Third Party & Independents: Archives

Bush will win points in my book if he will present policies, cuts, and numbers that will hold up under scrutiny to support his claim of reducing the deficit in half in 4 years. Not that I think reducing the deficit in half in 4 years is a worthy goal. For me, wiping out the deficit in 4 years begins to address the problem. But, since Kerry’s numbers and promises don’t add up, there is an opportunity for Bush in this area.

Also, providing a date certain for drawing down our forces in Iraq would score points I believe. I will wait and see if anything concrete comes out of the Convention. I suspect they will play to their moderate constituents who they are most in jeopardy over at this point in time. That may or many not translate into credible plans and policy proposals. Being a President of faith, my bet is he and his administration will ask the public to take their word on faith, rather, than rational, logical, and defensible concrete plans being set forth. BIG MISTAKE! But, it remains to be seen if they make it or not.

What difference does it make what the clown says. To understand what he’ll do if elected for four more years, look at what he’s done for the past four. Forget the rhetoric, numbers don’t lie and in every way this Presidency is a failure of astonishing proportions.

Did anyone bring up the “quadrennial orgy of self congratulations” in Boston a few weeks back? Or describe it in those terms?

No wait, here was the title…

DNC Opening Night Hits Homerun

And as far as the convertion goes, please let me know if GWB shows up in a flight suit saying “Reporting for Duty”.

Kerry so far has offered vague promises, secret agendas, and random flip flops. Can anyone give me a plan (besides the “Lets ship nuclear fuel to Iran” blunder) where Kerry has offered a defined plan of action?

jbv, you ask if Bush could say anything that would make him more electable. The truth of the matter is like President Ford, Carter, and his father, his actions and lack of foresight have already put this country in grave danger. Although you may hear a more centralist stand on the issues, the facts and actions in DC has not reflected this. His stand on terror and the defense of the country has lacked any form of leadership that real security agents would say matter. Failure of his party to porperly administor the tax cuts so our country does not face years of budget deficits.

Dave stated that President Bush was a man of faith, but so is Kerry. The difference between them on this issue is that Kerry understands Jesus’s parable about the woman tithing and Bush has not learned that lesson. To put this argument into prospective, who pays more taxes? Is it the rich that although they pay a larger amount in dollars the effects of paying those taxes does not hurt them in feeding and sheltering their family or the poor that pay less taxes, but have no money to spend on meeting their basic needs?

Could he pull a rabbit out of his hat? The better question to ask is the true christains have more faith in him or in what they know to be right for all Americans.

JBV:

I doubt Bush will shock anyone with anything at this convention, any more than Kerry shocked anyone at the DNC. Conventions are well scripted in this day and age.

I doubt Bush will lay out anything in as much detail as David Remer wants, and for good reason. First, by setting specific dates, one gets trapped into them. If the date specified ends up not being the right time for action, the candidate faces the choice of being battered for not doing what he said, or for doing the wrong thing at the time he said he would.

Most issues, like troop levels, should not be politicized in such a specific way. I’d like to see a general idea of his plans, both for the deficit and for troop levels, but I’d hold neither candidate to specific dates etc.

The biggest issue out of the DNC was the Democrats decision to focus so much energy on Viet Nam and so little on Kerry’s Senate career. It will be interesting to see what Bush focuses on—-I’d suspect it would be generally the war on terror with a side dish of economy.

But it will mostly be ideas (the economy is improving…look how good we can be) type of stuff rather than the detailed specifics. Remember, its an entertainment show—-not a detailed seminar.

I wouldn’t want to make any major decisions based solely on the conventions, though some will probably do so. It’s sort of like watching both cheerleading squads at a football game to determine which is the better team on the field. It might be very entertaining, but you probably won’t learn a whole lot.

I plan to watch at least part of it, especially Bush’s speech, but I’m not expecting any more surprises from this party than I got from the Democrats at their’s, though that “reporting for duty” thing came as a bit of a surprise.

Oh yes, I believe that Erica Harold, last year’s Miss America, will be speaking on Tuesday. I’m fairly certain that she’ll get a better reception than the Kerry daughters got at the MTV Awards show last night.

True christians? All [other?] Americans? I’m sorry, I have to say something here. Most of the ‘truely’ religious folks in the world believe that the last chapter in their “good book” is coming to pass. Can any optimism possibly come from them? If you hear what sounds like optimism, it’s actually fear-driven hope.

Now Bush, the holiest man in power, thinks God speaks to him. Pffft. Why is it that when Bush claims to hear God (imaginary voices) directing him to “strike” (kill people), he’s awarded praise by his followers, but if I kill someone and say that God spake to me, and told me to strike them dead, I get the ultimate punishment? Hello! Bush is a mental case everybody.

It doesn’t matter what he says at the convention, there are no “political points” to be gained by him from me. Remember, in the 2000 republicrat debates, when Bush said “I don’t think we ought(ah) do what’s called ‘nation building’”, and “I wouldn’t use force.” What’s that, a flop-flip? At the risk of sounding like I live in a mideval dungeon, I truely believe Bush is an evil man. Have you seen the signal he used to do with his hands? Well, he claimed that it was the hand sign used by the Texas University Longhorns … and he did NOT attend Texas State. Curious. Also, I want to show you guys this rediculous website, just so you can view the pictures. I don’t believe in any of this guy’s mathematical hocus pocus, but it’s entertaining nevertheless. Scroll a little more than half way down to see it.

And remember - John Kerry was/is a part of the same elite secret cult.

This is all in plain view, yet the so-called “news” giants won’t touch it with a ten foot pole. Is there a reason? Yup, but the nature of the vast entanglement of corruption and greed are so hideous that even as it is all right under our noses, it’s so unbelievably atrocious, that we could not ever believe it. And the word “conspiracy” pops onto our tongues, as if it were programmed to manifest itself the instant we hear of these things.

So, why isn’t Larry Silverstein Under investigation? Why isn’t this important enough to be aired between the Peterson, Jackson, and Bryant trials? And why does the ‘main-stream’ media refer to Ralph nader as “the other candidate” and “the spoiler”? Why won’t Chris Matthews set up broadcast at the Libertarian vs Green party debate tomorrow? AHH!

I tell you what, fellow stock of the herd, I have had an epiphany: even though I live in Ohio, a state which is up for grabs, and I’ve previously stated that I’d vote for Kerry in order to stifle Bush’s reelection, I’ve changed my mind. I’m going to vote for Micheal Badnarik, if he makes it onto the ballot here. If he doesn’t, then I’m staying home. And if bush wins my state by one vote, thereby gaining our electorial votes, then maybe what this country really needs is four more years of apocolypse-driven world war, waged by a paranoid megalomaniac who thinks that the imaginary ruler of the universe guides his reckless will. Maybe I’ll even vote for Bush, just to see how much worse things could get.

And if Kerry wins? Well, he’s just another pen wiggler in a suit, who will have no choice but to deal with Bush’s enormous pile of dung, and continue to ban this and ban that while he and his cohorts pump billions into the war on pot smokers, just as all republicrats before and to come.

Enjoy the convention everyone, or at least try to get your money’s worth of viewing time.

jbod, I just heard a Republican spokesperson for the Convention state that taxes are no longer an option for reducing the deficit (imagine truth being spoken by a major party spokesperson). That means the only option for reducing the deficit is spending cuts. Don’t you want to know where the President and this Congress intends to make those cuts before deciding to vote? If you don’t, milllions of other Americans sure do.

Neither Kerry nor Bush will get my vote until they pony up to telling us what cuts they are going to make. Industry and the economy absolutely must have improved education in order to compete in the international trade arena. It is absolutely mandatory for a responsible vote to know if either of these candidates intend to cut spending on education and whether they intend to foster vouchers for private school which will at least for a protracted period of time, undercut the quality of education at public schools be redirecting its revenues.

On domestic policy, I expect George W. Bush to use the same small-government, give-the-responsibility-back-to-the-people rhetoric that he used to win in 2000. This time, however, I wont believe a word he says.

I will actually agree with bayviking on this one:
“To understand what he’ll do if elected for four more years, look at what he’s done for the past four. Forget the rhetoric, numbers don’t lie”

Thats exactly right, although I am sure bayviking and I disagree on which numbers are really damning to Bush. For the last four years Bush has pursued a foriegn policy that I mostly agree with and a domestic policy which I mostly disagree with and which is completely at odds with his rhetoric. If he is re-elected, I expect him to do the same thing for the next four years. I do not trust him to keep his word on domestic issues (like he failed to keep it on smaller government, medicare, elligal immigration, campaign finance reform), so he has lost my vote and nothing he can SAY will convince me he is gonna be a changed man after novermber.

David:

Of course I want to know details. I only said that the types of details that you originally wanted were not going to be forthcoming, nor should they. But policy details are different.

What I really expect is ideas rather than statistics. I want to know what areas are intended for cuts, though I also recognize that cutting anything in our government ends up being a negotiation. So either Bush or Kerry can make a statement and be willing to follow through, but be unable to do so. We’ve seen Bush be able to get things done—-the book is not out on Kerry yet in that regard.

David, as far as the budget goes, increasing revenues and cutting expenses is the way to go. I doubt either one will work without the other for very long.

JBV-

According to the latest polling, Bush has a sizable lead among likely voters who believe that the War on Terror is the number one priority. Conversely, Kerry has an equally sizable lead among voters who believe that the economy and domestic issues are the top priorities.

I think the covention’s message will be along the lines of increasing support for the war while laying out a whole bunch of new agenda stuff on the domestic side. There will also be a few jabs at Kerry for good measure I’m sure.

But ask yourself the question, “what is the most important issue facing our country” and you will, in all likelihood, have your election day decision made. There are minority opinions in both directions, but most of those arguments are made by people who are firmly entrenched into either Party.

And be sure to check out the “looney left” protesters every night; that’s where the real story will be…

There’s are tremendously important issues that have almost completely escaped notice this political season. These issues won’t appear on televison.
Two to three Supreme Court seats could open in the next few years. Overturn Roe v Wade? Vote Bush. Keep it in effect? Vote Kerry. Break down the barrier between church & state? Vote Bush. Maintain the separation? Vote Kerry.
Or vote independent and hope for a tie?
In elections people usually vote their pocketbooks, and issues such as the Supreme Court take a distant backseat. In a way this election is even simpler, since there’s an incumbent, so for most voters it’s a question of rehiring a President based on the pocketbook issues of the last four years.
Yes, Iraq effects pocketbooks in a huge way. Last I saw, Iraq costs @ 300 million americans over $3 billion a month. Is it worth it?
As a political junkie, conventions are irresistably intersting for me. However, as Bayviking notes, the record is there. Think it through, and watch the conventions with a big thank you for our good friend, sodium choride.

If the “War on Terror” is the number one issue that causes you to vote for a candidate, than President’s Bush is your worse possible choose. No, I’m not a die hard democrat, but as a realist I have to put the blame for losing the idealogical war squarly on Bushs shoulders. Every sense he failed to find WMD’s in Iraq America has been put in mortal danger. For can you honestly state that the masses in this country and the world would believe him even if he had hard proof that a WMD was about to be launched against us. Just look at the reaction in August by everyone when he issuesed the latest terror warning. No body even thought twice about the danger.

If Bush were running against a hypothetical opponent, I might not vote for him. As it is I have to compare him to a real opponent – John Kerry. Besides, Bush can be impressive. I am always surprised when people say Bush has no vision. I heard him speak on foreign policy on three occasions overseas (Warsaw, Berlin and London). They were wonderful, comprehensive speeches, but they were hardly reported in the media. Each time, journalist professed surprise at the sophistication of the ideas. Then they covered the atmospherics or the street theater staged by various semi-professional demonstrators carrying a lot of expensive props, like paper masks of the President.

Liberals have successfully hung a label on George Bush, that he is not intelligent. When he does something that proves them wrong, they attribute it to luck and/or ignore it all together. They did the same to Ronald Reagan. Historians are beginning to appreciate Reagan’s genius, but at the time all we heard about was the “amiable dunce”. The thing you notice when you read what both said is how consequent they were. They broadly laid out the directions, which experts ridiculed as impossible, even stupid dreams (the end of the Communist empire and freedom for the Middle East, respectively) and then worked to make their visions reality. George Bush is not as articulate as Reagan, but don’t mistake his lack of eloquence with lack of vision. Reagan’s vision came to pass, so now it is hard to imagine any other result and we don’t usually give him the credit he deserves. Bush is making more progress than we currently give him credit for. I fear a John Kerry victory will derail the dream, just as a Mondale victory in 1984 might have saved the evil empire.

jbod, my reference to taxes was with regard to cutting them permanently as Bush wants to do, but, conservative think tanks and Congress persons alike are now agreeing, that is a fool’s errand.

I agree, conventions aren’t really there to do much but preach to the choir. I was hoping that they could shed some light on the candidates for me, an independent. Who’s left? Nadar isn’t even on the ballot in my state.

Honestly, I think that conventions do nothing to persuade anyone, one way or the other. Debates are where decisions are formed. The problem is that only the two main parties are involved in these debates. This seems unfair to smaller parties, aren’t there equal time rules?

I think that in ‘08, Hillary Clinton and Condi Rice should run against each other then we could probably get a strong third party going and actually get something accomplished in this country.

Roy, the Federal Elections Commission makes the rules regarding equal time. The FEC is made up of 5 Democrats and 5 Republicans. What chance does a third party or independent candidate have with such an exclusionary body making the rules to keep any further competition from occuring.