Bush\'s numbers fall after primetime speech
 

http://rasmussenreports.com/2005/Kat...ember%2018.htm

BGC, how does this mesh with your theory that once Bush starts campaigning, his numbers will go up?

How will Republicans deal with the internal war between Tom Delay who says all possible fat has been cut out of the budget, and Bush who says that funding for N.O. will come from cuts elsewhere in the budget?

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz....................
 

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz..........<Yawn!!!>
Bush is not running for re-election so all this time critizing Bush is a waste of time. The Tom DeLay comment was made with sarcasm dripping from his lips.

You Dems can be rather dim sometimes. I won't be sorry to see Bush go. His "compassionate conservatism" was just 'Democrat Lite'. Perhaps we can get a real fiscal conservative in the white house. But will the 'bread and circuses' voting public let this happen?

Re: Bush\'s numbers fall after primetime speech
 

[ QUOTE ]
http://rasmussenreports.com/2005/Kat...ember%2018.htm

BGC, how does this mesh with your theory that once Bush starts campaigning, his numbers will go up?

How will Republicans deal with the internal war between Tom Delay who says all possible fat has been cut out of the budget, and Bush who says that funding for N.O. will come from cuts elsewhere in the budget?

[/ QUOTE ]

Using popularity numbers derived from polling a population in which the vast majority gives very little rational, intelligent, objective, and serious consideration of the issues is a joke. The population on this forum is probably smarter than average, and yet most here are still idiots. So what does a stupid poll matter? Incidentally, I'll bet Adolph Hitler's popularity numbers were very high in the 1930s. I'm not a Republican and didn't vote for Bush, but these types of posts are silly.

Re: Bush\'s numbers fall after primetime speech
 

In your post you tell us why he lost support. Republicans want to send a message: "We will not spend unlimited money on all this stuff!"

Come the election, these GOPers are not going to vote for Democrats. So again, your snap poll means nothing even if completely accurate.

Where is the "Bush's numbers fall after UN note" thread?
Where is the "Bush's numbers fall after thunderstorm" thread?
Where is the "Bush's numbers fall after Grey makes a post" thread?

Re: Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz....................
 

[ QUOTE ]
Bush is not running for re-election so all this time critizing Bush is a waste of time.

[/ QUOTE ]Not true at all. Bush's approval ratings influence the 2006 vote, his legislative agenda, the 2008 vote, and party identification which has very long-term effects.[ QUOTE ]
The Tom DeLay comment was made with sarcasm dripping from his lips.

[/ QUOTE ]No, it wasn't. Please provide some evidence of this.

Re: Bush\'s numbers fall after primetime speech
 

[ QUOTE ]
Come the election, these GOPers are not going to vote for Democrats.

[/ QUOTE ]True, but they could not show up to vote, especially if they feel betrayed on fiscal conservatism (which they already have been- they just haven't noticed).

Re: Bush\'s numbers fall after primetime speech
 

[ QUOTE ]
True, but they could not show up to vote, especially if they feel betrayed on fiscal conservatism (which they already have been- they just haven't noticed).

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you kidding? When has a Republican in office ever stuck to fiscal conservative guns and yet Repubs keep flocking to the polls to vote for them. Just like when has a Democrat really helped anybody elevate their life yet minorities keep flocking to the polls to vote for them. Both parties have their sheep flocking every election in order to, if nothing else, vote against the other party (neither realizing that they both are selling out to their so-called principles every time).

Yep.......Polticians Who Fight for Their Principles are Rare
 

When has a Republican in office ever stuck to fiscal conservative guns and yet Repubs keep flocking to the polls to vote for them. Just like when has a Democrat really helped anybody elevate their life yet minorities keep flocking to the polls to vote for them. Both parties have their sheep flocking every election in order to, if nothing else, vote against the other party (neither realizing that they both are selling out to their so-called principles every time).
************************************************** ******
Good post.
There are a few principled politicians. Ron Paul of Houston, TX (Congressman,TX, R, aka "Dr No"), Jesse Helms (Senator, NC, R, he was a lightning rod but he had his political principles and he fought for them despite the bad press)..... Paul Wellstone (Senator, MN, D) was a principled liberal who was not ashamed of being known as a liberal (he was a rare breed).

Reagan was largely principled with a strong dose of pragmatism. Because the Democrats controlled Congress, Reagan made a lot of compromises to achieve his aims. Bush41...Gag! he broke his promise not to raise taxes and became a 1-term wonder.

Re: Bush\'s numbers fall after primetime speech
 

[ QUOTE ]
Just like when has a Democrat really helped anybody elevate their life yet minorities keep flocking to the polls to vote for them.

[/ QUOTE ]Did you not notice anything that happened during the Clinton Administration?

Re: Bush\'s numbers fall after primetime speech
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Just like when has a Democrat really helped anybody elevate their life yet minorities keep flocking to the polls to vote for them.

[/ QUOTE ]Did you not notice anything that happened during the Clinton Administration?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I saw an internet-fueled economy put more money in govt coffers than ever before. And I saw "don't ask, don't tell" (a silly compromise which resolved nothing) be placed on the military, and I saw a President who's lack of character undermined his administration even as his supporters still talk about character not mattering, and I saw endless conflicts where the U.S. resorted to 15000' bombing raids rather than trying to solve any real problems, and ... what am I missing? Oh! I saw the growing threat of Islamic extremism handled very poorly (but to be fair, Clinton wasn't the only one).

If those with less made progress in the 90s, it wasn't because of any particular action by the PrezUSA, it bwas a booming economy fueled by a business surge as the internet and personal computers becvame widely available to millions of Americans like never before.

But I'm sure you see things differently behind your rose-colored glasses and Democrat buttons.