Bush or Kerry?

[DREDIOCK]

Originally posted by Nash
I doubt it. The Bush team already shot its load in trying to paint Kerry as a bad choice. The "flip-flopper" and the whole Vietnam thing.
 

LOL best part of that whole deal was that Bush didnt have to "do" much of anything. Kerry did most of the work himself.

Im not REAL impressed with either . Bush is ok but leans a bit too far to the right for me. And The Dems typically lean too far to the left

That being said I think Bush will win out over Kerry.
I just dont "see" Kerry as Pres.
He just doesnt have .."it"

I really think Kerry is the Dems sacrificial lamb for this election and what they really want it Hillary in '08( a thought that really scares me) inasmuch as the Reps really dont have anyone in the wings.
what Bush needs to do is dump Cheney and have  Condolisa(sp?) Rice as his running mate so she can run against Hillary

[Nash]

Originally posted by DREDIOCK
LOL best part of that whole deal was that Bush didnt have to "do" much of anything.

I wouldn't be so sure about that.

[Dead Man Flying]

Isn't it ironic how everyone's personal choice for president seems to mirror who they think will win?  I guess everyone likes to vote for a winner.

-- Todd/Leviathn

[Hawklore]

Originally posted by Eagler

I got it.

Lets, see it depends really on what all happens in the time till Election, I don't want neither, but I'd say Bush would do better because he's allready in Office, and uh, kinda knows, how things work. But, I'd say Bush (Close Race) or Kerry (Landslide), either way it's not gonna be Kerry and close or Bush and a landslide.

[rpm]

Originally posted by Eagler

I totally agree. Bush has been a disaster.

[capt. apathy]

Kerry, and hopefully by a big enough margin that the courts can't get away with appointing Bush again.

[Heretik]

Eagler I'm confused, are you saying that the gentleman on the right is involved in the slinging of the substance on the left?

[AKcurly]

Originally posted by AKIron
Just want a record so I can say nanny nanny boo boo come November. Who will it be?

I say: Bush (close race)

I think this is one instance of a race where we find many of the voters extremely unhappy with both (ignoring the 3rd guy) candidates.  

Therefore, I believe the candidate for VP is going to be extremely important.  If Bush ditched Cheney and convinced McCain to run as his VP, then yes, I believe Bush would win by a large margin.  But Bush isn't ditching Cheney ...  Maybe Bush can convince Cheney to fake a heart attack.

If Kerry makes a so-so choice for VP, then Bush will win in a close race.  If Kerry chooses someone like Edwards, I think Kerry will win a close race.  Too bad McCain turned Kerry down ... it would have been Kerry by a large margin then.

curly

[_Schadenfreude_]

McCain issue does beg the question......if you are asked to be VP what do you put first political belief's or do you owe your country service?

[AKcurly]

Originally posted by _Schadenfreude_
McCain issue does beg the question......if you are asked to be VP what do you put first political belief's or do you owe your country service?

When Ron Reagan ran, he chose a republican with an extremely liberal reputation as his running partner -- George Bush, Sr.  I recall with great humor Bush referring to Reagan's economic ideas as "voodoo economics."  Of course, after Bush became his running mate, that quickly changed.  Bush Sr. is a pretty straight guy, so I like to think he believed in country service.

The last serious politician that I recall switching parties was Andersen (long time ago.)  He switched from Republican to Independent.

Doesn't happen often, does it?  How about England?  The first name that comes to mind is Winston Churchill.  He switched parties twice, right?

curly

[Eagler]

guess RR was not a "serious politician" as he switch from dem to Republican when he saw the Demacrats become a hand out robin hood social service

[lada]

Originally posted by NUKE


Strong economy, low unemployment, low interest rates, success in Iraq, strong leadership.
 

and terrorism has been supressed .. sure sure

[Creamo]

I don't care.

The O'Club will be just as retarded, arguing about who won and how the President didn't do everything Jesus would have with hindsite.

[Bodhi]

Originally posted by Creamo
I don't care.

The O'Club will be just as retarded, arguing about who won and how the President didn't do everything Jesus would have with hindsite.

lol   but oh so true!

[_Schadenfreude_]

Originally posted by AKcurly
When Ron Reagan ran, he chose a republican with an extremely liberal reputation as his running partner -- George Bush, Sr.  I recall with great humor Bush referring to Reagan's economic ideas as "voodoo economics."  Of course, after Bush became his running mate, that quickly changed.  Bush Sr. is a pretty straight guy, so I like to think he believed in country service.

The last serious politician that I recall switching parties was Andersen (long time ago.)  He switched from Republican to Independent.

Doesn't happen often, does it?  How about England?  The first name that comes to mind is Winston Churchill.  He switched parties twice, right?

curly

Quite a few local politicians either manage to piss off the party or get pissed off by the party and stand as independants - for instance the Mayor of London "Red Ken" Livingstone threatened to stand for Mayor, was warned not to, got kicked out of the Labour party, stood anyway, won by a huge margin, then the Labour party invited him back into the party since then they could say they won London - anyway he nearly lost this time around because he was a member of Labour.

On the whole British politics is more a party thing where American politics seems to be more about the individual - Tony Blair can go tomorrow and it won't make a bit of difference - Labour Gov will still be in charge till the enxt election.