Dole had a war story and he's a Republican. He didn't shamelessly hype his heroics the Kerry is. Bush 41 had a war story and he's a Republican. The GOP doesn't hype military service becuase we don't have to. There are plenty of other good reasons to vote Republican. There is no good reason to vote for Kerry.

BTW, even though Bush 41 had a much more impressive military carreer than Clinton, it did not make one bit of difference in that election. Kerry has to run on his military carreer because there is nothing else.

Dole ran ads touting his service.

i hear plenty of reasons,,, but what the F are they? im a very simple man and need it spelled out for me. somebody tell me why i should vote for bush!

lendaddy that was exactly what i mean... dont refer to kerry or his record,, just tell me WHY i should vote for bush,,, just on his merit?

play along, maybe you guys will shed some light and i will see that light and become a bush man. well i am a bush man but the furry soft type...

A couple of reasons to vote Republican:

Tax cuts (I know, I know, worthless w/o commensurate spending cuts so spare me the deficit rant)

Welfare reform

School vouchers ($10k/student on average in this country to teach kids about what a rotten place the US is and free condoms)

Real affirmative action - not quotas and set asides. There needs to be some affirmative action, but not the bastardized system that the race hustlers are killing themselves to preserve

National security - taking the fight to the terrorists is more effective than trying to find them and arrest them.

Limits on abortion - partial birth abortion is killing for convenience (subject of a 50 page thread i'm sure, but you know where the GOP stands on abortion).

Guns for everyone

Tougher on crime

Pro military (there are Democrat hawks, but the Dems are beholden to the appeasers)

The UN has long outlived its usefullness and the GOP doesn't hold it in as high regard as the Dems.

Darn good post, Craig..
 

I may not agree w/ all of your assessments of the differences between Dems and Republicans, but at least you listed actual reasons to vote for Bush. (In your opinion).

You get an "A". :cool:

Thanks Speedy! Typically, the GOP is not known for getting good grades.

Okay, I might go back and read through the replies, but my first reaction is "Huh? Is this the best you've got? Someone is suggesting that the ergonomic challenges of pulling someone onto a boat should lead to conclusions about what happened in a war zone forty years ago?

That's all he's given us to work with!

What else is there to debate about Kerry?!? He won three purple hearts in four months. Unprecedented yes, but that's his only qualification. Where is his plan to save Social Security? Where is his plan to reduce our dependence on foriegn oil? How is he going to reduce the deficit? (to be fair, W doesn't have such a wonderful plan on this one either). How is he going to improve our schools?

Kerry's answer - I'm not W and I never will be.

We're left to debate if those long arms had the strength to pull his buddy out of the water and wether he put himself in for purple hearts based on injuries that maybe weren't that severe.

Oh, that one Kerry did propose a solution. He said he would "twist some arms at OPEC".

Sure to be effective. :rolleyes:

Actually, Thom if you'll scroll up a few posts I did give some reasons - they're not the kind of reasons that will convince you to donate to the RNC (quite the opposite, but they're there to look at.

As far as a third party candidate, you're right, that will never happen unless both W and Kerry are caught holding up a liquor store together. Then, as you astutely pointed out, Congress would have a great time denying that guy any legislation.

One thing we have in our favor (the people!), both Kerry and W know that the electorate is evenly divided, so niether candidate has a mandate to run wild with an agenda.

Excellent point!

Dubya is acting as though he won by a unanimous vote.

I got to listen to both candidates for a while this morning. Listening to to the Senator is painful cuz he constantly promises what people want to hear and there is no hope to ever deliver. Listening to W is just painful.

Here are some facts for ya:

Headline via New York Times:

Report Finds Tax Cuts Heavily Favor the Wealthy

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/13/politics/campaign/13tax.html

thank you craig, thats what i was looking for were issues and positions on those issues. pro and cons, the meat and potatos

will my vote change? probally not but that was an inteligent exchange of ideas, not just the rant that has become the norm around here, me included.

could i give you that many eloquant reasons to vote for kerry? NO. But to counter you as best i can im just not for bush and kerrys all thats left. very sad i know but i just could not take four more years of what this admin has shown in the last 3.5..

So now a vote for Nader can really count, right?

If you'll remember, he did try and involve dems early on and even passed some dem favored legislation - Rx drugs for one. He even kept that boob Pineta as secretary for letting terrorists on flights. But things quickly deteriorated.

I think Ted Kennedy, Pat Leahy and Tom Daschle would never work with Bush regardless of what legislation he proposed. They're worse than Tom Delay when it comes to cooperating. Those three make Hillary look positively bisexual errrrrrrrrr, i mean bipartisan.

Fair enough! The fact that you're from the bay area and even discussing the possibility of a W vote shows me something (I lived in Oakland for 20 yrs). At least you're willing to discuss the issues. I was a fish out of water in Oakland. I loved my time there and will always be proud of graduating from Oakland High. Talk about diversity! What a great school.

I like Texas, but Texas is as conservative as Oakland was liberal.

back then Kerry was in Vietnam dodging bullets while W was here dodging the draft.

how pathetic is it to argue
over what happened 35 years ago..different times, different people.