Would you vote for Bush today? [Archive] - Debate Policy

Dilloduck

01-10-2008, 10:03 AM

In theory, if Bush were running for President in 2008, would you vote for him? Why or why not?

No--his mere presence in the White House would guarantee division for 4 more years and he has failed to secure our borders.

darin

01-10-2008, 10:07 AM

I would not. I appreciate what he's done, but 8 years of ANYBODY is enough. Time to move on.

5stringJeff

01-10-2008, 10:09 AM

I think Bush sold the Right a false bill of goods. Even on the most conservative of issues, cutting taxes, he's partially screwed up, by not getting them permanently extended with a GOP Congress. I'm not saying he's a total failure, but he's no Ronald Reagan.

Mr. P

01-10-2008, 10:10 AM

No. About all he has done is spend, spend, spend and not effectively addressed major problems in the country. IMO he has been just plain incompetent overall!

PostmodernProphet

01-10-2008, 10:32 AM

....instead of?......Satan?, yes.....Hillary?, yes (was that redundant?)......against a field of Republican nominees?.....no.....

manu1959

01-10-2008, 11:34 AM

In theory, if Bush were running for President in 2008, would you vote for him? Why or why not?

who is he running against.....

avatar4321

01-10-2008, 11:35 AM

no. i wouldnt. 8 years is enough. and quite frankly if he wont deal with the problems we have now. he wont deal with them in the next term.

Little-Acorn

01-10-2008, 12:15 PM

W is running against whom?

Against any of the current Dem candidates? Yes, certainly.

Against most of the current Republican candidates? No, except possibly against McCain.

Bush did excellently on judicial appointments, and good on Defense, especially the war declared by terrorists against us. He did pretty well on taxes, considering the opposition he got. He did poorly on government spending and entitlements, and abysmally on securing the border.

He's an odd mixed bag of conservative and liberal - sort of like being "pregnant" and "not pregnant" at the same time. Most current Repub candidates would be better than him, but he is miles above any current Dem candidate. As well as being miles above any of his former Dem opponents.

nevadamedic

01-10-2008, 12:57 PM

In theory, if Bush were running for President in 2008, would you vote for him? Why or why not?

Hell yea, other then Senator McCain he has the balls to strike Iran if they keep messing with us.

trobinett

01-10-2008, 01:07 PM

I'd vote for Bush again, IF, he were running againts the same ass wipe AGAIN.:dance:

avatar4321

01-10-2008, 01:11 PM

Hell yea, other then Senator McCain he has the balls to strike Iran if they keep messing with us.

let me see if i get this straight:

You honestly believe that President Bush and Senator McCain are the only people who would stand up to Iran if they keep messing with us?

April15

01-10-2008, 03:45 PM

The acorn doesn't usually fall far from the tree. I didn't care for his fathers policies so I couldn't see his being any different. I was totally correct!

darin

01-10-2008, 03:54 PM

The acorn doesn't usually fall far from the tree. I didn't care for his fathers policies so I couldn't see his being any different. I was totally correct!

How were they similar? Which Policies of Sr. bothered you? Why?

I think, I suspect what causes you to not-like Jr, isn't His Father. It's he fact he 'won' and he's NOT a democrat.

Abbey Marie

01-10-2008, 03:58 PM

For his court appointments, integrity and toughness- YES!

For his immigration policies - NO!

It really depends upon his opponent.

Trigg

01-10-2008, 03:59 PM

I was all set and ready to vote dem against Bush last time and they ran Kerry.

300 million Americans to choose from and the best the dems could to was Kerry. Running Hillary is another huge mistake for the party. We'll see if they make the same mistake twice.

typomaniac

01-10-2008, 05:44 PM

I would vote for ANY other candidate over Bush except for Dick Cheney or Tom DeLay. I might not have said that in 2000 (even though I didn't vote for him then), but I definitely had that position by 2004.

April15

01-10-2008, 06:09 PM

How were they similar? Which Policies of Sr. bothered you? Why?

I think, I suspect what causes you to not-like Jr, isn't His Father. It's he fact he 'won' and he's NOT a democrat.
He was appointed but that is not my problem with Bush. Bush Sr. was over his head as president. Bush Jr. is over his head as a janitor.

gabosaurus

01-10-2008, 06:39 PM

Fuck no.
Is that clear enough?

Little-Acorn

01-10-2008, 07:30 PM

He was appointed but

You can always tell who the completely-gone moonbats are. They still say things like this.

:laugh2:

They probably figure people are starting to agree with them when they get so few replies, not realizing that everyone simply regards them as unsalvageable and not worth the bandwidth. But they ARE fun to watch.

typomaniac

01-10-2008, 08:32 PM

You can always tell who the completely-gone moonbats are. They still say things like this.

:laugh2:

They probably figure people are starting to agree with them when they get so few replies, not realizing that everyone simply regards them as unsalvageable and not worth the bandwidth. But they ARE fun to watch.

Most people DO agree with them. It's the rightwads who are the moonbats. :laugh2:

5stringJeff

01-10-2008, 08:35 PM

Most people DO agree with them.

Most people agree that Bush was not elected President?? :link:

Dilloduck

01-10-2008, 08:35 PM

Most people DO agree with them. It's the rightwads who are the moonbats. :laugh2:

You agree that Bush Sr. was appointed ??

typomaniac

01-10-2008, 08:38 PM

You agree that Bush Sr. was appointed ??

The reference was to Jr. It's okay, pronouns can be tricky.

Little-Acorn

01-10-2008, 08:45 PM

You can always tell who the completely-gone moonbats are. They still say things like this.

They probably figure people are starting to agree with them when they get so few replies, not realizing that everyone simply regards them as unsalvageable and not worth the bandwidth. But they ARE fun to watch.

Most people DO agree with them.

See? There goes another one! :lol:

Aren't they cute?

.

Mr. P

01-10-2008, 08:56 PM

Bush wasn't appointed. Anyone that still spouts that BS is as loony as those that claim 911 was a gov conspiracy.

PostmodernProphet

01-10-2008, 09:09 PM

Bush wasn't appointed. Anyone that still spouts that BS is as loony as those that claim 911 was a gov conspiracy.

???....of course 911 was a gov conspiracy....so was 1-800........

Mr. P

01-10-2008, 09:14 PM

???....of course 911 was a gov conspiracy....so was 1-800........

So was 1-900 BUTT HEAD! I have problems with dash stuff. :laugh2: :cheers2:

Dilloduck

01-10-2008, 09:15 PM

The reference was to Jr. It's okay, pronouns can be tricky.

I'm sorry. I thought you were berating the old one--not the young one---my bad !:bow3:

April15

01-10-2008, 09:23 PM

You can always tell who the completely-gone moonbats are. They still say things like this.

:laugh2:

They probably figure people are starting to agree with them when they get so few replies, not realizing that everyone simply regards them as unsalvageable and not worth the bandwidth. But they ARE fun to watch.I could care less what other people think in general. I state my opinions as you do yours. I am an atheist too; so I am not only unsalvageble I'm not savable either.

Yurt

01-10-2008, 10:40 PM

I could care less what other people think in general. I state my opinions as you do yours. I am an atheist too; so I am not only unsalvageble I'm not savable either.

everyone is capable of accepting everlasting life