To bad Bush and buddies are far to the right of Arnold.
What did you think of the Bush twins, a couple of mature and bright girls ehh, haha.
^ yep, just like their daddy.
Arnie and every one else (w/ the exception of Dick) on that stage are WAY more liberal than the manifesto they call a platfrom.
UTD & Seminole:
Somehow I think you perceive it to be a weakness that the GOP has a tent broad enough to encompass people with many different viewpoints on many different issues. That is the GOP’s strength. Arnold pretty well summed up the essential ideas that make one a Republican. Regardless of how you stand on abortion or gay marriage or a whole host of issues, if you share the essential ideas of the GOP, you are welcome in the party. As to the differences, we are free and welcome to debate them and try to persuade our fellow Republicans to shift their positions our way.
I chuckle when you are heard to complain that the GOP speakers are more moderate than the Presidential candidate. The DEMS played the same game at their convention trying to demonstrate that the DEM party was more moderate than its oh so liberal Presidential ticket. When McCain spoke, the point wasn’t that Bush is as moderate as McCain. The point is that someone as moderate as McCain and who was John Kerry’s first choice for his VP candidate is in the GOP and endorses GW Bush. The point is that someone as moderate as Arnold is a leader in the GOP and endorses Bush.
It has been the rule of Presidential elections forever that you win the nomination by galvanizing the activists who are more right or more left depending upon the party. BUT, you win General elections by moving to the center and attracting moderates. Undecided moderates are influenced when they see other moderates they admire supporting one candidate over another. i.e. "If McCain and Arnold are so supportive of Bush, maybe I should vote for him too. "
Now we have a surprise endorsement coming Thursday and a new speaker added to the list. :drumroll: Ret. Gen Tommy Franks, author of the new #1 Best Seller on the NY Times Book List.
“It is true that you may fool all of the people some of the time; you can even fool some of the people all of the time; but you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.” -Lincoln
Unfortunately for Bush and company strolling out moderates won’t work, as the 4 years of what this administration has done can’t be hidden, the proof of the pudding is in the eating.
…
Moderate Republicans criticize Bush
NEW YORK (AP) — A group of moderate Republicans, many long out of office, called on President Bush and the Republican party to “come back to the mainstream” on the eve of the Republican National Convention.
Instead of partisan ideology — which increasingly has led moderates to leave the party — what’s needed is a speedy return to the pragmatic, problem-solving mainstream," the group called Mainstream 2004 said in newspaper advertisements to be published Monday.
The “Come Back To The Mainstream” ads say what many moderate Republicans are thinking, said A. Linwood Holton, who was Virginia governor from 1970-74.
The problem lies with the “extremist element that controls the Republican party,” Holton said, “which has polarized this country.”
“I see the ads as an effort to try to get the Republican party to widen its appeal” to moderates around the country, Holton said. “Bush talks that way, but I don’t see him or the rest of the party doing that.”
The group in its ads called on Bush and the GOP to “stop weakening environmental law”; start using “pay-as-you-go” budget discipline to end deficits; clear the way for embryonic stem cell research; and appoint mainstream federal judges.
The way the party is now, Holton said he wouldn’t vote for President Bush. “Not unless they change substantially between now and November,” he said.
The list of Republicans signing the ad include former GOP Govs. David Cargo of New Mexico, Dan Evans of Washington, A. Linwood Holton of Virginia, William Milliken of Michigan, Walter Peterson of New Hampshire; former U.S. Sens. Charles Mathias of Maryland and Robert Stafford of Vermont; and Nathaniel Reed, former assistant Interior Secretary under Presidents Nixon and Ford, and Russell Train, EPA administrator under Presidents Nixon and Ford.
mv, the point is the tent isn't broad, only the speakers are. The only thing they have in common is that they are rich white fat cats that want to stay in power as they are fast becoming a minority in the US.
What exactly are "the essential ideas of the GOP"? If it's supposed to be fiscal conservatism, this administration has made a mockery of it. If it's supposed to be "state's rights" then we wouldn't have the very UNconservative platform that calls for changing the constitution to include discrimination. If it's moral principles then we wouldn't have an adminstration whose social and foreign policy is not based on the moral principles of the Bible.
Bush may be as moderate as McCain but the neo cons that are pulling his strings and aren't. The GOP is NOT 'moving to the center', but just giving the false appearance to get votes. We are still going to have the uncompassionate, uninclusive, warmongering adminstration if Bush wins the election.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Agent Smith: *
They are trying to win election by applying fear tactics. They have no other accomplishments in last 4 years they can mention. They will just keep reminding people about 9/11 attacks, so that if you don't vote for us it will happen again. Most of the speakers at the convention are bunch of moderate like Juliani and Arnold who are not the core of Republican Party. Majority of Republicans are conservative who are lacking in this convention. So they are not showing the real side of Republican Party. On the other side In Democratic convention, those speakers truly represented the ideology of Democratic Party. Republicans are focusing on those undecided voters who are mostly moderate, neither conservative enough to be Republican nor liberal enough to be Democrat.
[/QUOTE]
This is a very good observation. With Dick Cheney finally out of his bunker and at the Madison Square Garden, we will hear more and more about 9/11 and War on Terror and how Iraq is related to War on Terror tonight in his speech. According to Karen Hughes, this election is going to be decided on issues like security, terror, 9-11. I hope she is wrong!
UTD:
The article you post simply demonstrates the truth in what I am saying. The GOP includes a diverse population running the gamut from moderate to conservative and the internal debate is vigorous regarding where on the spectrum we should be from time-to-time. Nothing wrong with that. I sort of think that more undecided moderates will be swayed by the endorsements and campaigning of McCain and Arnold than will be swayed by the non-endorsements of guys named A. Linwood Holton.
Seminole: I don’t think you can differentiate between the tent and the speakers. The speakers are, by choice, Republicans and find more things and more of the important things that they agree with enunciated by the GOP than the DEM alternative.
You say: ** “The only thing they have in common is that they are rich white fat cats that want to stay in power as they are fast becoming a minority in the US.” ** Really???? And what do you call Teddy Kennedy, John Kerry, Barbara Boxer, Nancy Pelosi, John Edwards and the like if not “rich white fat cats” that want to stay in and acquire more power???
You say: ** “The GOP is NOT 'moving to the center', but just giving the false appearance to get votes.” ** This is not unique to the GOP either. The DEMs are not “moving to the center” by putting Nancy Pelosi in a leadership position and nominating Kerry/Edwards as their Presidential ticket. The DEMs are still quaking in fear of embracing the “L word” as they know that is the quickest way to achieve a landslide loss in any national election.
Both parties are playing the same game they play every Presidential election year which is to try to attract the undecided moderates to their side. Whoever turns out more of their hard core base and attracts more moderate undecideds wins. They are ALL “rich white fat cats” seeking power who try to act like chameleons to attract the moderates. Your whining strikes me as nothing more than a complaint that the GOP is playing the game better than the DEMs. With the shakeup in the Kerry campaign leadership that was reported yesterday, a lot of DEMs seem to be feeling that Kerry is not playing the game well enough. Nevermind a post-convention bounce. Bush has been getting a pre-convention bounce.
As to the charge of playing to fear, what exactly do you think is the great issue of this election? Gay marriage? Environment? Abortion? Come on, get real. The most important issue is security and war. I can understand why Bush-haters don't want this to be the number 1 issue because Kerry doesn't stack up very well on it.
The fact is Clinton moved the Democratic party closer to the Center while Dubya has move his away from it, its clear both parties are not 'playing the same game.'
Security absolutely should be the number one issue and one that Bush has failed on achieving. Bush can't even decide if the war on terror can be won or not, talk about a flip flopper.
I guess I am 'whining' because the GOP is better at the game than the Dems. They are better at attacking and spinnig for sure. I'm not in love with the Dems either, but when there are only two choices you have to cast your die.
I totally agree that the most important issue is security and war. I agree that the Republican spin-meisters are better at playing on the fears of the public to make it their 'issue'. But I totally disagree that this adminstration has done a good job at it. They have left us in a much more dangerous position than if it was a well thought out "war on terror".
Please don't lump everyone who thinks the policies of the past 4 years have irreparably damaged our country as "Bush haters". That implies it is an emotional position that has not been thought out based on issues, policies and principles. I assue you that my reasons for opposing the current adminstration are not based on emotions. My earlier posts were 100% behind this president before all the blunders really became apparent.
UTD:
I thought you didn’t like to make this election a discussion of the Clinton record. After the Bush victory in 2000 and the DEM defeat during the 2002 midterm elections, the DEM left wing reasserted their influence and moved the party away from the center. Please do not tell me you think boosting Pelosi to a leadership position moved the party toward the center.
Seminole:
I don’t think I labeled you a Bush hater. Even if you were one, I would not call you unpatriotic or un-American as I’ve gotten to see your love of country through your participation in this forum. I think it would take a lame brain not to acknowledge that some miscalculations and mistakes have occurred with respect to this Administration’s response to 911. Something this monumental and this new is bound to experience some bumpy spots. Despite the problems and setbacks, I happen to think we are a lot safer today because of what we have done. And I admire GW’s resolve in staying focused on the big picture objective despite the problems and setbacks. I want to know that my President will always err on the side of taking the battle to the enemy where he lives rather than letting the enemy take the battle to us where we live. Our troops are fighting and dieing to keep the battlefield away from home and any change in this will be, IMO, a disservice to the memory of the fallen and wounded. I don’t think John Kerry has this resolve and believe that he makes his mind up about what stance to take on any given day based upon what he thinks is in his own best political interest and what the polls say. Whether he is right on gay rights, the environment, abortion, or a whole host of other issues is immaterial to me because he is not the right guy with the resolve to lead us in the war on terror.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by myvoice: *
I think it would take a lame brain not to acknowledge that some miscalculations and mistakes have occurred with respect to this Administration’s response to 911. Something this monumental and this new is bound to experience some bumpy spots. Despite the problems and setbacks, I happen to think we are a lot safer today because of what we have done. And I admire GW’s resolve in staying focused on the big picture objective despite the problems and setbacks. I want to know that my President will always err on the side of taking the battle to the enemy where he lives rather than letting the enemy take the battle to us where we live. Our troops are fighting and dieing to keep the battlefield away from home and any change in this will be, IMO, a disservice to the memory of the fallen and wounded. I don’t think John Kerry has this resolve and believe that he makes his mind up about what stance to take on any given day based upon what he thinks is in his own best political interest and what the polls say. Whether he is right on gay rights, the environment, abortion, or a whole host of other issues is immaterial to me because he is not the right guy with the resolve to lead us in the war on terror.
[/QUOTE]
Hook, line, and sinker. God willing the majority of those voting this election don’t fall for this ****.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by underthedome: *
Hook, line, and sinker. God willing the majority of those voting this election don’t fall for this ****.
[/QUOTE]
God fearing Araab Americans fell for 2000 Bush because?
God fearing Araabs will fall for 2004 Karry because?
God fearing Araabs will burry Kurry and vote for a 2008 Repub becuase?
Wanna know underthome?
2000 Bush goodi. Clinton badie, supporti Jews, smokie cigars
2004 Kurry is goodie goodie. Bush badi, attacki Iraqi
2008 Kurry badi badi. He don't likei Palis.
Kids logic right! Perfectly suites Araab-Amrikkis and their Pak-lackeys.
Better this **** than voting for someone who would have been hung for treason not that long ago!
Is AOL a shill for the Republican party, UTD?
http://www.electionguide04.com/straw_poll.adp
If I recall correctly, Kerry had about 170 electoral votes sometime last week. Looks like voters are wising up!
Peace To All Who Read This…
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by myvoice: *
I think it would take a lame brain not to acknowledge that some miscalculations and mistakes have occurred with respect to this Administration’s response to 911. Something this monumental and this new is bound to experience some bumpy spots. Despite the problems and setbacks, I happen to think we are a lot safer today because of what we have done. And I admire GW’s resolve in staying focused on the big picture objective despite the problems and setbacks. I want to know that my President will always err on the side of taking the battle to the enemy where he lives rather than letting the enemy take the battle to us where we live. Our troops are fighting and dieing to keep the battlefield away from home and any change in this will be, IMO, a disservice to the memory of the fallen and wounded.
[/QUOTE]
Are you really that naive? Can't believe that you are falling for this right wing agenda. All of us here as Pakistani and Muslim know exactly what were the motives behind the war. The things you are saying are the exact words used by this administration and right wing lunatics on talk radio and Fox news channel. What do you think how many of us will buy that crap about so called war on terror. Give me a break.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Agent Smith: *
....What do you think how many of us will buy that crap about so called war on terror....
[/QUOTE]
..Yessss! We the Araab-lakeys OTOH will buy the MAToo crap about so call Jihad...
Kick the MAToo terrorist A$$
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Agent Smith: *
What do you think how many of us will buy that crap about so called war on terror.
[/QUOTE]
Enough to re-elect GW to a second term.
Frankly, I don't think "All of us here as Pakistani and Muslim know exactly what were the motives behind the war." I think there are some Pakistanis and Muslims here who don't share your delusions about the "motives behind the war." If you are also one of those Pakistanis and Muslims here who are still looking for the remote controls used by the CIA or Mossad to crash the planes into the WTC, that's all we need to know about you.
The things I am saying are also the things John McCain and Arnold SCHW are saying. If you are so far in denial that you must paint these moderates into being "right wing lunatics," more is the pity.
As to the rest of what you said, those things really are what the left wing lunatics are saying. ;)
you are indeed very naive. :)
[QUOTE]
The things I am saying are also the things John McCain and Arnold SCHW are saying.
[/QUOTE]
Arnold is a joke, who really cares what he has to say? He was there last night just for the ratings and eventually it worked. There are enough stupid people out there who will vote for a guy who is just because he is a celebrity. He is not even sure where he stands. He calls him self a conservative but he is pro abortion and a big socialist not to mention he is married in to a Democrat family. He is just a Ploy Republican are using to attract minorities. How hard is that for any one to figure out?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by underthedome: *
The politicalization of 9/11 by these clowns is quite disheartening but expected as Bush's campaign is based on fear.
[/quote]
As well as constant attacks on Kerry - which wouldn't be so bad if it weren't for all the complaining the right did before - during and after the DNC for its extremely minimal (read: three or four) "attacks" on Bush.
Arnold did a fine job yesterday - good speech.
^^
You are kidding about the "minimal" attack ads against Bush right???
Moveon.org has been blistering GW for months and months with negative attack ad after negative attack ad. Moveon.org and the Swift Boat guys are the exact same type of organization that skirts around the campaign finance limitations through sleight of hand. Moveon.org has outspent swift boat by 4 or 5 to 1 I think.
I guess Agent Smith is just one heck of a lot sharper and smarter than the overwhelming majority of Californians who believe Arnold is performing his job as governor very well (Democrats as well as Republicans). And calling Arnold a "big socialist" is just "big ignorance." And please don't tell Smitty this but there are a lot of Conservative Republicans like me who favor giving a woman the right to choose whether to have an abortion under most circumstances.