Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: rpm on March 04, 2004, 12:56:09 PM
-
How long will it be before Bush's re-election campaign totally derails like his Father's did? I say September and the wheels come off the apple cart.
-
whatever the date, it will be after Kerry's. His hasn't started yet and it's coming unglued.
-
How many crocodile tears from the left will we have to endure if he's re-elected?
-
I think you mean from the Right after he tanks it.
-
Even if he wins the electoral and not the popular vote again i wont complain. If he is what the electoral voters of the country want then he is want we will have for better or for worse.
-
I believe Kerry's campaign manager will have his hands full just like Ma Richards' did. It should prove to be a really"spirited" contest.
Everyone thought she'd eat 'im alive.
-
How Bush can destroy Kerry fast
The Democratic Party chose a nominee Tuesday who probably cannot win the White House in November.
In opting for Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts and turning down Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina, Democrats have broken from the pragmatism and moderation that dominated their party’s profile under Bill Clinton and Al Gore in the 1990s.
Their party has now moved back to the liberal extremism of Walter Mondale and Michael Dukakis that characterized the 1980s — with the same predictable result.
It is now up to President Bush to take advantage of this by implementing a three-part strategy in the coming campaign.
First, his paid media must attack Kerry’s voting record to define him as an ultraliberal. There are likely those in the White House who are urging Bush to run positive ads. That won’t work. Even if positive ads produce a small, short-term bounce for Bush, events soon will come to dominate, and the impact of those ads likely will evaporate.
But if Bush uses the next eight months to educate voters on Kerry’s opposition to the death penalty, his vote against the 1991 Iraq war, his poor attendance record in the past year and his opposition to the Defense of Marriage Act, he could put this election away by defining Kerry right now.
Kerry has not been tested. He was nominated by running in the shadow of Howard Dean. Throughout the fall, all eyes were on the former Vermont governor. When he crashed and burned in late January, Kerry, as the liberal heir apparent, inherited his disappointed voters.
Meanwhile, Edwards never got the money or the momentum to run a decent race against Kerry because Gen. Wesley Clark — remember him? — crowded the field. By the time Edwards got Kerry one on one, the number of primary states stretched his resources to the point where he could not afford it.
But now, Kerry is a fair and inviting target. Bush has to zero in on him and push him to the left right now. Whether Kerry ever consorted with Jane Fonda is beside the point, but Kerry’s voting record is not.
Second, while his anti-Kerry ads are running, the president himself needs to make Americans understand that the war on terror is still atop our national agenda. He needs to elevate the sense of threat so that his advantage as a war president begins to count.
Kerry has also made a big mistake in backing the criminal-justice approach to terrorism, seeking to transform the war on terror into a series of DEA-style busts. Voters recognize that Bush is right when he says that this is a war against nation-states that sponsor terror, not a hunt for criminal bands in the mountains.
Pundits say that Kerry’s admirable war record makes national security irrelevant as a campaign issue. They couldn’t be more wrong. His efforts to defund the CIA and his opposition to the funding of the Iraq war are all key targets for Bush.
Some of those who have Bush’s ear may urge him to speak more about the economy and less about terror. This would be a big mistake. Bush must use his profile as president to make Americans understand how crucial staying the course in the war on terror is to our safety. Bush has lost a lot of support among women with the war in Iraq. But he can restore that support by stressing the need to make America safe from terror attacks and to stress how important it is to stick to this task.
Finally, Bush must begin to pull American troops out of Iraq after the handover in June. He should leave a sufficient number there, in safe, secluded bases, to intervene if the bad guys try to come back in power. But the daily drip of casualties must end.
President Johnson kept the troops in Vietnam and lost. President Nixon was withdrawing them, and he won.
If Bush’s ads and surrogates savage Kerry while the president raises the profile of the war on terror and his foreign-policy team brings the troops home, this race could be over long before either Bush or Kerry is officially designated as the standard bearers of his respective party.
-
Kerry is still leading Bush in the polls.
http://www.pollingreport.com/wh04gen.htm
-
Most democrats do not care that kerry is not a conservitive Democrat( i wouldnt call him liberal either, you want liberal you go for dean or kucinich). I am just glad we finally elected someone that is a democrat.
-
the neo-libs have a hard choice, kerry now or 4yrs of boosh and then hillary in 2008.
if kerry wins in 2004, hillary won't run in 2008, the neo-libs should let boosh "screw up " for 4 more yrs then hillary can just walk into the white house in 2008 and she just might carry the senate and house with her coattails.
BTW, what is hillary's "war record"?
-
Why are you so fasinated by hillary john? I think you ditto heads are way to facinated by here. Most democrats dont even like her as much as you guys do.
-
Originally posted by Frogm4n
Most democrats do not care that kerry is not a conservitive Democrat( i wouldnt call him liberal either, you want liberal you go for dean or kucinich). I am just glad we finally elected someone that is a democrat.
I guess voting the party line makes more sense than voting the issues?
Lemmings, all lemmings, follow kerry this way>>>>>>>>>>
-
Do you even read what i typed rip. I said i was glad that the party actually elected somebody who is a real democrat. Someone who actually supports the issues that the democratic party is based on.
-
Shame we're talking about who will tank first and not who's the better candidate. :(
-
Originally posted by Frogm4n
Why are you so fasinated by hillary john? I think you ditto heads are way to facinated by here. Most democrats dont even like her as much as you guys do.
It's similar to the liberal fixation on Rush.
-
rush is hilarious,pure entertainment. i dont hate the guy like these guys hate hillary.
-
by some quirk, mr ketchup were to win, the american ppl would deserve whatever followed - none of it good
but I don't see that happening, thought the media will do everything in its power for j that
(http://www.stanleyart.com/herman_.jpg)(http://www.gwu.edu/~action/2004/sc0503/fishfrykerr.jpg)
KERRY FOR PRES!
-
And so the hatred for kerry begins. Notice how his oppenents can only make fun of his apperance. While the crazy liberals only try to bash bush for his failed policys. Sure other crazy liberals bash bush on his goofy apperance, but none on these boards as of late.
-
Originally posted by Frogm4n
And so the hatred for kerry begins. Notice how his oppenents can only make fun of his apperance. While the crazy liberals only try to bash bush for his failed policys. Sure other crazy liberals bash bush on his goofy apperance, but none on these boards as of late.
Only his appearance? Nah, that's just the most fun. We also enjoy bashing his flip flops and voting to send the troops to war with no equipment.
-
wow martlet i thought you were smarter then that. You do realize that was only one vote in 91 that alot of senators voted against because it was filled with pork.
-
Originally posted by Frogm4n
wow martlet i thought you were smarter then that. You do realize that was only one vote in 91 that alot of senators voted against because it was filled with pork.
His voting to send the country to war and then voting not to give them the funds they need to fight it was "1 vote in 91"? No offense, Froggy, but you need to pick up a paper more. I'm into politics. If anything, I know how my own senator votes on issues that are important to me.
-
Originally posted by Martlet
His voting to send the country to war and then voting not to give them the funds they need to fight it was "1 vote in 91"? No offense, Froggy, but you need to pick up a paper more. I'm into politics. If anything, I know how my own senator votes on issues that are important to me.
Mind telling me which vote that was? I'd like to research that Martlet...since your an expert and all.
-
well if you want to "research ' it , why don't YOU 'research ' it, why do you want someone else to 'research ' it?
-
a) Because he seems to have the information.
b) I can't find it in his voting records.
-
no wonder you can't find kerry's voting records, he was only there to vote 2/3 of the time, was kerry AWOL from his senate duties? kerry should give full disclouser of his voting or non-voting records.
-
Originally posted by john9001
no wonder you can't find kerry's voting records, he was only there to vote 2/3 of the time, was kerry AWOL from his senate duties? kerry should give full disclouser of his voting or non-voting records.
D'OH! (http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/legislative/a_three_sections_with_teasers/votes.htm)
(http://www.indefinite.org/images/owned/owned_full_metal_jacket.jpg)
-
Here's a right wing synopsis. Just take the instances and google them.
http://www.gopusa.com/news/2004/february/0226_kerry_rnc.shtml (http://www.gopusa.com/news/2004/february/0226_kerry_rnc.shtml)
I specifically was referring to Kerry's vote against the 87 billion in financing, after voting to send the nation to war.
-
Originally posted by john9001
no wonder you can't find kerry's voting records, he was only there to vote 2/3 of the time, was kerry AWOL from his senate duties? kerry should give full disclouser of his voting or non-voting records.
And, of course, there's that.
-
Just because the Republicans and Democrats split a vote on where the money was coming from does not mean Kerry wanted their supplies cut off.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
Just because the Republicans and Democrats split a vote on where the money was coming from does not mean Kerry wanted their supplies cut off.
Really? So, why don't YOU show me where he proposed legislation to get the money from somewhere else.
-
its gotta be a mindset that ANYONE would be better than bush for someone let alone an entire party would stand behind a flip flop bs artist left field millionaire such as jk - amazing
give me a break, offends my intelligence even consider such a tool as our POTUS
-
and bush isnt a millionare flip flop artist in his own right eagler?
-
(http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/graphics/bush_gollum.jpg)
-
Leftist extremists? :lol
-
and bush isnt a millionare flip flop artist in his own right eagler?
I read Eagler's comment as an indictment of the Democratic Party's apparent platform of opposing Bush as a 'millionaire flip flop artist' and instead offering their own.
-
1 A WOMEN WELL NEVER WIN
2 A BLACK PERSON WILL NEVER WIN
just wont happen il leave you guys to find out why they wont win
(S)
-
Originally posted by simshell
1 A WOMEN WELL NEVER WIN
2 A BLACK PERSON WILL NEVER WIN
just wont happen il leave you guys to find out why they wont win
(S)
As niether Bush, Kerry, nor even Nader is 1) a woman or 2) Black your observation is moot.
My prediction: A 'Bonesman' will be elected in November.
-
Didn't you guys watch the Simpsons? The guy who spits out the bite of the three eyed fish will lose.
-
Make sure and show up here after Bush is re-elected....I'de be amused to hear what you have to say then....maybe.....well....nev ermind.
-
Kiss yer sister guys, it's a freakin' tie. Both sides have a candidate they don't really want. My hope was to get someone different, but it isn't going to happen.