Bush approval sinks to 52%

[Guest JMA]

From what I've read about Dean's platform he's far from being a left-wing extremist.

[Vyce 0]

I don't necessarily believe that.

 

But it matters little what I believe - he will very easily be presented as such by the Republicans, and he will not easily be able to prove in a general election that he's some sort of great moderate. His stance on gay marriage alone may put him over the top, and that's just ONE of the hurdles he would have to go through.

[Vyce 0]

She's right.

 

I'm taking her ambiguity to mean that she believes that we will find WMD in the future, but even if we do not, it will not matter much come the election.

 

The majority of Americans care more about the bottom line on the Iraq war (that Saddam is overthrown and the country liberated of his regime), and the blame for any lapses on intelligence will not weigh down onto the Bush administration nearly as heavy as liberals want it too.

Judging by polls, a lot of Americans think we've ALREADY found WMDs.

I think the more accurate answer is that most Americans don't care if we find WMD or not.

[Guest JMA]

I think the more accurate answer is that most Americans don't care if we find WMD or not.

I, on the other hand, believe most average Americans don't care enough about politics to find out accurate info. Still, it is distressing to know how unaware of things the general public is.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

I disagree.  Gore would spank Bush if he ran this time.

That's what I thought last time, and Bush put on his usual sputtering speech that has about all the grace of a plane spiraling out of the air in flames, but Gore still managed to do worse and actually lose.

 

Americans largely do not approve of the way Bush ran the war, but they do agree with the idea of war itself, something that Lieberman.  Lieberman would have a much easier time of getting the undecided vote than an extremist like Dean, who most non-Democrats see as a coward.

 

Are you sure you're not mistaking Dean for Kucinich? Dean's never said anything about leaving Iraq (I don't think, correct me if I'm wrong), but he has said we need international help and, indeed, needed it in the first place.

 

Kucinich just wants to totally withdraw all U.S. troops and go home and leave Iraq on the UN's doorstep to deal with. I can't necessarily say that position would win hearts and votes either.

 

Is your goal to run your favourite candidate or the candidate most likely to beat Bush?  Because if it is the latter, it would make far more sense to run someone like Kerry or Lieberman.

 

Problem is that those guys haven't been so successful at debating even their own peers, let alone Bush. Dean had the right idea going to try and woo that Clark guy for Veep, as most every successful ticket has a southerner on it, although he seems determined to let the time to the primaries tick away while he hems and haws on running.

 

Of course, I don't necessarily think conservatives are suddently some kind of new hip trend or something. People want to see sand dunes explode after 9/11. I'm not calling them stupid for that, I wanted to see it too. Bush basically gave them what they wanted and now he's gone from the guy all the late-night jesters would pick on incessantly to some kind of political supergenius and hero to all.

 

I can't believe that.

 

Frankly, I think Barney The Dog, if President, could have gotten a 90% approval rating after 9/11 once the B-52s started making their rounds in Afghanistan.

[Vern Gagne 0]

No Dean said we should remove half our troops and replace them with the UN and let them take charge.

[Vyce 0]

I think the more accurate answer is that most Americans don't care if we find WMD or not.

I, on the other hand, believe most average Americans don't care enough about politics to find out accurate info. Still, it is distressing to know how unaware of things the general public is.

I don't think it's that; I think that most Americans honestly just don't care, rather than them being too lazy or uninformed to care.

 

I have reasons for this belief, but I don't want to get into that whole discussion again.

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

No Dean said we should remove half our troops and replace them with the UN and let them take charge.

He's taken the stance everyone else has; we need to get the UN involved so we can start filtering some of our troops back home. He didn't say he wants to immediately remove half of our troops from Iraq.

[Guest MikeSC]

From what I've read about Dean's platform he's far from being a left-wing extremist.

Of course, you're rather far left yourself.

 

I personally don't find Bush to be that right wing --- doesn't mean everybody sees it the same way.

-=Mike

[Jobber of the Week 0]

His stance on gay marriage alone may put him over the top

Oh please. This is an issue that, in time, will be looked back upon as simply and constitutionally protected as giving women voting power, and our children's children and their children will wonder why we didn't stop bickering and just get it done sooner.

 

I personally don't find Bush to be that right wing --- doesn't mean everybody sees it the same way.

                        -=Mike

 

Three words: Faith-Based Organizations.

[Guest JMA]

Of course, you're rather far left yourself.

That's BS. I was initially divided on the war in Iraq but now I support the regime change. I also think we should take out Saudi Arabia. How the FUCK is that far left? It isn't.

 

I personally don't find Bush to be that right wing --- doesn't mean everybody sees it the same way.

He's isn't really that right-wing. His stance of abortion allows for the Big Three. Dean's not all that left-wing to me (although he IS left-wing, IMO). I agree with Dean on most of the issues in his platform. And I'm not sure I trust your definition of liberalism. You only have negative things to say about it.

 

-=JMA, who respects conservatives as well as their views.

[Guest MikeSC]

I personally don't find Bush to be that right wing --- doesn't mean everybody sees it the same way.

                        -=Mike

 

Three words: Faith-Based Organizations.

Hence the phrase everbody doesn't see it the same way.

 

Faith-based organizations dispense charity infinitely better than the gov't ever could. Why not allow those that can do the job to actually do the job?

-=Mike

[Firestarter 0]

His stance on gay marriage alone may put him over the top

Oh please. This is an issue that, in time, will be looked back upon as simply and constitutionally protected as giving women voting power, and our children's children and their children will wonder why we didn't stop bickering and just get it done sooner.

Possibly. In the meantime, our children's children and their children are a few decades away, and the election is in less than 14 months.

[Guest MikeSC]

Of course, you're rather far left yourself.

That's BS. I was initially divided on the war in Iraq but now I support the regime change. I also think we should take out Saudi Arabia. How the FUCK is that far left? It isn't.

 

I personally don't find Bush to be that right wing --- doesn't mean everybody sees it the same way.

He's isn't really that right-wing. His stance of abortion allows for the Big Three. Dean's not all that left-wing to me (although he IS left-wing, IMO). I agree with Dean on most of the issues in his platform. And I'm not sure I trust your definition of liberalism. You only have negative things to say about it.

 

-=JMA, who respects conservatives as well as their views.

Read your posts. Ask ANYBODY who is even moderately conservative. You are left-wing. Doesn't make you evil.

 

Well, not much.

 

I have primarily negative views of modern liberalism, borne out of a study of recent history.

-=Mike

...Classical liberalism, however, rocks

[Guest JMA]

Read your posts. Ask ANYBODY who is even moderately conservative. You are left-wing. Doesn't make you evil.

 

Well, not much.

 

I have primarily negative views of modern liberalism, borne out of a study of recent history.

-=Mike

...Classical liberalism, however, rocks

OF COURSE I'm left-wing. You said I was FAR left however (meaning you're wrong). I just don't look at liberalism and conservitism in a black and white light like yourself.

[Guest JMA]

I also don't support Affirmative Action. Far left my ass.

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

This post right here kinda relates the the whole "left wing media" shit. When a conservative calls a liberal what he is -- that is, a liberal -- the liberal trips over himself to prove he's not that liberal. Is it a bad thing to be liberal or something?

 

Personally, I've found myself to be supporting conservative ideas more than I used to, and that bothers me a bit. I'd rather be a misguided liberal than a cold-hearted, pro-business conservative.

[Guest JMA]

I'm not ashamed of my liberalism. I'm pretty damn proud of it, actually. I'm not JUST a liberal, however. I do have non-leftist views.

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

The point is that Mike, Marney, etc. aren't tripping over themselves to prove that they're not just far-right wing conservatives. They're proud to be over there, and we're conditioned as if liberalism is a bad thing. It's really not, but people like Kucinich make it seem like insanity. It's not.

[Guest JMA]

Well, I disagree in saying Marney is far right.

[Vyce 0]

Is it a bad thing to be liberal or something?

That's a rhetorical question, right?

 

You can't go around setting yourself up like that.

[NoCalMike 0]

As far as Bush's approval rating goes and his chances of re-election. I think it is going to come down to which guy can get the NEW voters to come out to the polls. Something tells me the race is going to be extremely close. Now that is only of today of course. A lot can happen over the next year.

[Spicy McHaggis 0]

I'm not JUST a liberal, however. I do have non-leftist views.

Exactly. Most people, myself included, strongly dislike being labeled one way or another.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Personally, I've found myself to be supporting conservative ideas more than I used to, and that bothers me a bit. I'd rather be a misguided liberal than a cold-hearted, pro-business conservative.

Wait until you get a real job with real taxes taken out. You'll probably want to kill yourself then...

[Hogan Made Wrestling 0]

Personally I think one of the things that is hurting/going to hurt Bush (and I may be wrong here - feel free to disagree) is one of the issues where he is completely in the right: the necessity for the USA to stay in Iraq and pump money into the cause. It just seems to me that many people, from all over the spectrum, see this 87 billion dollar figure and think to themselves "all I care about is getting rid of Sadaam, why do we (i.e. I) have to cough up all this money and see our troops die?". Most people here are sensible and agree that this is money that needs to be spent, but for people who are less politically aware and see a depressed economy, it might be the kind of thing they just can't understand.

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

Wait until you get a real job with real taxes taken out. You'll probably want to kill yourself then...

 

I've already experienced it. It wouldn't bother me to pay taxes if I wasn't in the lowest tax bracket already.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Possibly. In the meantime, our children's children and their children are a few decades away, and the election is in less than 14 months.

Exactly. And there's going to have to be some world-class spinning going on to turn this election from the war to gay marriage.

[Guest MikeSC]

Well, I disagree in saying Marney is far right.

Why? Because she has some "leftist" views? Nobody has views totally on one side of the spectrum.

 

Heck, I have some non-Republican views. I think marijuana being illegal is an asinine mistake and so not worth the effort (although, National Review also believes that, so some conservatives agree with it). I do not see why prostitution is illegal. Legalize both and tax the living crap out of them.

 

I am a Christian, but I do not want the Christian church to have any power in America. Yes, I support allowing faith-based organizations to dispense charity (welfare), but only because they are rather efficient at doing so.

 

Doesn't change that I am rather far right.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Hence the phrase everbody doesn't see it the same way.

 

Faith-based organizations dispense charity infinitely better than the gov't ever could. Why not allow those that can do the job to actually do the job?

-=Mike

The primary reason is that there are organizations that also do this that don't have a religious M.O. Also, Bush signed an order to "end discrimination against faith-based organizaitons" but believes they should continue to have their right to discriminate however they see fit through their hiring processes.

 

You can't have your cake and eat it, too. You cannot take the perks of being a religious organiation and the perks of being a government-funded charity at the same time.

 

The Boy Scouts are figuring this kind of thing out right now. They got denied the right to use some public land somewhere because they declared themselves a religious organization to freely hire based on sexual orientation.

[Guest MikeSC]

Hence the phrase everbody doesn't see it the same way.

 

Faith-based organizations dispense charity infinitely better than the gov't ever could. Why not allow those that can do the job to actually do the job?

                        -=Mike

The primary reason is that there are organizations that also do this that don't have a religious M.O. Also, Bush signed an order to "end discrimination against faith-based organizaitons" but believes they should continue to have their right to discriminate however they see fit through their hiring processes.

 

You can't have your cake and eat it, too. You cannot take the perks of being a religious organiation and the perks of being a government-funded charity at the same time.

 

The Boy Scouts are figuring this kind of thing out right now. They got denied the right to use some public land somewhere because they declared themselves a religious organization to freely hire based on sexual orientation.

All Bush favors is to allow faith-based organization to distribute charitable funds, since the non-faith based ones give so very little of the money donated to the people it was intended for (the percentages are borderline criminal, honestly).

 

It's like the intelligence field (to use an analogy). Clinton wanted the U.S intelligence services to not deal with people who are "unsavory". Only problem with THAT is --- and Marney can verify this better than I ever could --- is that the people with the useful info tend to BE unsavory sorts. "Good" people rarely have useful intelligence on terrorists.

-=Mike