More meat for the whiners
 

"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

"basskisser" wrote in message
oups.com...

NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
basskisser wrote:
Dan J.S. wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
oups.com...
Dan J.S. wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
President Bush Job Approval
Updated Daily by Noon Eastern

Bush Job Approval
Strongly Approve 15%
Somewhat Approve 21%
Somewhat Disapprove 17%
Strongly Disapprov 46%

RasmussenReports.com

Disapprove is misspelled next to the 46% - proves its inaccurate!
How to hell does a misspelled work indicate that the poll itself is
inaccurate??????

I dunno, but little voice says it is. Must be right!

Uh......okay.......



Poor Dubya has dropped another three percentage points on the Faux
News
poll, but he came up a couple points on the Rasmussen Poll. His
average on
the major legit polls is around 33-34%. Still too high.

But his base hasn't left him. When Carter's approval dipped below 30%,
even
his own party disapproved of him nearly 2 to 1. Last I saw of Bush's
approval rating, it was in the low to mid 70's among Republicans.

NOYB and Hannity the only two people on the planet that thinks Bush is
doing a good job!!!!


You must have missed the part where I stated that more than 70% of
Republicans approve of the job Bush is doing.




Maybe in the hard core Republicans of your neighborhood. the only reason he
survived the last election was the Democrats found the almost most
unelectable candidate possible and he still came close to winning. His
popularity has not increase. If he controlled spending, he would have a lot
higher rating. The only pol's with a lower rating are Congress itself. The
Democrats have not put anybody in charge of the DNC with a living brain. If
they were to propose a valid way to control spending, excess government
intrusion in to our lives, and a valid immigration reform they could sweep
the elections. And if they do not come through on those promises, they
should be swept out in the next election. Forget the war in Iraq, most do
not like the way it is being run, but we are stuck there, and most of the
people who vote realize this. The current problem with the Democratic
candidates for office, are they are not addressing the above items, but
promising more spending on social programs, and complaining about Bush and
the war. Forget the complaining, does as much good as Harry ranting about
Bush on a insignificant newsgroup. Come up with valid plans, not this crap
like Kerry did last time about he has plans but they are secret until after
the election.

More meat for the whiners
 

Calif Bill wrote:
Maybe in the hard core Republicans of your neighborhood. the only reason he
survived the last election was the Democrats found the almost most
unelectable candidate possible and he still came close to winning.

No, the Democrats chose the candidate that pulled in by far
the most votes during the primaries.

It's called democracy.


... His
popularity has not increase. If he controlled spending, he would have a lot
higher rating.

I guess this is your not-quite-honest way of admitting that
President Bush has done a lousy job? Sort of like the way a
lot of people who obviously voted for him now say that they
didn't?


.... The
Democrats have not put anybody in charge of the DNC with a living brain. If
they were to propose a valid way to control spending, excess government
intrusion in to our lives, and a valid immigration reform they could sweep
the elections.

Uh huh. That all hinges on your definition of "valid." For
somebody who has claimed at times to be a centrist or
moderate Democrat, you seem strangely uninformed, or just
unwilling to give credit, to the Democratic Party for their
positive proposals on these very issues (and more).


... Forget the war in Iraq, most do
not like the way it is being run, but we are stuck there

By whom?

I guess we should just shrug it off.

..... Come up with valid plans, not this crap
like Kerry did last time about he has plans but they are secret until after
the election.


???

One of the things I have learned from this newsgroup is just
exactly how far people will go to justify their extremely
stupid & destructive political postures.

DSK

More meat for the whiners
 

"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
Calif Bill wrote:
Maybe in the hard core Republicans of your neighborhood. the only reason
he survived the last election was the Democrats found the almost most
unelectable candidate possible and he still came close to winning.

No, the Democrats chose the candidate that pulled in by far the most votes
during the primaries.

It's called democracy.


... His popularity has not increase. If he controlled spending, he would
have a lot higher rating.

I guess this is your not-quite-honest way of admitting that President Bush
has done a lousy job? Sort of like the way a lot of people who obviously
voted for him now say that they didn't?


.... The Democrats have not put anybody in charge of the DNC with a
living brain. If they were to propose a valid way to control spending,
excess government intrusion in to our lives, and a valid immigration
reform they could sweep the elections.

Uh huh. That all hinges on your definition of "valid." For somebody who
has claimed at times to be a centrist or moderate Democrat, you seem
strangely uninformed, or just unwilling to give credit, to the Democratic
Party for their positive proposals on these very issues (and more).


... Forget the war in Iraq, most do not like the way it is being run,
but we are stuck there

By whom?

I guess we should just shrug it off.

..... Come up with valid plans, not this crap
like Kerry did last time about he has plans but they are secret until
after the election.

???

One of the things I have learned from this newsgroup is just exactly how
far people will go to justify their extremely stupid & destructive
political postures.

DSK


I did not vote for either Bush or Kerry. Kerry was far behind in the polls
and primaries until the DNC put all their resources behind Kerry. Is part
of Democracy to have a party leadership committee, but this DNC seemed to
deem Kerry their person. Just like the RNC blessed Dole a few years prior.
Both unelectable. If the xNC supplies you gross more resoures than any
other candidate, you will get a huge leg up.

More meat for the whiners
 

Calif Bill wrote:
I did not vote for either Bush or Kerry.

Yeah I bet.

... Kerry was far behind in the polls
and primaries until the DNC put all their resources behind Kerry.

???

No, Kerry won almost all the primaries with fairly large
margins. Edwards came in second a number of times, Dean won
a single early primary.

Where do you get this loony-toons stuff?


... Is part
of Democracy to have a party leadership committee, but this DNC seemed to
deem Kerry their person. Just like the RNC blessed Dole a few years prior.
Both unelectable.


Why was Dole "unelectable?"

DSK

More meat for the whiners
 

"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
Calif Bill wrote:
Maybe in the hard core Republicans of your neighborhood. the only reason
he survived the last election was the Democrats found the almost most
unelectable candidate possible and he still came close to winning.

No, the Democrats chose the candidate that pulled in by far the most votes
during the primaries.

That Dem candidate also got more votes in the November election than any
other Democrat in history. But they got beat by a Republican candidate who
got more votes than *any* President ever.

More meat for the whiners
 

On Tue, 23 May 2006 01:25:01 +0000, Calif Bill wrote:

Forget the
war in Iraq, most do not like the way it is being run, but we are stuck
there, and most of the people who vote realize this.

I don't mean to jump to severely on what I am sure is an off-handed
comment, but I'd point out, *we* are not stuck there. Some 140,000 odd
young Americans are, and death is their daily reminder. To me, if it
weren't for Iraq, Bush would be just another inept President, of which
this country has a long list. However, make no mistake, the "buck" for
this war stops on this Presidents desk. That buck includes 2,500 young
American deaths, some 17,000 American wounded, and some 40,000 Iraqi
civilian deaths.

More meat for the whiners
 

No, the Democrats chose the candidate that pulled in by far the most votes
during the primaries.


NOYB wrote:
That Dem candidate also got more votes in the November election than any
other Democrat in history. But they got beat by a Republican candidate who
got more votes than *any* President ever.


Then why does Calif Bill (and so many other Republicans)
regret it now?

Are you sure about this? My understanding is that voter turn
out was very low.

DSK

More meat for the whiners
 

"DSK" wrote in message
. ..
No, the Democrats chose the candidate that pulled in by far the most
votes during the primaries.


NOYB wrote:
That Dem candidate also got more votes in the November election than any
other Democrat in history. But they got beat by a Republican candidate
who got more votes than *any* President ever.


Then why does Calif Bill (and so many other Republicans) regret it now?

Are you sure about this? My understanding is that voter turn out was very
low.

DSK


I am a registed Democrat. Would probably register Libertarian if they had
more power, or a better platform. And you are a Yellow Dog Democrat?

More meat for the whiners
 

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 23 May 2006 01:25:01 +0000, Calif Bill wrote:

Forget the
war in Iraq, most do not like the way it is being run, but we are stuck
there, and most of the people who vote realize this.

I don't mean to jump to severely on what I am sure is an off-handed
comment, but I'd point out, *we* are not stuck there. Some 140,000 odd
young Americans are, and death is their daily reminder. To me, if it
weren't for Iraq, Bush would be just another inept President, of which
this country has a long list. However, make no mistake, the "buck" for
this war stops on this Presidents desk. That buck includes 2,500 young
American deaths, some 17,000 American wounded, and some 40,000 Iraqi
civilian deaths.

Was not an offhand comment. Was a thoughtful comment. We are at war with
Muslim extremists. Most of the country realize this. The Iraq war was as
ill advised as opening up the Russian Front in the 1940's. But if we pull
out now, you do not think the Muslim extremists will not only be emboldened
but have a recruiting bonanza? We will be having lots of suicide bombers
right here in the USA. We are stuck now, and have to figure out a way to
disengage while leaving a semi-functional Iraq. If they crash in to total
extremism later, will not be the disaster that just pulling out now would
be. We could have won in Viet Nam in less than a year after we pulled out.
The Tet Offensive decimated the VC. Thet lost 40-50 thousand. Most of
their equipment, etc. But we were told we lost the Tet Offensive by Walter
Cronkite, etc, and the American people had had enough. So a couple million
Cambodians, and Vietnamese died in the following purges.

More meat for the whiners
 

"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
Calif Bill wrote:
I did not vote for either Bush or Kerry.

Yeah I bet.


Since it is a secret ballot, I can not prove it, so you get to keep your
money.

... Kerry was far behind in the polls and primaries until the DNC put
all their resources behind Kerry.

???

No, Kerry won almost all the primaries with fairly large margins. Edwards
came in second a number of times, Dean won a single early primary.

Where do you get this loony-toons stuff?


... Is part of Democracy to have a party leadership committee, but this
DNC seemed to deem Kerry their person. Just like the RNC blessed Dole a
few years prior. Both unelectable.


Why was Dole "unelectable?"

DSK


http://www.boston.com/news/politics/..._kerry_debate/

Sort of explains Kerry selection.

Dole was unelectable as he had no charisma, no real platform and no
leadership showing. Sort of like Sen., Kerry. Senators make a poor choice
for President. They are not CEO's but cogs in a big gear of the Congress.
Dealmakers more than leaders. Best would be a major CEO of a large,
successful company or a Governor. JFK was good on the Charisma part, but
was not a real successful POTUS. Got us the Bay of Pigs, and the Cuban
Missile Crises, and then died before a large legacy could be defined. And
he gave us LBJ, who really screwed the pooch via Viet Nam. And JFK was only
a Senator for a short time, 8 years as opposed to 20+ for both Dole and
KErry.