Republicans: ABANDON SHIP, ABANDON SHIP!

[on-ramp]

these are real ex-republican voters speaking on Bush:

"He's been a world-class polarizer. I don't know if I can stomach four more years with him as president. He misled us into the war in Iraq (news - web sites) and has mismanaged everything since."

"The foreign policy is a mess. The offensive in Iraq is reckless and built on bad decision making. On the domestic front I understand that terrorism has struck and he's occupied but any real progress on a domestic agenda has ground to a halt,"

Lloyd Huff, 64, retired director of the Dayton Research Institute in Ohio, says he has "voted for a Republican in every presidential election I can remember" but it will be Kerry this time because "the Bush administration has been the most deceitful, duplicitous, secretive administration this country has ever had."

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=564&e=19&u=/nm/campaign_crossovers_dc

[on-ramp]

[techweenie]

Apparently the only defense of Bush is an attack on Kerry.

As posted before, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth is headed up by a Bush family friend and a Republican PR firm.

I wonder who all those sailors and soldiers were standing with Kerry at the DNC podium? I wonder what GWB would give to have had a guy whose life he saved give a speech for him?

Originally posted by SoCal911SC
Clearly, Bush is very vulnerable this year.

Which is why the Dems will be kicking themselves in November. They picked a horrible candidate to unseat Bush, and will lose.

If they had managed to pick someone even halfway decent, Bush would be gone. Kerry simply isn't the man to do it, though.

There was always Hillary.

Originally posted by techweenie
Apparently the only defense of Bush is an attack on Kerry.

Pot calling kettle black?

[techweenie]

Originally posted by Mark Wilson
Pot calling kettle black?

And still, no defense of Bush?

Originally posted by techweenie
And still, no defense of Bush?

This thread subject is only flatulance. Only defense is to hold nose until smell passes.

[Moses]

Originally posted by techweenie
And still, no defense of Bush?

The most effective defense of Bush may simply be that he's not John Kerry.

[on-ramp]

Originally posted by Mark Wilson
This thread subject is only flatulance. Only defence is to hold nose until smell passes.

the purpose of this thread is to expose the fact that a few republicans will be voting for Kerry this November due to some of Bush's shortcomings. primarily, the war in Iraq, the deficit, tax cuts for the rich, and various other topics that Americans care about.

during the upcoming repub. convention, the honorable thing for Bush to do is to apologize to the families that have lost loved ones in Iraq and to the thousands of other innocent people killed over there. His war, his beliefs for the causes for war (ie. WMDs), were false and he should admit to that. This may be political suicide but many may actually forgive him and he might be better off because of it. of course a shameless man never apologizes for something that is right, fearing the consequences.

[techweenie]

Originally posted by Moses
The most effective defense of Bush may simply be that he's not John Kerry.

Pretty sad state of affairs for the Republicans, then.

Failed economic policy, failed national security. failed attempts to 'get' OBL, failed energy policy; failed attempts to quickly conquer, stabilize and get out of two countries... but at least GWB had no questionable purple hearts.

Originally posted by techweenie

Failed economic policy, failed national security. failed attempts to 'get' OBL, failed energy policy; failed attempts to quickly conquer, stabilize and get out of two countries... but at least GWB had no questionable purple hearts.

Tech, you really should use quotation marks when pulling from James Carville's newly published Big Book of Bull*****.

[island911]

Originally posted by techweenie
Apparently the only defense of Bush is an attack on Kerry.. . .

whats to defend? .. that is hardly a "news-worthy" story. "We found some people who claim they were for Bush. .. but are now switching over to Kerry."

Wow, what a piece. (of crap)

Now if they had a bunch of polling data to support previous Bush supporters leaving to Kerry . . .then maybe a story.

BTW, who, in their right mind would go from supporting either of these guys, to support the other? I could see someone for Bush (or Kerr) saying "he's not getting my vote . . .the whack-job. . I'm stitting this vote out."

But, c'mon. . what? "I liked Bush's leadership. . .but John Kerry Mowed down villages in Vietnam. . .he's my guy now. Besides, have you seen that cute John Edwards? swoon swoon swoon"

[Moneyguy1]

Dear Dr. Wilson

Tech is right. Repeatedly, you have been asked straightforward questions.

You have listed, among other things flatuence. Cute. You post pictures. Clever.

An unbiased observer could conclude your posts show a degree of cynicism and desperation, and a lack of factual data with which to defend your position logically.

You aren't gonna sway many folks with that attitude.

Moses, I think, may have said it best.

[cowtown]

Originally posted by on-ramp
his beliefs for the causes for war (ie. WMDs), were false and he should admit to that. This may be political suicide but many may actually forgive him and he might be better off because of it

Like, you are soooo TOTALLY right, LOL-Dork!

Let's start out small, though. Why don't you apologize for saying that Bush killed more people than Saddam Hussein, and then we'll get the Prez to apologize for all his lies. I mean, you lied, right? So you take the high road first, then we'll get the big guy to do it. I'm sure we'll forgive you and you will be "better off because of it."

Honestly, you are a twit. You don't even have any real enemies, and you won't apologize for lying. Why would W?

[ronin]

Dear Mr. Moneyguy1

I'm sorry, but Mark isn't doing anything that the lefties on this board haven't done to G.W. a hundred times over. one problem that I have seen with answering your (not yours personally, but those of most of the lefties in general on this board) so-called straightforward questions is that you (again, not you personally) don't appear to have the ability to take a clear, factual, and straightforward answer and take it for what it is, making the whole process of debate on this forum akin to intellectual masturbation. remember, one can only expect to engage others in intelligent dialogue if one is willing to debate in kind

Originally posted by Moneyguy1
Dear Dr. Wilson

Tech is right. Repeatedly, you have been asked straightforward questions.

You have listed, among other things flatuence. Cute. You post pictures. Clever.

An unbiased observer could conclude your posts show a degree of cynicism and desperation, and a lack of factual data with which to defend your position logically.

You aren't gonna sway many folks with that attitude.

Moses, I think, may have said it best.

1. When have I been asked any questions that I have not answered?
2. Yes, I am extremely clever and I choose to answer the silliness, lies and baseless accusations with wit and humor.
3. Neither am I a cynic, nor am I desparate. My responses contain very carefully, calculated and researched FACTS, unlike the other side.
4. Who the fuch ever said I was trying to sway anyone? I don't give a red rats ass who anyone votes for. There is no way that any visitor to this OT board is shaped politically from the rants and raves.

Now go away......

Oh, and-

[techweenie]

MarK: thanks for the laugh.

Happy to work with the Ragin' Cajun any day.

And as for your counter argument, well, devastatingly convincing.

But I guess it was written in invisible pixels.

[Mulholland]