Third Party & Independents: Archives

ELECTION IS HERE: TIME TO BOTTOM LINE IT

This election is a referendum on Bush. If he’s bad, then it’s time to give the new guy Kerry a chance. If not, then let Bush have four more years.

KEY AREAS OF BUSH RECORD ON A SCALE OF 1 TO 10

BUSH RECORD ON TERRORISM – 2 OUT OF 10

* BIN LADEN ON THE LOOSE. Why the heck has public enemy number one still not been caught after over three years since 9/11/2001??? The reason is Bush took his eye off the ball and invaded Iraq before finishing the job of catching bin Laden. To the point, by March 13, 2002 Bush said, according to an official White House transcript “I’ll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him.” Now the President says he wants bin Laden dead or alive. This is a huge FLIP FLOP on one of the most important issues facing our country.

* TERRORISM ON THE RISE. Never before have so many US and foreign troops and citizens died from terrorist attacks in Iraq and elsewhere. And the numbers are increasing. Bush hasn’t focused our military resources in the relentless push that is needed to completely dismantle al Qaeda. Neither has Bush adequately funded the Homeland Security Office, which lets 95% of shipping containers come into the US uninspected. As a consequence, now the President admits it’s not a matter of if the next terrorist attack will occur against the US, but when. BOTTOM LINE: BAD JOB FOR BUSH.

BUSH RECORD ON IRAQ – 1 OUT OF 10

* IRAQ WAS A MISTAKE. The reason Bush rushed us into war – that Iraq supposedly has weapons of mass destruction – was all wrong. Major major major mistake. For that kind of mistake, the buck has got to stop with the President.

* IRAQ IS A MESS THAT IS NOT BEING CLEANED UP. Iraqis can’t travel safely in their own streets. Iraqis avoid being near foreigners because of the risk of attack. Whole sections of Iraq are lawless war zones. Terrorism is increasing each month. Infrastructure is still in shambles. Why is the Iraq situation declining from bad to worse? The reason is we never had a decent plan to secure the peace in that country. Another bad mistake.

* WE TORTURED INNOCENT IRAQIS. We disgraced ourselves. Bush says we are bringing Democracy to Iraq. Then we round up innocent people without adequate proof of wrongdoing, nearly all of whom have since been released, and subject them to bizarre torture aimed at violating their deepest religious mores. Sadly, this is not surprising since Bush has said we are not following the Geneva Convention, which protects our troops and citizens from outrageous conduct such as beheadings. Instead, in doublespeak, Bush’s administration said we are following “the principles of” the Geneva Convention. Even more shocking, no senior administration official such as Rumsfeld has been shown the door.

* DID WE INVADE THE RIGHT COUNTRY? At the same time we were invading Iraq, North Korea already had nuclear weapons and was building more. Iran was busily obtaining nuclear weapons. Lot’s of people are asking if we invaded the right country. Was Iraq really that urgent? Should we have gone into Iran or North Korea? Or nowhere! BOTTOM LINE: BAD CHOICES, BAD JOB FOR BUSH.

BUSH RECORD ON THE ECONOMY: 3 OUT OF 10

* THE TAX CUT FAILED. Nice tax cut for the rich but it didn’t much help the rest of middle America, who lost a lot of jobs and faced skyrocketing costs of living in health care, education and fuel costs. For the first time since Herbert Hoover’s administration, we lost more jobs than we created. Net net by all accounts more than a million jobs are gone over the past four years. Even over the past several months during the so-called “recovery”, job growth can’t keep up with population growth. Government deficits are out of control and we will be paying for them for years to come.

* TOO MANY AMERICANS ARE STRUGGLING. How are Americans getting by with skyrocketing health care, education and fuel costs? Not with much help from the government. Tax cuts of only a few hundred dollars a year for middle income Americans can’t make up for the squeeze from these costs. There’s no direct help in the fuel area and limited help in the education area. The federal drug program is limited to seniors and is very hard to understand. This is really a drop in the bucket compared to Bush’s failure to make good on his promise to let everyone buy drugs from Canada. The President’s broken promise demonstrates that he holds the interests of big drug companies above those of the public. Prescription drugs sold in Canada are largely the same pills sold here. Whole communities have been forced to break the law by sponsoring bus trips to Canada to avoid their elderly and sick from becoming impoverished from the astronomical cost of drugs in the US.

BUSH ON SOCIAL ISSUES: 5 OUT OF 10

* THE PRESIDENT HAS HELD THE LINE BUT IS DIVISIVE. Social issues are what is keeping the President afloat. The country is divided down the middle on social issues. There are reasonable arguments as well as misinformation on both sides of the aisle. It’s a shame Bush couldn’t build more unity, but you can’t blame him entirely for people being put off by his folksy swagger persona.

* OUT OF TOUCH ON STEM CELL RESEARCH. In a recent Annenberg poll in August, 64% favored and 28% disfavored use of embryos to conduct stem cell research. In the abortion debate, it’s a real live fetus lost on the one hand versus no health benefit for the mother. The stem cell debate balances a tiny embryo against health gains for millions of sick people. Bush says he is permitting stem cell research, but according to stem cell researchers, he really isn’t. There are only a few old and sick cell lines that can be used. Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of embryos are frozen only to be ultimately discarded because it’s against the law to use them for stem cell research. If Bush gets elected, cures from stem cell research for millions of sick people are at least four more years away, and the US could lose the edge in this promising and potentially profitable field of research.

BOTTOM LINE: Bush’s record (average of 3.7 out of 10) is weak. Time to give the new guy a chance. Kerry proved himself capable and Bush’s match during the debates. Many of the people hollering about Kerry should remember all the similar hollering about Clinton, who turned out to do a pretty good job for America. No big wars on Clinton’s watch. A great economy. At least four terrorist attacks averted by the Clinton administration through hard work leading up to the turn of the millennium, whereas the Bush administration ignored similar signs leading up to 9/11. Maybe that’s why bin Laden was so surprised that 9/11 exceeded all his expectations in running flawlessly. Republicans will try to blow off this post as “talking points” or the like, but the content is factual. We haven’t caught bin Laden yet and its been over three years since 9/11. Iraq is a mess. The economy is still losing jobs. Bush is playing a game on stem cell research by appearing to support it while in reality crippling it. Vote carefully.

Iraq isn’t an issue with me. kerry would have had us there under UN control, Bush has there now. I don’t think we have any business being there.
So instead, I used the issues that affect my everyday life in deciding who to vote for.
I was leaning about 90% in voting for the Constitution party, but when Bush upheld the Constitution by not renewing the assault weapons ban bill, that dropped to about 60%.
Bush still has a chance for my vote. I just won’t know for sure until tomorrow morning.

kctim:

I’ll disagree with you on one issue there. I dont think Kerry ever would have had us in Iraq, and in part because I don’t think the UN ever would have fully approved it.

Were Kerry President, we would still be sanctioning Iraq (or perhaps sanctions would have ended). We’d have another passel of UN resolutions to wave in Saddam’s face.

Now, some would have preferred that to our present course of action, and if so, they should vote for Kerry. Kerry talks tough about “killing terrorists” but he won’t do it (unless we are attacked). If that’s the kind of president you want, vote for him.

On the other hand, Bush took steps to head off further terrorism, and to date America has not been attacked since 9-11. Is the world safe? Not yet. Will it ever be? Not completely.

Remember that the cry from the 1940’s was “Never again” in reference to the Holocaust. Yet we have had ethnic cleansing in Cambodia, Rwanda, The Balkans, Congo, Sudan, and more. It hasnt stopped, and it never will stop completely.

Despite having suffered through 9-11, the acounting scandals, the bankruptcies and an energy crunch, the Bush economy over the last 18 months has been moving forward, thanks to the tax cuts in part. 1.9 million jobs have been created in just the last 13 months.

I’m gonna continue with something that is working.

Rumsfeld wrested control of handling post-war Iraq from the State Department saying something to the effect, “Give me 100% control and you can hold me 100% accountable.” Rumsfeld’s War

Electoral College Meta-Analysis

Below is a meta-analysis directed at the question of who will win the Electoral College. Meta-analysis provides more objectivity and precision than looking at one or a few polls, and in the case of election prediction gives a more accurate current snapshot. The calculations are based on all available recent state polls, which are used to estimate the probability of a Bush/Kerry win, state by state.

Electoral prediction with undecideds and turnout: Kerry 323 EV, Bush 215 EV

Popular vote prediction with undecideds and turnout: Kerry 50%, Bush 48%, Nader/other 2%

JB
Thanks for the link. I too feel like kerry will win somehow tomorrow.
At least I can take comfort in the fact that Missouri still seems to believe in America.

has the U.S. ever had such a poorly planned military undertaking in the past 100 years?

Ummm, I can think of at least 3…

Were you being serious here? Because if you are, this is an example of someone who is simply way too out of touch to be rational. Much like those saying this is the worst economy since the depression, etc.

If you don’t like Bush, fine, but let’s not get crazy here.

Rhinehold, I was being entirely serious.

What are the three you are thinking of that were as poorly planned as the invasion of Iraq. I don’t mean undertakings that were a spectacularly bad idea, like Viet Nam. VN was planned well, unfortunately for the planners they had underestimated the resolve of their opponent.

In Iraq there was no discernable planning of what to do once the initial invasion was over. The war there certainly is not over, and there was no contingency planning for any situation other than “Iraqi people fall to their knees in thanks and immediately all go register to vote.”

Well, kctim, it might end up a tie, 269 to 269. If it played straight from there things can get pretty weird. One possibility would be Acting President John Edwards with Vice President John Edwards. Or a simple but odd President Bush and Vice President Edwards. Or a really whacky scenario of a President McCain. Almost makes me hope for an electoral tie. Almost.

rev matt

Anzio, Torch and Market Basket leap to mind. All those operations, by the way, were parts of an ultimately successful war, as Iraq will be.

The Iraq invasion was a marvel of efficiency and effectivess. We made mistakes after that success. But even after all, I don’t think anyone would have believed in early 2003 that the U.S. could conquer and occupy Iraq with the losses we suffered. Many were predicting ten times as many casulties.

SOrry, market garden - garden

Market Garden was a British Operation.

I always wonder why opposition to the Draft is so low. With about 50% of the country supporting the Iraq War, 50% should also support the Draft. What kind of man would not put his life on the line for his beliefs? If the Repugs believe in the justification for Iraq, they should all go there.

Aldous.

Let’s get rid of Bush today. Enough BS.

Aldous

Your logic doesn’t follow. People can support things without wanting personally undertake them. That might be why John Kerry only pays 12.3% in taxes and you don’t see a lot of liberals inviting street people to stay overnight in their homes. Or take the “good” side. I am a conservative who supports gay marriage, but I don’t want to participate and I believe in performing life saving operations, but I wouldn’t try to do one.

We have a professional volunteer military that does an excellent job. There is no need for a draft in any foreseeable circumstances. The only people who talk seriously about draft are John Kerry and his supporters and they don’t mean what they say. In the event of a World War style emergency, I expect the situation would change, but so would everyone’s perspective. As it is now, the average draftee would not be up to standards and an old guy like me would just get in the way. My son wants to join the marines. I am encouraging him in that decision because it seems right for him. I am proud that he is considering it, but if he chooses not to do it that would be okay too. Remember the concept, volunteer.

You can reduce any argument to its absurd lengths. It can make sense to a point, but not beyond. Do I want Osama bin Laden dead? Yes. Would I support someone killing him? Yes Would I be willing to kill him personally in cold blood? Maybe. Would I be physically able, i.e. bring myself to do the actual act? Probably not. Which by the logic you offer means I cannot support his elimination.

Market Garden was an allied operation. I see your point about American, but Iraq is also an allied operation. If you want we can substitute the overconfidence that led to the Battle of the Bulge. My father got a purple heart there. He told me it was the only time when he thought the U.S. might lose. He was mistaken.