Bush Losing Core Supporters

Thank you, oh thank you, for making my hellish morning brighter today!

 

:lol:

This would have been relevant in either 2000, or 2004, not 2 years into his second term.... :lol:

 

except, squid, that you forget the ways of the total f*cking moron. due to their total f*cking moronic state, it takes them more or less 5 years to realize what's going on around them.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(livelychick @ Jun 9 2006, 09:33 AM) [snapback]268536[/snapback]</div>

Me too. It made me realize that there are more Democratic morons than Republican morons.

I love listening to President Bush's daily poll #'s as reported by the press - do you think they will ever realize he is not running for office again and could not give a hoot about them.

Imagine if we retreated from Iraq like the Democrats and thier spokesman Jumpin Jihad Jack Murtha wanted - Zarqawi would still be breathing, no functioning Iraqi government, and Saddam back in power ramping up his torture and rape and murder chambers like before - oops, Murtha preferred that, and oops, he did not mind 1,000,000 Rowandans slaughtered, and he hasn't minded the genocide in Darfur either --. Have not heard much from Jumpin Jack about the repurcussions of pulling out of Somalia like a girl - now that the Islamonfascists have that locked up - another Democratic mess. And let us not forget to ask where Jumpin Jack and the Democrats were when North Korea went nuclear under their watch :blink: And are we to give him/them a pass for allowing India and Pakistan to go nuclear too? Amazing, Jumpin Jack and the Democrats let the nuclear genie out of the bottle THREE times while they were in charge.

We would be a lot better off without Jumpin Jack and the Democrats in charge - we are still cleaning up all the messes they made (not including the Oval Office carpet). And thankfully their hate continues to blind them. Witness the latest election in Democratic California where I think the REPUBLICAN won! And watch Jumpin Jack and his band of hate America/hate the military put up another Winner Candidate for President in 2008. JEEZ you would think that after running algore and D student/bring my home movie camera to war Kerry they would have learned a lesson. Time to wake up guys - the Republicans are probably going to have a candidate that will actually be able to speak in public - the fact that you guys lost to President Bush TWICE must be soooo fustrating. But lets see who Jumpin Jacks party runs -- could it be 'I dont care if my husband has affairs cause i understand why - the carpetbagger - the one with negative poll #'s in the 40%+ range - the one who could not muster a "job well done" to the guys who smoked Zarqawi yesterday - Hillary? Rumor has it Karl Rove has already donated to her campaign and she is being set up by Murdoch too. Or maybe it will be - I lost my home state algore? Even better yet - D student sugarmommy marrying John Kerry will come back for more -- if he does, please someone get him some muscle relaxers and whatever you do, do NOT send him to Hillary's plastic surgeon.

Anyhow, thanks for reaffirming my belief that blind hate will doom the Jumpin Jack Murtha Democratsi in 2008 - and of course their running planks like:
1. let all the illegal aliens in and give them amnesty and voting rights
2. Iraq = Vietnam - America lost this war, so pull out now
3. Partial Birth Abortion - here is a good one -- and I am pro-abortion but against this
4. Tax the Rich - that mantra is getting old
5. Tax the Dead - this is a real winner for Jumpin Jack -
6. Gay Marrage - wake up guys - 75% of ALL Americans are against this - but I hope you stick with it
7. The economy sucks - too bad unemployment is 4.6% so not too many of us have time to hear you yapping about this one either. In fact the fact the economy is so good may protect you by preventing Americans from actually having too much time to think about what Jumpin Jack stands for.

 

Based on his poll numbers, I predict President Bush will not even RUN for reelection!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Jun 10 2006, 01:09 AM) [snapback]269080[/snapback]</div>

I HATED BUSH BEFORE IT WAS COOL TO HATE BUSH!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(The Amazing Arthur @ Jun 10 2006, 06:45 AM) [snapback]269142[/snapback]</div>

Now there's a badge of distinction that contains no honor in the wearing. When is it ever cool to hate someone? Tis better to remain silent and thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.

Wildkow

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Jun 9 2006, 10:00 AM) [snapback]268556[/snapback]</div>

For reference, that particular zone nearly always votes republican - and it was a much tighter race than usual, even though the republicans spent quite a lot more money holding on to a 'guaranteed' seat.

Just in case you wanted to be accurate instead of frothy =)

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(larkinmj @ Jun 8 2006, 08:10 PM) [snapback]268419[/snapback]</div>

That was hilarious! Thank you, Michael.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(geologyrox @ Jun 10 2006, 07:21 AM) [snapback]269150[/snapback]</div>

Huh?

There really aren't very many "safe seats" in California for Republicans. They can go to the Democrat camp pretty easily. The recent replacement Congressman (50th District?) when to the Republican because the Dem was nutjob ... they had her on tape telling Mexican nationals here illegally that they "didn't need papers to vote in an American election". And while a respectible fellow poster feels that statement is taken out of context, the full tape shows that the candidate was supportive of social benefits for "migrants". That's welfare for illegals, and that's a hot topic in California.

Had she been more moderate, and not from the looney left, she would have won.

Even with those areas that usually vote Republican, California is reliably in the Democrat Party camp. It did not vote for the current president in either election, and supported Bill Clinton in both of his elections. You have to go back to landslides to get California to vote for the Republican candidate, GHW Bush in 1998 and, of course, our favorite son candidate Reagan.

The California Assembly and State Senate have been in Democrat party hands since 1970 (except for a brief period in 1995 - 1996 when the Assembly had a slight Republican edge). The current ratio is 25 / 15 Democrats to Republicans in the State Senate, and 48 / 32 in the Assembly.

At the time of the recall election, only one executive office in the state was held by a Republican; all the rest were held by Democrats. Now, with a Republican governor, I think we have two. With the next election, the Democrat candidate for governor will probably lose (nutjob!) and it may be that the Republican lieutenant governor candidate may win also (California can have a Governor from one party and a lieutenant Governor from the other).

Interestingly, I think the imposition of term limits actually helped the Democrat party more than the Republican party.

 

Hmmm, the liberal internet media sites I visit must have been confused... I had read that the 50th Congressional District was reliably republican - significantly more conservative than the rest of the state (and even the county.) They even voted for BushCheney2004 - by a wider margin than this special election. It really should have been an easy replacement for the right. I don't know that I think it hails anything coming, but I wouldn't call it a decisive positive for the republicans.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(geologyrox @ Jun 10 2006, 03:14 PM) [snapback]269265[/snapback]</div>

This is true.

Bush's low approval rating *is* a danger signal.

Sure he's not running for President again. But he is a vain man that craves approval. So what this means to me is he is going to try to get them back with stupid, dangerous, waste-of-time stuff like the most recent marriage amendment. Now, couldn't that time be better spent on real problems like energy, the budget and the war? So it worries me about what lamebrain idea he's going to come up with next to try and make nice with the extreme right wackjobs. I mean, what might Bush do to appease the f*cking moron contingent? Think about it.

Oh, and what larkinmj said about the Busby quote et al. The Republicans bought the 50th district back. To my way of thinking, what they did is a prime example of the sin of having too much money. OH...and the stupidity of the voting public who allowed themselves to be bought.

Bilbray and Busby run against each other again in November. I'm sure Bilbray can manage not to do anything stupid in the few months before that election. But I predict he'll eventually pull a "Duke" and I can scream "Told you so" with a clear conscience. Of course, the voters will still be stupid when they elect their next Republican. I mean the Republicans could run a dead chihuahua against a Democrat in the 50th and as long as the chihuahua was born in the U.S.....it will win. Of course a dead golden retriever would be easier.

BTW I surprised no one said anything about Bilbray being a carpetbagger (didn't own a house in the district. Instead he moved in WITH HIS MOTHER. Not only a carpetbagger but a cheap one at that.)

The 50th so got what they deserve. And they'll regret it. But they'll never learn their lesson.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(larkinmj @ Jun 10 2006, 03:31 PM) [snapback]269268[/snapback]</div>

I voted in this election here in the 50th in San Diego. Actually 44 percent of the district's voters are Republicans, 30 percent Democrats (about 3:2) and 22 percent independents. Lot's of independents, I'm an independent. To win it, the Democrat needed to get all the Democrats and the Independents. Busby only got 57% of Democrats. No real difference than in 2004, Bush beat Kerry in the 50th by about the same margin in 2004 as the Bilbray beat Busby in this 2006 election.

My opinion, the Democrats should have won it but they had a weak candidate. They should have won because Busby had momentum from the previous election and especially given the crimes and greed of the last Republican Rep in the 50th Cunningham. But poor Francine Busby was in way over her head. I don't know what was in the news nationally, but check out her resume, she hasn't had a job since 1981. She is on the Cardiff School Board in the Cardiff School District (a small sleepy beach town) which up until recently only had one school, an elementary school (pre-school to 5th grade). Now they split that same school into two elementary schools with a combined attendence of just 750 students. In local interviews on the news she came off vague and clueless mainly because she didn't know much about what was in the McCain bill.

On the other hand Busby's opponent had eight years experience in Congress and has a 12 year focused record on trying to solve the illegal immigration problem long before it was very news worthy nationally.
But far more important than that, he probably won because he's a surfer.....

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Karnac @ Jun 10 2006, 05:27 PM) [snapback]269335[/snapback]</div>

Yep, with a good candidate, the Dems should have won this one. The national media focused on it to see if Bush's low poll numbers would translate into a loss of the Republican majority in Congress come November. Now that Bilbray won, everyone is saying "of course he won." It would have been front page news and endless analysis if she had won.

I thought Bush beat Kerry in that district only by about 5 points, but I'll defer to your local knowledge of it. The fact is, without the immigration issue, I suspect the scandal issue would have lost the seat to the Dems.