"Unnamed Democrat" leads Bush in Polls - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 03-06-2003, 04:36 PM   #16
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 08:03 PM
Well, since Election Day is not for awhile, I don't want to start my involvement in any campaign or whatever now. I hate these two year campaigns. If I start this crud now I'll be so sick of politics come Election Day I'll scream. It's overkill.
__________________

__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 03-06-2003, 04:58 PM   #17
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,379
Local Time: 03:03 PM
yeah his approval ratings have slipped since his post 9/11 highs... but despite all these angry pissed off protesters who supposedly make up the american majority, bush's approval ratings still hold steady in the 53-56% range... jumping up towards 60 every time he gives a major speach, and jumping back down towards the 53 whenever the french say no again.
__________________

__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is online now  
Old 03-06-2003, 05:49 PM   #18
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 08:03 PM
I don't think the polls right now are that important as per Election Day 2004 results are concerned. Things could change. George Bush Sr. had a 90% approval rating after Desert Storm, and then lost the election less than two years later. It's too early to tell what the heck will happen this time.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 03-06-2003, 06:06 PM   #19
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,661
Local Time: 02:03 PM
Quote:
I don't think the polls right now are that important as per Election Day 2004 results are concerned. Things could change. George Bush Sr. had a 90% approval rating after Desert Storm, and then lost the election less than two years later. It's too early to tell what the heck will happen this time.
We can only hope...

I think this election may be one of the most important voting opportunities I've had in my voting life. Of course I live in Texas where unless you vote Republican, you have no voice. But I'll wisper as loud as I can.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 03-06-2003, 06:44 PM   #20
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 01:03 PM
it goes to show u one thing.
that one thing is this-
once you attatch a name to a face of the current democratic party and what they represent....

you
sink
in
reality

keep hope alive
our main man
knows the score
it'sGeorge Walker Bush
in the year 2004

thank u-

diamond


ps-
WHOS
YOUR
DADDY
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 03-06-2003, 06:47 PM   #21
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 12:03 PM
Quote:
Playing Texas poker, Bush bets all on Iraq

March 6, 2003

BY ROBERT NOVAK SUN-TIMES COLUMNIST








A senior Bush official privately admits what his administration cannot declare publicly. The stagnant economy, a dagger aimed at the heart of George W. Bush's second term, will not immediately respond to the president's economic growth program. The economic engine will not be revived until the war against Saddam Hussein is launched and won.

Military victory is anticipated inside the Bush administration as the tonic that will prompt corporation officers and private investors to unleash the American economy's dormant power. Although it is impolitic to say so, the fact that the United States will be sitting on a new major oil supply will stimulate the domestic economy. That puts a high premium on quickly gaining control of Iraq's oil wells before they can be torched--a major uncertainty in an otherwise strictly scripted scenario.

''This is Texas poker, with the president putting everything on Iraq,'' a Republican senator (who thoroughly approves of this policy) told me. The extraordinary gamble by Bush leads to deepening apprehension by Republican politicians as they wait for the inevitable war. They consider the Democratic Party divided, drifting to the left and devoid of new ideas. Yet, Bush's re-election next year is threatened by two issues: the economy and the war on terrorism. Success on both is tied to war with Iraq.

Few Republicans discuss even in private whether the president had to make this bet. The usually unasked question: Was it really necessary to focus on Saddam's removal from power? With U.S. troops ready to head into harm's way, patriotic politicians do not want to speculate whether this war was avoidable. Any suggestion that the present course largely echoes policies of the Israeli government risks accusations of anti-Israeli and, indeed, anti-Semitic bias.

Ever since the Six Day War of 1967, my late partner Rowland Evans and I have faced such accusations whenever we questioned the wisdom of a joint U.S.-Israeli policy. Most recent was the column in the Washington Post of Feb. 18 by Lawrence F. Kaplan, a New Republic senior editor. He cited me and several other journalists in alleging that ''invoking the specter of dual loyalty'' (to the United States and Israel) by Jewish Americans was ''toxic,'' polluting and even nullifying ''public discourse.''

Two days later on CNN's ''Crossfire,'' I asked Kaplan to name one instance when I had suggested dual loyalty by anybody. He could not, because I had not. But more than misrepresenting me is involved. Origins of the decision to wage the war against terrorism by removing Saddam has nothing to do with the ethnic origins of its supporters, but constitute something that should be explored without being attacked.

On July 7, 1996, the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies issued a paper by six ''prominent opinion makers'' laying out ''a new vision for the U.S.-Israeli partnership'' that urged an end to ''land-for-peace'' concessions. Among many suggestions was to ''focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq.''

The ''study group leader'' preparing the report was Richard Perle, who as chairman of the Pentagon's part-time Defense Policy Board has put priority, ever since the 9/11 terrorist attacks, on changing the regime in Baghdad.

The group also includes two current full-time administration officials: Douglas Feith, the undersecretary for policy at the Iraq-first Pentagon, and David Wurmser, a State Department senior adviser.

While removing weapons of mass destruction from Iraq was always cited as the primary reason for Saddam's ouster, the broader vision of Democratic Arab states throughout the Middle East--laid out in the 1996 report--was painted in Bush's speech last week to the American Enterprise Institute. Endorsing Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's repeated contention, the president predicted ''the passing of Saddam Hussein's regime'' will dry up financing of Palestinian suicide bombers.

The senator who told me the president is playing ''Texas poker'' is delighted to march with Bush in a crusade for democracy in the Arab world, a goal that colleagues well-versed in diplomacy view as unrealistic. That is the heart of George W. Bush's gamble, with his presidency and the course of the nation at stake.









Copyright The Sun-Times Company
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 03-06-2003, 06:49 PM   #22
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 01:03 PM
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 03-06-2003, 06:50 PM   #23
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 11,961
Local Time: 03:03 PM
keep hope alive
our main man
knows the scene
melon
in
2016



thank u -

SF10


ps-
YOU
AREN'T
MY
DADDY
__________________
Screaming Flower is offline  
Old 03-06-2003, 06:54 PM   #24
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 01:03 PM
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 03-06-2003, 07:11 PM   #25
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 11,961
Local Time: 03:03 PM
__________________
Screaming Flower is offline  
Old 03-06-2003, 07:19 PM   #26
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 12:03 PM
By 2016, Melon will be a Republican
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 03-06-2003, 07:26 PM   #27
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 12:03 PM
Will the party have given up their current views?
or will Melon have been cured by prayers?
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 03-06-2003, 07:34 PM   #28
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 12:03 PM
I am not aware of any "curing" needs for Melon. I'd reserve prayers for things other than political persuasions.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 03-06-2003, 07:43 PM   #29
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 12:03 PM
nbcrusader,

I compliment you on your true 'Christian' attitude.

I am just frustrated with the intolerance of many in the party.

It would be nice if Melon's orientation was of no significance.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 03-06-2003, 07:48 PM   #30
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 01:03 PM
Log
Cabin
Republicans..?
__________________

__________________
diamond is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com