that I don't know what they'll do in office" :)
 

Zero

Originally posted by phatmonky
That's a cute way of saying "I am voting for someone that I don't know what they'll do in office" :)
Is that what you really think?
 
55
2
Originally posted by Zero
Is that what you really think?
It is when that's the only rebuttle to a candidate who has a history indicative of just that.
 
The Re-elect Bush ads feature a softer voice president talking more vision thing. It is a modified version of the 1984 Re-elect Reagan campaign.
 
82
0
Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
As for Kerry and his ability to change his mind based on new information, yes, if we want to elect the most inflexible then we want Bush.
You had a few spelling mistakes, let me correct.

As for Kerry and his ability to change his mind based on what will get him elected, yes, if we want to elect the lesser of two evils then we want Bush.

Remember that people are not just voting for which candidate they like best, they are voting for a way of life. I think a Democrat in office will only hurt this contry more so I will be voting Bush but not because he is the best choice, I see him as the only choice.
 
I'm sorry? You're trying to paint Kerry as somebody who waffles?!

"The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our Number one priority and we will not rest until we find him!"
--- George W. Bush, September 13, 2001


"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and I really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
--- George W. Bush, March 13, 2002
 

Ivan Seeking

Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,093
174
Originally posted by phatmonky
That's a cute way of saying "I am voting for someone that I don't know what they'll do in office" :)
So by your logic we should elect based on survey cards and not based on the candidate's character, intelligence, and his [her?] ability to adapt to new situations?

This waffle claim falls flat as a pancake.

PS. Thanks for the new signature Chemicalsuperfreak.
 
Last edited:

GENIERE

Is a quote considered to be correct simply because it is cited hundreds of times on liberal political forums? Of course it is OK to do this as long as it serves the purpose of the poster because we all know what our president meant to say even if he didn’t say it.

According to the CNN reporter present, the president replied to the question as follows:

CNN- March 13, 2002 Posted: 7:35 PM EST (0035 GMT)

QUESTION: Mr. President, in your speeches now, you rarely talk or mention Osama bin Laden. Why is that?

Also, can you can tell the American people if you have any more information -- if you know if he is dead or alive. Deep in your heart, don't you truly believe that until you find out if he is dead or alive, you won't really want to make...

BUSH: Well, deep in my heart, I know the man's on the run if he's alive at all. And I -- you know, who knows if he's hiding in some cave or not? We hadn't heard from him in a long time.

And the idea of focusing on one person is really -- indicates to me people don't understand the scope of the mission. Terror's bigger than one person. And he's just -- he's a person who has now been marginalized. His network is -- his host government has been destroyed. He's the ultimate parasite who found weakness, exploited it, and met his match.
He is -- you know, as I mention in my speeches -- I do mention the fact that this is a fellow who is willing to commit youngsters to their death. And he, himself, tries to hide, if, in fact, he's hiding at all.

So I don't know where he is. Nor -- you know, I just don't spend that much time on him really, to be honest with you. I'm more worried about making sure that our soldiers are well supplied, that the strategy is clear, that the coalition is strong, that when we find enemy bunched up, like we did in Shah-e-Kot mountains, that the military has all the support it needs to go in and do the job, which they did...
 

Zero

Well, obviously rightwingers don't mind when it is the Al Gore "I invented the Internet" misquote...but thanks for pointing that out for us.
 
55
2
Originally posted by Chemicalsuperfreak
I'm sorry? You're trying to paint Kerry as somebody who waffles?!

"The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our Number one priority and we will not rest until we find him!"
--- George W. Bush, September 13, 2001


"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and I really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
--- George W. Bush, March 13, 2002

Maybe we can go ahead and post other fallacies while you are at? [zz)]
 
55
2
Originally posted by Zero
Well, obviously rightwingers don't mind when it is the Al Gore "I invented the Internet" misquote...but thanks for pointing that out for us.

Why don't you ever keep it to the posts and posters at hand, rather than spewing out partisan rhetoric? Quit turning it into a them vs us routine, and let's stay on topic.
 

Zero

Originally posted by phatmonky
Why don't you ever keep it to the posts and posters at hand, rather than spewing out partisan rhetoric? Quit turning it into a them vs us routine, and let's stay on topic.
Deep breaths...what I posted is true, people often don't mind a bit when a lie is spread about their opponent, and I am glad that GENIERE quoting an actual transcript, versus what someone thinks Bush said.

Until we get some honest reporting, people will continue to base their opinions on incorrect data.
 

russ_watters

Mentor
18,992
5,146
Originally posted by Zero
Well, obviously rightwingers don't mind when it is the Al Gore "I invented the Internet" misquote...but thanks for pointing that out for us.
The thing about that misquote, Zero, is the only people I ever hear it from are Democrats who misquote Gore and attribute the misquote to Republicans. Its a misquoted misquote. A smokescreen. (Pre-emptive strike?)
 

Related Threads for: Bush will beat Kerry

  • Last Post
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
7K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Poll
  • Last Post
3
Replies
62
Views
5K
Replies
22
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Top