Republicans have control

[Guest Kahran Ramsus]

Canadian federal politics blow. The Liberals hold exactly one province (Ontario), and they have it only because of the split right. If the Alliance and PC ever got together the Liberals would get clobbered.

 

Most of Canada is conservative, that's why the Alliance always wins in the west, the PC in the east, the BQ/PQ in Quebec, and the PC in the Ontario provincial elections.

[Guest DrTom]

I may be the least bit biased but I believe Gore would have acted much differently and much more wishy-washy with what to do following the attack...

I don't like Gore, but one thing he's not is a ninny. He has a very strong voting record when it comes to the military, and as VP, he called for action against Iraq and bin Laden before Clinton did anything. It's hard to say Gore would have made the same moves every step of the way, but I will not doubt his patriotism, nor his record of supporting the military. For a Democrat, he's always been very hawkish.

 

Having said that, if Gore decided to run again in 2004, he'll lose again. There was no possible way he should have lost in 2000, since he was riding the coattails of a rather popular President during a time the economy was perceived as strong. Gore's problem is that he lacks personal charisma, which Clinton had in spades, and even Bush has in far greater quantities. He just doesn't relate to people well, which will always hinder him when seeking a national office. I also think the "I demand recounts until I win" strategy he employed in 2000 will be held against him by a lot of voters who resented seeing the election highjacked.

[Guest bob_barron]

Do you think if Clinton had campaigned with Gore that Gore would've won?

[Guest LooseCannon]

No. Clinton would've won Gore more votes on the coasts where he would've won anyway, and he would've been a very big liability in the swing states.

[Guest Vern Gagne]

This election doesn't mean a whole lot in the grand scheme of things. Mark my words, Bush and company will start such a run of terror that by 2004 people will be lined up outside the firehouses waiting to vote them out.

Oh no the evil republicans are going to steal social security, cut school lunches for poor urban kids, and no doubt start countless wars without the UN's approval.

 

That tired liberal lie isn't flying with voters anymore. The people of this country are becoming more moderate and don't want big gov't. getting in the way.

[Guest NoCalMike]

First off, Bush is not above 70% in his approval rating anymore, that was just for the few months following Sept. 11th when America was in it's "don't question ANYTHING" mode.

 

I truly believe the reason the Democrats got their asses kicked in this election is because they offered ZERO OPPOSITION. They talked about how stupid the tax cut was, and then they helped it get passed. They talked about how ludicrous the war against Iraq will be, and then they helped vote it in. So as a voter, one would naturally think, if the Dems are agreeing with the Republicans, why not just vote Republican. Ever since Sept. 11th the Democrats have cut off their balls and are afraid of name calling by the republicans so they back down on EVERY issue. It is a sad and sorry time to be supporting the democrats political party, and I am glad I stopped a few years ago. The Greens will continue to rip into Democrats support as long as the Democrats choose to sit back and take everything.

[Guest Kotzenjunge]

Oh no the evil republicans are going to steal social security, cut school lunches for poor urban kids, and no doubt start countless wars without the UN's approval.

 

That tired liberal lie isn't flying with voters anymore. The people of this country are becoming more moderate and don't want big gov't. getting in the way.

 

Yes, you're right. Even though Republicans now pretty much run Washington, their majority isn't exactly overpowering in either house. This, along with the abundance of close races across the country, shows that a balance is being found between left and right for the first time that I remember, which results in overall moderate measures and whatnot, because some things will need 2/3 to pass (cloture, if we sign any treaties, etc), and as such, will need to be compromised to be passed.

 

I personally love the idea that things are so even that bipartisanship will be needed.

 

Kotzenjunge

Don't Think CabbageBoy Represents Liberals

[Guest Kotzenjunge]

First off, Bush is not above 70% in his approval rating anymore, that was just for the few months following Sept. 11th when America was in it's "don't question ANYTHING" mode.

 

I truly believe the reason the Democrats got their asses kicked in this election is because they offered ZERO OPPOSITION. They talked about how stupid the tax cut was, and then they helped it get passed. They talked about how ludicrous the war against Iraq will be, and then they helped vote it in. So as a voter, one would naturally think, if the Dems are agreeing with the Republicans, why not just vote Republican. Ever since Sept. 11th the Democrats have cut off their balls and are afraid of name calling by the republicans so they back down on EVERY issue. It is a sad and sorry time to be supporting the democrats political party, and I am glad I stopped a few years ago. The Greens will continue to rip into Democrats support as long as the Democrats choose to sit back and take everything.

It isn't really so much of a choice as it is an obligation and duty. You said it yourself, they're afraid of being called whatever by the Republicans, who are currently the party that the nation as a whole favors at the present time. To continue to challenge and pass absolutely nothing would probably be more damaging than making concessions and passing bills and tax cuts they might not agree with.

 

I think the current DNC strategy is to let the Republicans wear out their welcome, so to speak. If enough of the same conservative measures are passed and Republicans look to be dominating everything for two whole years, the nation could very well be sick of them come 2004.

 

I for one, hope this happens and some kind of fundamental change occurs. Having the same party control the White House and Congress might be good for the party involved and their agenda, but Americans grow tired of the status quo quickly, I think.

 

Kotzenjunge

Enough Is Enough, And It's Time For A Change! </Owen>

[Guest Vern Gagne]

The DNC doesn't have any idea what there strategy is.

[Guest Kotzenjunge]

Surely they started brainstorming today at least. Hell, they probably started last night as they saw they were going to lose control. By January they'll have it all planned out I'm sure. Don't know if they'll come up with a good idea, but they'll be ready to handle the next two years somehow.

 

Kotzenjunge

National Parties Know No Working Hours

[Guest kkktookmybabyaway]

"I truly believe the reason the Democrats got their asses kicked in this election is because they offered ZERO OPPOSITION. They talked about how stupid the tax cut was, and then they helped it get passed."

 

Here's a list of all the Senate Democrats that voted for Bush's $1.2 trillion tax cut:

Source: http://www.legitgov.org/fameNshame.html

 

Baucus (Mont.)

Bayh (Ind.)

Breaux (La.)

Carnahan (Mo.)

Carper (Del.)

Cleland (Ga.)

Edwards (N.C.),

Feinstein (Calif.) !?!?!?!?!

Johnson (S.D.)

Kohl (Wis.),

Landrieu (La.)

Lincoln (Ark.)

Miller (Ga.)

Nelson (Neb.)

Torricelli (N.J.)

 

Notice the names on that Senate list that aren't/won't be in Congress anymore: Carnahan, Cleland, Torricelli.

 

Notice the names that just missed being booted from the Senate/facing a tough run-off election: Johnson, Landrieu.

 

These politicians represent states that supported Bush's tax cut. There's a reason the didn't go against it. If they had, their defeats would have been more resounding. (Good thing the Democrats stole the Torch's Senate spot away or else they'd have even fewer seats in that chamber.)

 

Strangly enough, this list also features a number of Democrats I wouldn't mind voting for: Baucus, Bayh, Breaux, Cleland, Edwards (he's a lawyer, but I'll forgive him), Johnson, Miller (the REAL maverick of the Senate), Nelson...

[Guest Some Guy]

First off, Bush is not above 70% in his approval rating anymore, that was just for the few months following Sept. 11th when America was in it's "don't question ANYTHING" mode.

http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm

 

Sorry it ranges from 61%-67% for the last week. WHich is still pretty damn good considering that Clinton never got over 70% in his entire 8 years.

 

CBS News and The New York Times

7/22-23/02 65%

 

ABC News and The Washington Post

7/24-28/02 69%

 

Gallup Poll and CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll

9/20-22/02 66%

 

Those are from the first 3 polls listed and the first week post-9/11 that he fell below 70%. So I'd say that 7/22-9/20 is slightly more than a "few months following Sept. 11th."

[Guest cabbageboy]

Approval ratings don't mean all that much because right now there is no other choice. In 2004 there will be another choice besides Bush and his ratings will go down faster than WCW in 1999. His dad had approval ratings arond 90% during the Gulf War, but gee that sure as hell changed in a hurry once people realized how botched Desert Storm was and how bad the economy had gotten.

 

And yes, he's been a lame duck to me ever since he won the way he did.

 

I dunno, I almost think that the Demos need some really new and fresh blood. Not Hillary, voters will dump on a woman candidate and she has the Clinton stigma. Gore is of course damaged goods as well due to 2000, but he would certainly have a chance.

 

They have to think outside the box, but not think stupid. Running Hillary is stupid, putting Lieberman in as VP and expecting to win anti semetic southern states is stupid. What they need is a charming Clinton type southerner who has high morals and can keep his dick in his pants. That's the key I think. Gore lost every state in the south even his home state of Tennessee. I should think that is due to him being a decidedly non southern and bland sort, and also having a Jew as his running mate.

 

Seriously, if the Democrats can't beat Bush in 2004 after not catching Bin Laden, wrecking the economy, and getting us into a war with Iraq due to his family grudges.....well, the Demos might as well pack it in and go home. They'd be screwed.

[Guest Razor Roman]

Approval ratings don't mean all that much because right now there is no other choice. In 2004 there will be another choice besides Bush and his ratings will go down faster than WCW in 1999. His dad had approval ratings arond 90% during the Gulf War, but gee that sure as hell changed in a hurry once people realized how botched Desert Storm was and how bad the economy had gotten.

 

And yes, he's been a lame duck to me ever since he won the way he did.

 

I dunno, I almost think that the Demos need some really new and fresh blood. Not Hillary, voters will dump on a woman candidate and she has the Clinton stigma. Gore is of course damaged goods as well due to 2000, but he would certainly have a chance.

 

They have to think outside the box, but not think stupid. Running Hillary is stupid, putting Lieberman in as VP and expecting to win anti semetic southern states is stupid. What they need is a charming Clinton type southerner who has high morals and can keep his dick in his pants. That's the key I think. Gore lost every state in the south even his home state of Tennessee. I should think that is due to him being a decidedly non southern and bland sort, and also having a Jew as his running mate.

 

Seriously, if the Democrats can't beat Bush in 2004 after not catching Bin Laden, wrecking the economy, and getting us into a war with Iraq due to his family grudges.....well, the Demos might as well pack it in and go home. They'd be screwed.

Ok, now it's time to set things straight.

 

Bush lost in '92 because of the economy and his ineptitude as a campaigner. He was not an inspiring leader and communicator like Regan, and largely got elected to conitnue the Regan legacy, which he abandoned when he gave Democrats a tax hike in '90 so they would be his friends. The '90 tax increase caused the recession we were entering to be much worse than it should have been.

 

No one I know of thought Desert Storm was botched in '92, and while some people may say we should have done things differently, no one argues that we achieved our objective at the time which was ONLY to get Hussein out of Kuwait. (Maybe it should have been more, but it wasn't, we did EXACTLY what we set out to do, and we did it just about as flawlessly as possible)

 

 

 

And on to the Second Bush.

 

First of all.. "Catch Bin Laden" - it appears as if he is dead. The war with Iraq has nothing to do with family grudges. Would you like to pay the price if Iraq gets a nuke and decides to test it in, say, Tel Aviv?

 

Bush was not illegitametly elected. He WON Florida. Every recount had him ahead of Gore. EVERY SINGLE ONE. And he's gotten a tremendous mandate from the people, and especially the voters of Florida, who could have said "We're voting against your brother because you stole our state" but they didn't.

 

Bush is an artful campaigner, he has good ideas for the country, and he is HONEST. I doubt the Democrats will have any luck defeating him in '04 (especially if Guiliani is his VP) and a Powell-Giuliani ticket could be huge in 08.

[Guest Vern Gagne]

Seriously, if the Democrats can't beat Bush in 2004 after not catching Bin Laden, wrecking the economy, and getting us into a war with Iraq due to his family grudges.....well, the Demos might as well pack it in and go home. They'd be screwed.

Thank God. A majority of people in this country don't believe this tired liberal bull. Some advice for liberals instead of bashing the Republicans try telling the American people your ideas. The Republicans had an agenda this past election, all the Dems did was say how evil the Republicans were.

[Guest kkktookmybabyaway]

"Not Hillary, voters will dump on a woman candidate and she has the Clinton stigma."

 

I don't think voters will "dump" on a woman candidate. They would just dump on Hillary -- except those living in NYC and the Left Coast...

[Guest NoCalMike]

What "Great" republican ideas have been acted upon? Setting up our country to go to war in a time of economic depression?? Please.

[Guest bob_barron]

Wars generally help the economy

[Guest Olympic Slam]

What "Great" republican ideas have been acted upon? Setting up our country to go to war in a time of economic depression?? Please.

What ideas have Democrats come up with in oh......I don't know, the past 30 years?! If they're not out pimping yet ANOTHER government program that'll fail, they're telling why you SHOULDN'T vote Republican. Telling voters that if you elect a Republican that they'll kill grandma, take away a women's right to choose, and give social security money to Enron CEO's are not ideas, they're pathetic scare tactics.

 

I swear I don't know how anyone can be a Democrat when they offer absolutely nothing! If you want to be a liberal there are at least three other viable alternatives with , you know, actual agendas! The Democrats try to take baby steps toward a grander social agenda in a free-market society that doesn't cater towards it as well as a full blown social revolution would. All you Dems out there, show your true colours and pick a side of the fence! Social reform from that of the Greens or the ideas that make America what it is from that of the Right.

[cawthon777 0]

And yes, he's been a lame duck to me ever since he won the way he did.

 

I dunno, I almost think that the Demos need some really new and fresh blood. Not Hillary, voters will dump on a woman candidate and she has the Clinton stigma. Gore is of course damaged goods as well due to 2000, but he would certainly have a chance.

 

They have to think outside the box, but not think stupid. Running Hillary is stupid, putting Lieberman in as VP and expecting to win anti semetic southern states is stupid. What they need is a charming Clinton type southerner who has high morals and can keep his dick in his pants. That's the key I think. Gore lost every state in the south even his home state of Tennessee. I should think that is due to him being a decidedly non southern and bland sort, and also having a Jew as his running mate.

 

Seriously, if the Democrats can't beat Bush in 2004 after not catching Bin Laden, wrecking the economy, and getting us into a war with Iraq due to his family grudges.....well, the Demos might as well pack it in and go home. They'd be screwed.

Desert Storm was far from botched; it went flawlessly and we could have done more (like take Saddam out) had we been allowed to at the time. But our job was to free Kuwait and we did that, quite easily I might add. To call that a "war" is somewhat laughable.

 

If it's true that Florida was so democratic then Jeb would have been killed instead of becoming the first Republican ever to be reelected. Bush won. The only reason there was a debate was because Gore couldn't handle defeat.

 

Voters won't dump on a woman; I have more faith in the public than that. They would, however, dump on Hillary because she's a power-hungry devil bitch that finds it acceptable to run for senator in a state she doesn't even live in (yeah, I know she has a house there...whatever). Why did she win NY? There are stupid people everywhere, what can I say.

 

I also have to give the American public more credit when it comes to Lieberman. The south is not anti-semetic. I'm indirectly from the south, my whole family is from the south, and in all the time I've been down there in my life I've never found it to be anti-semetic. Gore didn't lose the south because of his VP, he lost it because the Dems don't adequately represent these people. The people they do represent are tree huggers and Hollywood movie stars, and you won't find either in TN, KY, GA, AL, VA, or the Carolinas. If you take a look geographically as to what Gore won (population-wise), he did the best in big cities, the northeast, and the west coast. Bush got the south and midwest.

 

We're not looking for Bin Laden, he's probably dead anyway. Bush didn't ruin the economy, he inherited it from Clinton/Gore (it started going down far before Bush came into power). And Saddam should have been killed 12 years ago. Maybe if Clinton could have kept his pants on, our country wouldn't have to be on the offensive like we are.

[Guest kkktookmybabyaway]

"Voters won't dump on a woman; I have more faith in the public than that. They would, however, dump on Hillary because she's a power-hungry devil bitch that finds it acceptable to run for senator in a state she doesn't even live in."

 

But Big Media won't say this as being the reason for people hating Hillary -- they'd say we hate her because she's a woman.

 

"If it's true that Florida was so democratic then Jeb would have been killed instead of becoming the first Republican ever to be reelected."

 

This is probably one of my biggest surprises of the election -- the fact Jeb won by that kind of margin. Kinda wish he was running against Janet Reno.

 

"Bush didn't ruin the economy, he inherited it from Clinton/Gore (it started going down far before Bush came into power)."

 

It baffles my mind how peolpe can say the last year or so of Clinton's economy was great -- it was tanking then. (I also don't understand how all these CEO scandals are directly Bush-related, since they had been going on probably before he was even a Texas Guv)And of course when Bush said this in his early days, Big Media said he was saying this JUST to help push his tax cut. Now, of course, Big Media is whining about how Bush doesn't even know economic troubles are abound...

[Guest LooseCannon]

Wars generally help the economy

In the short term, they often provide stimulus, but in the long term they're detrimental to the economy. At least that's the conventional wisdom anyway.

[Guest Olympic Slam]

Seriously, if the Democrats can't beat Bush in 2004 after not catching Bin Laden, wrecking the economy, and getting us into a war with Iraq due to his family grudges.....well, the Demos might as well pack it in and go home.  They'd be screwed.

I'd like to hear a liberal actually explain: what exactly Bush did to ruin the economy? Every time I've asked a liberal that question they've never been able to give a coherent or actual response. Do libs even know what an economy IS?

[Guest Syxx]

Oh please the Alliance is a joke, they can't even co-exist with in their own party let alone branching with the PC's.

 

And about our economy....well it went to shit when Mulroney (a conservative) was in office, so dont blame this on the left. And so what if our economy does not thrive as much as yours, is your whole life dependent on who has more toys, and talking on these boards like u are better than everyone else (I hope u realize there is more to life than yourself). We are compassionate human beings who provide care to those who can not afford it, so that every human being leads a decent life, that is left wing ideology. I find it funny that Conservatives associate themselves so closely with Christianity, when they love to neglect so many of its fundamental principles.

[Guest treble charged]

Hey, Syxx and I agree on something for once. 'Tis a glorious day, indeed.

[Guest NoCalMike]

"What ideas have Democrats come up with in oh......I don't know, the past 30 years?! If they're not out pimping yet ANOTHER government program that'll fail, they're telling why you SHOULDN'T vote Republican"

 

"I'd like to hear a liberal actually explain: what exactly Bush did to ruin the economy? Every time I've asked a liberal that question they've never been able to give a coherent or actual response. Do libs even know what an economy IS"

 

Ok, first off, I never said Bush PUT US in the economic condition we are currently in. Secondly, I don't support the Democrats either, so stop spewing assumptions. Third, the government surplus that was left there when Bush arrived, is now gone and there is a defeciet already being blown up all over again, due to the riduculous Tax Cut, that helped everyone out for about a day, but long term has DONE NOTHING, but benefited the upper 5% of the wealthy.

 

I agree the Democrats gave offered nothing to rebut the republicans thus it is their OWN FAULT they lost control of everything, like I said, if the Democrats actually opposed Bush and acted like they give a damn about something over the last 2 years, they would have succeded. Most of the elections were won by slim margins, and can be attributed to poor voter turnout and disolusioned citizens thinking the entire government and whole process is so fucked, that it won't do any good voting for any candidate(half true, I guess).

[Guest Olympic Slam]

Oh please the Alliance is a joke, they can't even co-exist with in their own party let alone branching with the PC's.

 

And about our economy....well it went to shit when Mulroney (a conservative) was in office, so dont blame this on the left. And so what if our economy does not thrive as much as yours, is your whole life dependent on who has more toys, and talking on these boards like u are better than everyone else (I hope u realize there is more to life than yourself). We are compassionate human beings who provide care to those who can not afford it, so that every human being leads a decent life, that is left wing ideology. I find it funny that Conservatives associate themselves so closely with Christianity, when they love to neglect so many of its fundamental principles.

I hear this same speech from just about every Canadian. If social programs are your thing and "each according to his ability as each according to his need" is your country's philosophy, than that's A-ok. Just remember though, if your dollar weakens you still have your compassion. If a beloved sports team moves to Orlando, you still have compassion. If you have to wait an extra week or three to see the Dr., you still have your compassion. If the latest product is available in the U.S but not Canada, no need to worry, you still have compassion. If you work hard to become succesful and have to give up nearly half your salary in taxes, just remember that it's going towards compassion. Don't blame or diss the U.S when things don't go your way, you still have your compassion. After all, that makes you better than us, right?

[Guest Kahran Ramsus]

Oh please the Alliance is a joke, they can't even co-exist with in their own party let alone branching with the PC's.

 

And about our economy....well it went to shit when Mulroney (a conservative) was in office, so dont blame this on the left. And so what if our economy does not thrive as much as yours, is your whole life dependent on who has more toys, and talking on these boards like u are better than everyone else (I hope u realize there is more to life than yourself). We are compassionate human beings who provide care to those who can not afford it, so that every human being leads a decent life, that is left wing ideology. I find it funny that Conservatives associate themselves so closely with Christianity, when they love to neglect so many of its fundamental principles.

And Ontario almost went bankrupt with the NDP in office, who are even further left than the Liberals. What is your point?

 

Yes, they won't get together because they are too fucking stupid, but if we did have a united right like the Republicans, they would win practically every time. The majority of the country is right wing, they just can't win because the right is split.

 

Our economy follows the Americans, like it or not, we are smaller than them, and what affects their markets, affects ours 90% of the time.

 

Since coming into power in 1993, the Liberals have done exactly ONE good thing. Balance the budget, and that asshole Chretien tosses out the guy responsible. The Liberals never used to be this bad, but starting with Trudeau and his cronies, they have ruined the country. We are nothing on the world stage, and I for one am embarrassed about it. Now, I am not about to jump to the US, like too many Canadians have, but I damn sure want to see Canada live up its potential.

[Guest Olympic Slam]

"We are nothing on the world stage, and I for one am embarrassed about it. Now, I am not about to jump to the US, like too many Canadians have, but I damn sure want to see Canada live up its potential."

 

I'm rooting for Canada. I hope you guys can get your dollar to at least 80% of the U.S dollar. Anything less than that is WAY below Canada's abilities.

[Guest bob_barron]

Nooooooooooo- The Canadian Dollar has to remain weak so my college tutition will be cheap