Bush to conservatives: Agree with me on amnesty or you're anti-American

**Crazed Rabbit** · 06-05-2007, 04:48

Originally Posted by Banquo's Ghost

I'm intrigued by the levels of conservative disillusionment that have developed over the last couple of years.

Just as a straw poll, is there anyone here who would vote for George W Bush again - on his merits and record to date - should it be possible?

I know much of the political process depends on choosing between candidates, but I'm interested to see if any supporters still have some confidence in President Bush.

No, no, and hell no. Not even if it was him or Kerry. Bush might well lose Iraq, but at least Kerry would have done it quicker.

As for the straw that broke the back - I'd say a year or so ago, when Bush started his push for Amnesty.

CR

**drone** · 06-05-2007, 16:45

Originally Posted by Banquo's Ghost

Just as a straw poll, is there anyone here who would vote for George W Bush again - on his merits and record to date - should it be possible?

I was never really happy with him as president, I had wished for a better choice in 2000, but I was sure that I didn't want Gore in the White House. Doesn't really matter anyway, since Virginia usually goes close to 60/40 GOP/Dem for the presidential election. By 2004, I was already fed up the theft of our liberties, the incompetence apparent in the administration, and the realization that we were sold a bag of lies to invade in the first place. So I threw my vote away and checked the Libertarian box. No way I was voting for Kerry. And, again, I live in Virginia, so it didn't matter. If Bush could run again, I would probably vote for whatever idiot the Dems nominate, even Hillary, and pray that Congress flips back to the GOP.

Having 2 big parties hurts, but I don't think it would be so bad if the nomination process were changed. The current process is just one long money-sucking charlie foxtrot.

**Slyspy** · 06-05-2007, 16:51

A vote is never thrown away so long as it is used, even in protest.

**Gawain of Orkeny** · 06-05-2007, 16:52

If the dems had run Lieberman for pres they might have actually won . Bush did talk a good game however before he was elected. Thats why I dont take much stock in the debates. They try to tell you what you want to hear but rarely come through. The republican class of what was if 96 is a good example of being swallowed by the machine.

**Xiahou** · 06-05-2007, 17:12

Originally Posted by drone

I would probably vote for whatever idiot the Dems nominate, even Hillary, and pray that Congress flips back to the GOP.

Hah! Hillary might be the best that the Dems have to offer this go round.

**Odin** · 06-05-2007, 17:41

Originally Posted by Xiahou

Hah! Hillary might be the best that the Dems have to offer this go round.

Sadly you might be right, so that means since 1980 there would be a Bush or Clinton on the ballot in every election.

Enough already

**drone** · 06-05-2007, 17:41

Originally Posted by Xiahou

Hah! Hillary might be the best that the Dems have to offer this go round.

Well, fortunately Bush can't run again, so I won't be forced to vote for her.

Originally Posted by Slyspy

A vote is never thrown away so long as it is used, even in protest.

Try out the electoral college method for your next election. It's teh bomb!

**Lemur** · 06-05-2007, 20:13

Originally Posted by Xiahou

Hah! Hillary might be the best that the Dems have to offer this go round.

You know, this nation is not a monarchy or an oligarchy, so I would find it deeply depressing if we had Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton. That's just all kinds of wrong. Our highest offices are not family baubles to be traded among the First Citizens. I hope we never, ever see another Bush of Clinton in the White House.