How many times can one man flip flop?

[kcmcdonald]

mtnbiker,
you're going to easy on these people, be careful they may think they were right.

 

[shergald]

We clearly disagree about Bush and Kerry. It is easy to take apart a 20 year senatorial career and find changes, call them flipflops if you want to, but you are deceiving everyone by not being attuned to the changing circumstances that confront the country that might make for taking different even opposite positions on issues. One of course is political strategy which all politicians take into account. What will get me elected? Clinton did not keep voicing that he was going to change welfare as we know it because he cared about dismantling the security net that is needed in a competitive capitalistic system.

You talk about leadership. Bush is not a leader and his buttons are pushed by others behind the scene. He just does not have the intellect and knowledge about economic and world conditions to do that. He is a lightweight and I suspect when he asked for his library at some time in the future, he will offer the Bible. He is quite unlike Clinton who was probably the most intelligent man we have had to date as a president, barring perhaps, Jimmy Carter, and he understood where he wanted to take the country on all levels. He was the decision maker. He understood economics quite well, indeed, and predicted that his tax increase would stimulate the economy. And it did: it started the biggest economic boom ever experienced in this country. He was not a Bush, dependent on a group of advisors who then pushed his buttons. Bush has no vision, just slogans like 'compassionate conservative.' What the hell did that mean anyway? Economics under Bush will endanger the country and put us into an old time depression in the long run. And that is possibly the problem. He can't see the big picture nor see ahead beyond the next election.

Bush's problem is that he does not flipflop. He needs to learn that. When you are wrong, you just don't keep going in the same direction to prove you 'mean what I say.'

 

[MtnBiker]

Originally posted by shergald
Kerry 48%, Bush 44%.

That's from likely voters with Nader included as a candidate. Without Nader, the spread is 9%. Who did you say was running scared?

March 09, 2004, 12:40 p.m.
The Poll Results You Haven’t Seen
The public's verdict on which campaign has been fighting fair — and which hasn't.

By now you've read about new polls showing Democrat John Kerry leading George W. Bush in the presidential race. The most recent Gallup poll, for instance, has Kerry leading Bush by a 50-percent-to-44-percent margin, with third-party candidate Ralph Nader pulling two percent. Kerry leads Bush 52 percent to 44 percent in a one-on-one match-up.



The results have attracted a lot of coverage. But there are some other results in the poll that haven't gotten as much attention.

For example, Gallup found that the public seems to believe Kerry and the Democratic party have, at least so far, conducted a dirtier campaign than Bush and the Republican party.

Gallup asked, "Would you say that George W. Bush and the Republican party have — or have not — attacked John Kerry unfairly?" Twenty-one percent said yes, Bush and the GOP have attacked Kerry unfairly, while 67 percent said no, they have not. Twelve percent had no opinion.

Then Gallup asked, "Would you say that John Kerry and the Democratic party have — or have not — attacked George W. Bush unfairly?" Thirty-five percent said yes, Kerry and the Democrats have attacked Bush unfairly, while 57 percent said no, they have not. Eight percent had no opinion.

Breaking down the numbers by party, 33 percent of Democrats said Bush and the Republicans have attacked Kerry unfairly. But 53 percent of Democrats said Bush and the Republican party have not attacked Kerry unfairly.

Twenty-one percent of independents said Bush has been unfair, but 65 percent of independents said Bush and the GOP have not attacked Kerry unfairly.

Nine percent of Republicans believe Bush has been unfair, while 84 percent believe he hasn't.

Looked at from the other party's perspective, 59 percent of Republicans said Kerry and the Democrats have attacked Bush unfairly, while just 35 percent said Kerry and the Democrats have not attacked Bush unfairly.

Thirty-five percent of independents said Kerry has been unfair, while 55 percent said Kerry has not attacked Bush unfairly.

Thirteen percent of Democrats said Kerry has been unfair, while 80 percent said he has not.

In all, it appears that Republicans feel more aggrieved at the moment — not surprising, given the months of Democratic campaigning and the Bush campaign's belated counterattacks. But perhaps more importantly, more independents seem to believe that Kerry and the Democrats have been unfair than believe that Bush has been unfair.

Finally, the poll had one more surprising finding. Gallup asked respondents, "Regardless of whom you support, and trying to be as objective as possible, who do you think will win the election in November?" Fifty-two percent said Bush, while 42 percent said Kerry. Six percent had no opinion.


link

 

[shergald]

Mtnbiker
My memory was slightly off, but you clarified the results quite well. There will undoubtedly be a lessening of the difference by election time. However, the raw results are what they are at this stage and it does not really bode well for an incumbent president to be so far behind after three years of demonstrated practice on the job. They (commentators) say that Bush is very likeable in person, a sort of nice guy. BUt from afar he is really disliked by many. Whether it is his arrogance or swagger, I don't know.

I noticed that there are a lot of Republicans on this site, and it would be enjoyable to chitchat, but if you go to some of these threads, you can't help notice the bigotry and racism that underlies a lot of the Bush support that is expressed by many. I tapped into it and it is not very pleasant talking to persons of this ilk (see the thread on Kerry Elite WHite Man or something like that where the racism is blatant).

 

[lilcountriegal]

Ya know... I dont agree with the majority of the racism posters on this board regarding that subject. However, one thing I will give them props for is for they state what they believe, say who they are, and stick to it. On the other hand, on one of your first posts on this message board, you claim to be republican. In reading the rest of your posts, that is obviously a fallacy.

What I wonder is how you can find fault with those posters when your record began as shady as it did...

 

[shergald]

I was never a Republican. But as I read some of the rediculous Bush promoting posts on some of these treads, I didn't mind starting with a put on. It's purpose was to elicit the barrage of criticism it did. There are a few calm reasonable minds on this message board, but for the most part I found what I expected to find: a lot of angry hot-heads who seem to be bigots and racists at heart, sincere ones, I am told or so you say, but racists none the less. I have better things to do with my life than waste it talking to such people. In any case, it was a few nights of recreation but now I have to get back to living life. This is not life.

 

[OCA]

Originally posted by shergald
We clearly disagree about Bush and Kerry. It is easy to take apart a 20 year senatorial career and find changes, call them flipflops if you want to, but you are deceiving everyone by not being attuned to the changing circumstances that confront the country that might make for taking different even opposite positions on issues. One of course is political strategy which all politicians take into account. What will get me elected? Clinton did not keep voicing that he was going to change welfare as we know it because he cared about dismantling the security net that is needed in a competitive capitalistic system.

You talk about leadership. Bush is not a leader and his buttons are pushed by others behind the scene. He just does not have the intellect and knowledge about economic and world conditions to do that. He is a lightweight and I suspect when he asked for his library at some time in the future, he will offer the Bible. He is quite unlike Clinton who was probably the most intelligent man we have had to date as a president, barring perhaps, Jimmy Carter, and he understood where he wanted to take the country on all levels. He was the decision maker. He understood economics quite well, indeed, and predicted that his tax increase would stimulate the economy. And it did: it started the biggest economic boom ever experienced in this country. He was not a Bush, dependent on a group of advisors who then pushed his buttons. Bush has no vision, just slogans like 'compassionate conservative.' What the hell did that mean anyway? Economics under Bush will endanger the country and put us into an old time depression in the long run. And that is possibly the problem. He can't see the big picture nor see ahead beyond the next election.

Bush's problem is that he does not flipflop. He needs to learn that. When you are wrong, you just don't keep going in the same direction to prove you 'mean what I say.'

HOLY CRAP! BILL CLINTON AND JIMMY CARTER THE TWO MOST INTELLIGENT PRESIDENTS TO DATE????????? Are you kidding us? Name one intelligent thing either of them did?

 

[lilcountriegal]

No one is claiming that this board is life. What we claim, is this is where we go to discuss issues of life. Others will agree that the racism thread and the racism being brought into every topic got a little above and beyond the norm. Hence that thread was closed.

However, with all due respect, you begin your posts on the premise of a lie. It is no surprise that you received a barrage of criticism. One thing this board does not lack is intelligence among the regular posters, democrats and republicans alike. Most everyone saw through your little white lie by the time you submitted your 3rd post.

My suggestion, is to stand proudly behind the party you support. If its the democrats,fine. You can add alot to this board with your ideas and thoughts. Yes, some do end up in flaming piss tests, but some do not. For instance, you can answer the questions in other threads as to why Kerry flip-flops so often. what Kerry would bring to this nation as a President, etc. etc. As of yet, no one has stepped up and given a reasonable reply to those.

If you're looking for a board where everyone is a Democrat and agrees on every issue, patting each other on the back, well then you've got the wrong board and you can exit via enter door. BUT, if you're looking for reasonable debate about why typical americans feel the way they do, then stick around. I"m sure you could learn alot, and teach alot for that matter.