News Will Bush Change Course in His Second Term?

[BobG]

One reason I fear the religous right becoming the driving force behind the Republican Party. They've tended to ally themselves with the wrong causes, especially some of the Southern coalitions.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/04/alabama.segregation/index.html

Moore and the Christian Coalition argued that repealing the segregationist 1956 amendment would open the door to court-ordered tax increases for education.

Despite the narrow margin, Christian Coalition chief John Giles declared victory.

"The Christian Coalition of Alabama will work to ensure that reckless trial lawyers and activist judges will not be able to open the floodgates to increase taxes and that private, Christian, parochial and home-school families will be protected," Giles said in a statement on the group's Web site.

To be fair, Giles also added:

"The Christian Coalition will lead the way to remove the racist language in the next election."

 

[schwarzchildradius]

He's going to get what he wants. Flat tax of 15% (exactly the same that is in place in Iraq), no tax on capital gains. Privatized social security, the privatization (which will cost trillions) paid for with borrowed money. Falling dollar, rising oil prices. Bloated, wasteful, militaristic government.
He's not going to start any more wars, but we will be fighting in Iraq for four moree years.

He's not going to get outlawed abortion, prayer in public school, gay marriage ban, because he doesn't believe in any of that, that was just a trick.

Luckily, when the Democrats lost, the demagogical radicals lost their scapegoat; therefore the responsibility and guilt for the catastrophic events that lie ahead rests with the extremists who triggered them.

 

[wasteofo2]

Luckily, when the Democrats lost, the demagogical radicals lost their scapegoat; therefore the responsibility and guilt for the catastrophic events that lie ahead rests with the extremists who triggered them.

I doubt it. I saw a representative of the Bush campaign and one from the Kerry campaign doing a town hall style question and answer thing on CNN, and someone asked something about what Bush'll do to make the economy better. And the Bush representative said that when you're talking about the economy, you have to remember, that when George Bush came into office, he was handed the worst economy since the great depression. Luckily, there were lots of boos from the audience, so the public isn't TOTALLY blind, but these guys will try anything to get out of taking responsibility for their mess ups.

 

[franznietzsche]

I doubt it. I saw a representative of the Bush campaign and one from the Kerry campaign doing a town hall style question and answer thing on CNN, and someone asked something about what Bush'll do to make the economy better. And the Bush representative said that when you're talking about the economy, you have to remember, that when George Bush came into office, he was handed the worst economy since the great depression. Luckily, there were lots of boos from the audience, so the public isn't TOTALLY blind, but these guys will try anything to get out of taking responsibility for their mess ups.

Actually he was handed a bad economy. The tech bubble had collapsed at the end of the clinton administration, and all through 2001 things went downhill, before he had done anything (as Michael moore spent ten minutes pointing out in Fahrenheit 9/11). from 2002 on, things have been moving up, consistently if not rapidly. He cannot be blamed for the events of march 2000-june 2000 when the recession began, IIRC. Furthermore the president doesn't ahve any real power over the economy anyway. Not directly at least. And as i said, things have been steadily improving since 2002.

 

[schwarzchildradius]

Actually he was handed a bad economy.

Reeeeeely?
(1998) Lowest peacetime unemployment rate since 1957; (1998) first budget surplus since 1969; (1999) highest stock market index in history.
Earned-income tax credits, college scholarships, family leave for workers, capital gains tax cut (1997)

from 2002 on, things have been moving up, consistently if not rapidly.

If you're talking about the deficit, unemployment, and poverty-stricken children with no health insurance, you're right.

Furthermore the president doesn't ahve any real power over the economy anyway.

(1) establishing fiscal discipline, eliminating the budget deficit, keeping interest rates low, and spurring private-sector investment; (2) investing in people through education, training, science, and research; and (3) opening foreign markets so American workers can compete abroad.

 

[schwarzchildradius]

Also:
Largest Surplus Ever (FY2000); Largest Three-Year Debt Pay-Down Ever; Lower Federal Government Spending (22.2% in 1992 to 18% in 2000); Reduced Interest Payments on the Debt; Enacted the 1993 Deficit Reduction Plan without a Single Republican Vote; Negotiated the Balanced Budget Agreement of 1997; Dedicated the Surplus to Save Social Security and Reduce the National Debt; Extended Medicare Solvency from 1999 to 2025.

Many of these benefits have since been recklessly & intentionally destroyed.

 

[Gokul43201]

from 2002 on, things have been moving up, consistently if not rapidly.

Depends on how you define up. Relative to absolute stagnation, or relative to average/expected growth ?

The job creation rate at least is only just keeping up with the population growth. That's not really a growth.

The growth in the stock market started only with the announcement of the Iraq War in Mar 2003. The DJ is up about 2% relative to Jan 2002, but up 30% from Feb 2003, fuelled in large part by the gains among Exxon-Mobil (up 50% since 02/03), Halliburton (up 100%) and other honchos in the energy and Defense contracting sectors. Pharmaceuticals, Infotech, Automotive and Consumer Goods have underperformed the Dow.

Yes, some things have picked up and gotten better...but not nearly as much as Don Evans or Scott McClellan have been suggesting.

 

[russ_watters]

Reeeeeely?
(1998) Lowest peacetime unemployment rate since 1957; (1998) first budget surplus since 1969; (1999) highest stock market index in history.
Earned-income tax credits, college scholarships, family leave for workers, capital gains tax cut (1997)

The statement you are trying to counter was that Bush was handed a bad economy. Meaning it was bad when he took office. So how do facts from 1-2-3 years before he took office help you any? How does the highest stock market in history in 1999 help you when the markets lost a sizeable fraction of their worth by the end of 2000?

No, it is a fact that Bush was handed an economy already in the crapper.

 

[loseyourname]

in 2004 they are stronger- but the populations of cities [blue areas]- particularly of minorities- are increasing exponentially while rural states/counties [red areas]will remain at the same population- by 2015-2020 the cities will represent 3/4s of the total population- people in rural areas are isolated from other cultures and beleifs and so aren't pressured to embrace them- but people in cities who have to live/work with other cultures and learn other ideas through the media/internet/schools learn to open their minds more- religiosity wains- it's a numbers battle that the right cannot win in the end- though they ride high now- it's their nadir



only for a little while longer- then the GOP won't have the numbers anymore- math is a *****

I wouldn't be too convinced of this if I were you. For one thing, most of the more democratic cities (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco) are pretty well saturated population-wise and any growth in the population of their metropolitan areas is only occurring at this point in far-off suburbs like south Orange County that are mostly republican. Furthermore, the cities that are still growing at a fast pace (Phoenix, Las Vegas, Kansas City) are not nearly as liberal as the older cities.