Bush is a lame duck: People wish his presidency was over.

[Snowguy716]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16840614/site/newsweek/

Very interesting poll put out, finding that most Americans (86% of Dems, 59% of Ind., and 21% of Republicans) wish Bush's presidency was over.

Also, 46% would prefer to see a Democrat elected president in 2008 while only 28% would prefer to see a Republican.

The poll also matched up potential candidates with Hillary and Obama both finishing ahead of McCain and Giuliani, but it was close, either way.

While it is way too early to predict 2008, this is the exact same thing that was happening in 2006: On a nameless poll, Democrats did much better than Republicans, and when names were mentioned, Democrats did only slightly better. This is where Republicans had hope in 2006, because, they thought, when it came down to "your" congress person, you'd choose based on character and not party. That, unfortunately, did not happen and the Democratic gains were on the upper end of the predictions.

People are really sour about the Republican party... and for good reason. But this gives a good time for the Democrats to redefine themselves and define the Republicans while they're at it. 2008 will be a volatile year... and it's sad that the shell of a Republican party is coming to the Twin Cities... we really wanted the Democrats. Oh well... the brothels will do record business and the churches will have record attendance all at the same time...

[dimebag1980]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16840614/site/newsweek/

Very interesting poll put out, finding that most Americans (86% of Dems, 59% of Ind., and 21% of Republicans) wish Bush's presidency was over.

Also, 46% would prefer to see a Democrat elected president in 2008 while only 28% would prefer to see a Republican.

The poll also matched up potential candidates with Hillary and Obama both finishing ahead of McCain and Giuliani, but it was close, either way.

While it is way too early to predict 2008, this is the exact same thing that was happening in 2006: On a nameless poll, Democrats did much better than Republicans, and when names were mentioned, Democrats did only slightly better. This is where Republicans had hope in 2006, because, they thought, when it came down to "your" congress person, you'd choose based on character and not party. That, unfortunately, did not happen and the Democratic gains were on the upper end of the predictions.

People are really sour about the Republican party... and for good reason. But this gives a good time for the Democrats to redefine themselves and define the Republicans while they're at it. 2008 will be a volatile year... and it's sad that the shell of a Republican party is coming to the Twin Cities... we really wanted the Democrats. Oh well... the brothels will do record business and the churches will have record attendance all at the same time...

[richyb83]

Well said SBC.

[Snowguy716]

Was this supposed to be a post about people disliking Bush, or an outright bashing of the Republican party? Or did you just go off on a Republican-bashing tangent because you're drunk on the Democrat Kool-Aid?

How about preferring to see the RIGHT person elected to office, rather than an effing party for once? This is where this God-forsaken country has gone completely wrong. All people see anymore is "Democrat" and "Republican" or "Liberal" and "Conservative" rather than paying attention to the real issues.

Don't get me wrong, YOU might be looking at the issues; but there are THOUSANDS upon THOUSANDS of people in this sick, backward-assed country who vote strictly along party lines and that bullshat is what has screwed this country up and gotten us so divided.

I truly hope for a civil war between the left and right, just to get this partisan B.S. over with once and for all.

[Inkdaub]

I'm actually tired of all the 'partisan vs non-partisan' rhetoric. You should vote for the person that stands for what you stand for. The parties tend to stand for different things and therefore partisanship is born. Also, why does it seem that I'm hearing republicans crying about partisanship now that Congress holds a Democratic majority? I don't remember there being any problems with partisanship when it was a Republican majority. Now the republicans are all about 'working together'. Haha...right.

The issues are what divide the parties. The issues and where you stand on them are what results in being labeled...or labeling yourself...as conservative or liberal. It's asinine to say to to ignore that yet vote what you believe. Partisanship is based on what you believe.

Would I vote for a republican if he stood for what I stand for? No. Why? Because if he stood for what I stand for he wouldn't be a republican.

You can say that partisanship is politics for dummies and would be correct, though.

[JDC]

I'm actually tired of all the 'partisan vs non-partisan' rhetoric. You should vote for the person that stands for what you stand for. The parties tend to stand for different things and therefore partisanship is born. Also, why does it seem that I'm hearing republicans crying about partisanship now that Congress holds a Democratic majority? I don't remember there being any problems with partisanship when it was a Republican majority. Now the republicans are all about 'working together'. Haha...right.

The issues are what divide the parties. The issues and where you stand on them are what results in being labeled...or labeling yourself...as conservative or liberal. It's asinine to say to to ignore that yet vote what you believe. Partisanship is based on what you believe.

Would I vote for a republican if he stood for what I stand for? No. Why? Because if he stood for what I stand for he wouldn't be a republican.

You can say that partisanship is politics for dummies and would be correct, though.

[monsoon]

This country has gotten to this point from indulging in 25 years of Reaganism (cake and ice cream) and GW Bush is its ultimate achievement. Reaganism has reached it's logical conclusion in that it has finally imploded on itself and the country is now at a cross roads where something else will take over. What that might be, I don't know but the USA has some serious issues facing it after the excesses of the last 1/4 century and I would hope that Americans wake up and do the right thing this time.

[kayman]

I'll say this, I am honestly beyond sick and tired of George Walker Bush and the neo-conservative wing of the Republican party. The vast majority of them are the ones who have simply ran this country into the ground faster than electric-powered screwdriver. They are the ones that rubber stamped the cutting of vast amounts of federal funds that goes towards college financial aid and welfare aid for truly needy families. In addition to that they are the ones that have lacked all kinds of rules of ownership that were in placed by the FTC, FCC, and SEC to the point that consolidation/monopolization is the way of business nowadays.

It is embarrassing that this country has been defamed internationally over a war started because of total lies. I have personally and professionally disassociated myself from others that still support this utter BS called a "War of freedom". George Walker Bush is the epitome of a complete, utter imbecile that probably couldn't find his way out of a paper bag with a detailed map. He and this administration has done more destruction to this country's infastructure than probably the Great Depression in the late 1920's and 1930's.

I have voted for Republicans on a state level because their progressive position on the key issues here in Alabama. However, the National Republican party IMO is the most dispicible group of individuals and politicians that existed in the past 40 years. They have created this disburbing, warped, bizarro world where everything is about censorship, morals, and values. Meanwhile the ones that suppose to uphold these very things, politicians and preachers, are worst than the common streetwalker. On top of that, nothing in any industry of business is sacred anymore and everything is about profits, killing off or buying out competition, and the bottom-line.

[cityboi]

Its very obvious that people are sick of this president. This is the first time Ive seen a presidential campaign begin this soon before the election.

[nowensone]

I'll say this, I am honestly beyond sick and tired of George Walker Bush and the neo-conservative wing of the Republican party. The vast majority of them are the ones who have simply ran this country into the ground faster than electric-powered screwdriver. They are the ones that rubber stamped the cutting of vast amounts of federal funds that goes towards college financial aid and welfare aid for truly needy families. In addition to that they are the ones that have lacked all kinds of rules of ownership that were in placed by the FTC, FCC, and SEC to the point that consolidation/monopolization is the way of business nowadays.

It is embarrassing that this country has been defamed internationally over a war started because of total lies. I have personally and professionally disassociated myself from others that still support this utter BS called a "War of freedom". George Walker Bush is the epitome of a complete, utter imbecile that probably could find his way out of a paper bag with a detailed map. He and his own administration has done more destruction to this country's infastructure than probably the Great Depression in the late 1920's and 1930's.

I have voted for Republicans on a state level because their progressive position on the key issues here in Alabama. However, the National Republican party IMO is the most dispicible group of individuals and politicians that existed in the past 40 years. They have created this disburbing, warped, bizarro world where everything is about censorship, morals, and values. Meanwhile the ones that suppose to uphold these very things, politicians and preachers, are worst than the common streetwalker. On top of that, nothing in any industry of business is sacred anymore and everything is about profits, killing off or buying out competition, and the bottom-line.

[Snowguy716]

Much of Europe has already proven that a mixture is the best way to go. Many Americans would uphold Capitalism even when it isn't the best system because many see lack of intervention from the government in economic affairs as more desirable than the imbalance and inequalities that capitalism will naturally create.

They support a flawed system and hope that they don't turn up on the bottom. The great thing about democratic socialism is htat there is always an opponent that keeps them in check. A one-party system is the most flawed system of all, and it is much more desirable and better to have a country be "socialist" because it was elected that way with that option to change and reform always there.

I don't think you can have just one system, though. In some areas, it may be very lucrative to supply cheap electricity to people through private, profit-seeking ventures, while in more rural areas, it may not be. This is why people in Bemidji set up an electric and telephobe cooperative, so that they wouldn't be faced with losing their electricty/telephone service because it wasn't profitable. Luckily, it has been, and the customers (shareholders) have benefited from that.

The same goes for farmers. Some farmers are able to make enough profit simply by selling their product to the market alone. Others don't have large enough farms to do that, so they band up with other farmers to create a cooperative where they share profits based on how much input they gave... it allows them, however, to build a consolidated grain elevator/storage facility in a central location which increases efficiency.

You have to ultimately leave things like that up to the communities.

With things like healthcare, it is probably more efficient/necessary to have the government insure children/young adults (up to 18 or 25 if still in college), and the elderly while the private sector can handle those in between.. basically, those that are most productive/working. Business can band together or use themselves for bargaining power to gain lower rates for insurance. Those who cannot afford medical insurance or are not offered insurance at work should be eligible for state subsidized programs based on your income/family size/etc. A totally private system clearly does not work, nor does a totally public system... maybe a balanced mix is best.

Same with schools: Forcing everyone to go to the traditional public school isn't always best. A student should go where he/she can learn best. Some students learn better in smaller schools with theme focused curriculums... charter schools have filled that gap, and provide a public alternative to traditional public schools. Also, for people who are willing to pay extra, there are private schools. We shouldn't be giving out vouchers, but we should make alternatives/opportunities open to students in an efficient/affordable manner. Again, probably 80% will do just fine in a normal public school.. but those others would do better in a different setting. That should be up to the student and his/her parents.

One-size-fits-all rarely works.. I can tell you that being quite tall with a size 14wide shoe.

[seicer]

My short take on this:

Who cares about party lines, who likes who, and all that garbage?

Vote for the person you believe to be the right person to serve your country. Whether that is an Independent, a Green, Democrat, Republican, etc., it simply does not matter. For instance, I fall in between many issues. I lean to the Republicans on some economic dialogues, while I lean heavily towards the Green/Independents on issues regarding the environment and transit. And I lean towards the Democrats on other issues, much like what I do for other parties.

Does it make one bit of difference if the person belongs to one party or another? No.

So let's stop quibbering over party lines and go after the real issue: the issues themselves.

[Captain Worley]

^^Exactly. I wish more candidates would express independant thought, even f it was unpopular unmong constituents. I'm still waiting for someone to fess up that Social Security won't be there for me when I retire.

[Spartan]

I'm glad to see this bash-fest of Republicans is going well. You all seem to fail to remember that the Democrats have failed to offer any decent candidate to this point. Bush WAS the better choise, and America voted that way TWICE. I blame the Democrats for their poor leadership in recent times, and their inablity to put out a convincing message. Or maybe its because their message is more unappealing than the Republican one? America is the greatest country on earth, and we are not fools. I am offended by the notion that I am somehow a "sheep" or that I have been coerced by those "evil no-good Republicans." The true Republicans (and not this lot that is in office now) want the same things as you do. Don't let your own partisan views blind you to that fact.

If Democrats have the answer, then they should be able to garner more support without drafting moderate (even conservative leaning) candidates. They should also be able to explain the actions of the antiwar protesters that vandalized our nation's capitol buiding recently. Do you they represent the liberal antiwar agenda? I certainly hope not. Do these people really represent America? They don't represent me.

The way I see it- if you are intelligent enough to recognize that you should vote on the issues, and not the party, then you are doing what our system is designed to do. If we are going to vote solely by party, then perhaps its time to move to a multi party system like most European nations use. Their system makes candidates and what they stand for irrelevant. Its all about the party line. I personally prefer to vote for the candidate based on his own character and positions, but thats just me.

[cinco]

Don't let your own partisan views blind you to that fact.

[Gusterfell]

I'm glad to see this bash-fest of Republicans is going well. You all seem to fail to remember that the Democrats have failed to offer any decent candidate to this point. Bush WAS the better choise, and America voted that way TWICE. I blame the Democrats for their poor leadership in recent times, and their inablity to put out a convincing message. Or maybe its because their message is more unappealing than the Republican one? America is the greatest country on earth, and we are not fools. I am offended by the notion that I am somehow a "sheep" or that I have been coerced by those "evil no-good Republicans." The true Republicans (and not this lot that is in office now) want the same things as you do. Don't let your own partisan views blind you to that fact.

[Spartan]

judging from that last post... you too, could take a heaping spoonful of your own advice.

from the last number of posts i do get a sense of people @ least THINKING of themselves as somewhat independent. most of us probably do, and who could blame that.... also, most of us would say that all political parties are rotten and corrupt @ some level and that many politicians are liars. it's good to have a little distance from the whole system - which brings me to a thought... i wonder what it would be like if there wasn't ANY political parties... just democratic governing and individuals representing?

it seems too ideal to ever work... but, i imagine that is how many colonialists felt upon hearing the aspirations of our founding fathers.

[monsoon]

I.... You all seem to fail to remember that the Democrats have failed to offer any decent candidate to this point. Bush WAS the better choise,

[Gusterfell]

Yes he did. Check out the 2004 election results. Unless 51% isn't the majority, he won. In 2000, under our government/electoral structure via the electorial college, Bush won fair and square. Gore won a plurality, but not a majority. The debate over the need for the electoral college is another issue entirely, however.

[Spartan]

Under our system of elections, the Electorial College votes are all that matter. I don't see the need to explain this any further. The popular vote doesn't guarantee you a win under out system. I can't help it if the Democracts/Liberals can't get over that.

I'm not sure how a majority of the popular vote, and a clear majority of the Electoral College isn't a decisive win... but whatever. Maybe its not a landslide, but IMO, decisive means "clear." In 2000, it was definitely not clear at first. I think that if America really wanted Kerry, he would have won. One can only make so many conclusions about why people voted. Bush got more votes, so I can only assume they liked his message more than Kerry's. Or maybe they disliked his less than the disliked Kerry's. I have no idea.

Bush will be remembered because of September 11 and Katrina, but I don't think he will be a significant president in the eye's of history. He hasn't done anything spectacular in the grand scheme of things. And as for Iraq, I don't think he will be remembered for that anymore than LBJ is remembered for getting us into Vietnam.

Gore recieved more votes than any other presidential candidate in history to that date, including Bush.

[sunshine]

Bush will clearly be remember as one of the worst, if not the worst president of modern times. Yes he was chosen, but that doesn't mean he was the better choice. I can't help to think the country would be in a much much better position today if Gore had prevailed in the Supreme Ct. in 2000.

[nowensone]

^ By the Supreme Court or the Freemasons?

[Gusterfell]

Under our system of elections, the Electorial College votes are all that matter. I don't see the need to explain this any further. The popular vote doesn't guarantee you a win under out system. I can't help it if the Democracts/Liberals can't get over that.

I'm not sure how a majority of the popular vote, and a clear majority of the Electoral College isn't a decisive win... but whatever. Maybe its not a landslide, but IMO, decisive means "clear." In 2000, it was definitely not clear at first. I think that if America really wanted Kerry, he would have won. One can only make so many conclusions about why people voted. Bush got more votes, so I can only assume they liked his message more than Kerry's. Or maybe they disliked his less than the disliked Kerry's. I have no idea.

[Captain Worley]

II disputed your initial point that Bush's message was somehow more "convincing" or "appealing" to the American people than those of his Democratic opponents.

[monsoon]

...

Anyway, it wasn't even close, it wa 51-49, which sounds close. However, 45% of the voters are going to vote republican no matter what, and 45% are going to vote democrat no matter what. That leave 10% contested. So Bush won 6-4, which is a pretty dang big margin.