Can George W get any worse?

Political Discussion: You've been warned! Please remember we are all friends here. Insults will not be tolerated!
User avatar
fnordboy
Ed Zwick Wannabe
Posts: 1954
Joined: Sep 25th 2002, 10:29 am
Location: Exit 16E, NJ
Contact:

Post by fnordboy » Dec 10th 2003, 3:50 pm

TomSpeed wrote: I think we are already seeing the answer -- those policies are generally helping the situation.
I wouldn't agree with that at all, atleast at this time. I haven't done enough research into it yet myself, but just from what I have heard on even right wing news sources (hannity, FOX) I have very little belief. They can say any numbers they want (that are most likely skewed), but everyone I know or know of that has been unemployed for the last year or two still is. There are no real jobs out there, I don't see anybody getting rich. I see pay staying the same and the cost of living going up.

I can't attribute that to Bush (yet ;) ) but I also can't say he is helping anything.

Besides, if we can not get economic growth out of a war than he really is a horrible president. War is notorious for boosting the economy.

User avatar
TomSpeed
Marshall Wannabe
Posts: 1226
Joined: Jan 13th 2003, 3:37 pm
Location: Tampa, FL, USA
Contact:

Post by TomSpeed » Dec 11th 2003, 10:46 am

Here's a brief news item about small businesses hiring again.

http://www.salon.com/business/wire/2003 ... index.html

It's difficult to say whether Bush's economic policies or natural business forces are driving improvement in the job market. However, lower taxes generally mean that businesses and consumers have more money to spend on other things.
TomSpeed

Patty: If Rayanne's not seeing you, and we're not seeing you, who is seeing you?
Graham: And how much of you?
Angela: Dad!
Graham: Oh, I'm sorry! I asked a question about your life, didn't I? Woah, what came over me?
http://www.last.fm/user/TomSpeed/

User avatar
lance
Ed Zwick Wannabe
Posts: 1983
Joined: Jul 6th 2002, 4:47 pm
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Contact:

Post by lance » Dec 11th 2003, 8:09 pm

TomSpeed wrote:Here's a brief news item about small businesses hiring again.

http://www.salon.com/business/wire/2003 ... index.html

It's difficult to say whether Bush's economic policies or natural business forces are driving improvement in the job market. However, lower taxes generally mean that businesses and consumers have more money to spend on other things.
My generally understanding of presidential economic policies is that the true effects of any particular President's policy are not truly felt in the economy until years later. Granted this isn't much of a help if you trying to decide upon which canidate to support.

Fortunately this year there is simply so much out there to be concerned about (National Security, Terroism, Open ended foreign committments, the environment, civil liberties-or lack there of-, abortion rights, gay rights and I am not even trying hard here.)

I am disturbed though by the fact that Repubs seem to be endorsing spending like its going out of style. Don't get me wrong Democrats spend too, but they are in the distinct minority. The Repubs are in the drivers seat and as such garner the lion share of the reward and blame.
So how come I have to balance my budget but Congress shows no sign of balancing the Federal budget? How many billiions of dolllars of debt are we going to hoist onto the backs of future Americans? Anybody else worried about this?

Interesting thing about 10-15 years ago the Republican spin misters were like, "Budget deficit bad, spending bad." Democrats were accused of being Tax and spend. Sort of a weird role reversal going on right now. The Democratic leadership in Congress, such as it is, has adopted the old GOP mantra and just a couple of months ago I spotted Robert Novak saying, "Liberals were right, budget deficits are nothing to worry about."

:shock:

Never thought I'd live to see the day when Novak would say something like that.

-LanceMan

andrewgd
Liberty High Graduate
Posts: 676
Joined: Sep 11th 2002, 9:49 pm
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Post by andrewgd » Dec 24th 2003, 5:10 pm

Why should we re-elect this man?

It has been TWO YEARS since 9/11 and people are STILL just as afraid of terrorism NOW as back then. Osama is STILL issuing orders for his people to KILL Americans. What has our dear Prez done? Gone after Saddam.

Great, now Saddam is captured. Great thing, right? Tell that to the families of 10 Americans killed since then.

It really bothers me that with all this president has done (or pretended to do), we're still on as high alert as ever, right during the holidays. Why should he get my vote? I don't feel any safer under him now than right after 9/11. Nothing has changed under him. And he pretends to be strong against terrorism. HA!

Talk about unelectable.
"Your imagination, like a child, will explode with unrestrained possibilities for adventure."

andrewgd
Liberty High Graduate
Posts: 676
Joined: Sep 11th 2002, 9:49 pm
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Post by andrewgd » Jan 28th 2004, 10:51 pm

I saw an article saying that Bush is considering dropping Cheney as VP, and asking Guliani to run with him.

I'm not sure what to think. While Guliani is a leaning when it comes to abortion and welfare (I think)...it would still be a big Bush in office. Plus, I seriously doubt that Cheney will stop whispering in Bush's ear.

I DO know, that if Guliani is on the ticket, Bush would be near invincible. He is the face of heroism on 9/11. People across the US would do just about anything for this man. Even I would have to think twice (not for very long, but the thought would have to run through my head) before voting against Guliani.

Hopefully PNAC and the other scarey right wingers will ensure Cheney stays on.
"Your imagination, like a child, will explode with unrestrained possibilities for adventure."

User avatar
lance
Ed Zwick Wannabe
Posts: 1983
Joined: Jul 6th 2002, 4:47 pm
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Contact:

Post by lance » Jan 30th 2004, 8:53 pm

andrewgd wrote:I saw an article saying that Bush is considering dropping Cheney as VP, and asking Guliani to run with him.

I'm not sure what to think. While Guliani is a leaning when it comes to abortion and welfare (I think)...it would still be a big Bush in office. Plus, I seriously doubt that Cheney will stop whispering in Bush's ear.

I DO know, that if Guliani is on the ticket, Bush would be near invincible. He is the face of heroism on 9/11. People across the US would do just about anything for this man. Even I would have to think twice (not for very long, but the thought would have to run through my head) before voting against Guliani.

Hopefully PNAC and the other scarey right wingers will ensure Cheney stays on.
Andrewgd,

If true, the other way to look at this is, "Man, the Bush campaign must be in serious disarray to drop such a huge part of their Administration like Dick Cheney." Cheney being one of the huge cheerleaders for the war in Iraq, he is not some mid level bureaucrat. He is the favored son of the conservative wing of the Republican party. Bush takes many, many risks by dropping Cheney in a potentially tight election.

-LanceMan

User avatar
TomSpeed
Marshall Wannabe
Posts: 1226
Joined: Jan 13th 2003, 3:37 pm
Location: Tampa, FL, USA
Contact:

Post by TomSpeed » Jan 31st 2004, 8:54 pm

I'm of two minds about Bush's keeping Cheney on the ticket. Let's not forget what a drag Dan Quayle was to Bush I. Many people wanted Bush to drop him from the reelection ticket. Granted, Cheney is no Quayle, but if there's fire to the smoke of Cheney telling intelligence analysts to provide inaccurate or sexed-up data regarding WMD, Cheney will stand in the way of Bush's chances for reelection. However, Bush II is very loyal to his friends. And Cheney is Bush's right-hand man. So, he might not be likely to ditch a Cheney. I think if we see stories about Cheney having "heart trouble" in the next few months, we can read between the lines. It could very well be a reprise of the days in the Kremlin when unwanted leaders were fired under the subterfuge of poor health.
TomSpeed

Patty: If Rayanne's not seeing you, and we're not seeing you, who is seeing you?
Graham: And how much of you?
Angela: Dad!
Graham: Oh, I'm sorry! I asked a question about your life, didn't I? Woah, what came over me?
http://www.last.fm/user/TomSpeed/

User avatar
TomSpeed
Marshall Wannabe
Posts: 1226
Joined: Jan 13th 2003, 3:37 pm
Location: Tampa, FL, USA
Contact:

Post by TomSpeed » Feb 11th 2004, 1:19 pm

Cheney is in trouble. I wouldn't be surprised if Bush dumps him soon. Who will be tapped to replace him?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,1 ... 90,00.html
TomSpeed

Patty: If Rayanne's not seeing you, and we're not seeing you, who is seeing you?
Graham: And how much of you?
Angela: Dad!
Graham: Oh, I'm sorry! I asked a question about your life, didn't I? Woah, what came over me?
http://www.last.fm/user/TomSpeed/

User avatar
fnordboy
Ed Zwick Wannabe
Posts: 1954
Joined: Sep 25th 2002, 10:29 am
Location: Exit 16E, NJ
Contact:

Post by fnordboy » Feb 11th 2004, 4:04 pm

TomSpeed wrote:Cheney is in trouble. I wouldn't be surprised if Bush dumps him soon. Who will be tapped to replace him?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,1 ... 90,00.html
Rumors are Bush might tap Guiliani, which a lot of people think will hurt him.

Guiliani was at the right place at the right time on 9/11, pre-9/11 there were very few happy with his term as mayor. Post 9/11 he could do no wrong :roll: . IMO it has been long enough after 9/11 that people will remember their initial feelings about him.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests