Really? I don't know how old you are, but that means that you wanted Carter over Reagan, Mondale over Reagan, Dukakis over Bush I, Perot or Bush I over Clinton, Perot or Dole over Clinton, Gore over Bush, and Kerry over Bush.

I find those choices to be....well....interesting.

I understand it isn't all sour grapes. I think there are many out there on the left that are genuinely concerned about the direction of the country and I respect that, and I count you and MBC (among others here) with that group. However, the leadership of the dems, i believe, is more greatly concerned over the loss. They have been losing their power since 1992, and with how things are shaping up, I don't see them getting any back for quite a while.

Hey Sac - did you see reports that government revenue has actually increased since the tax cuts? And that the Fed deficit was only 4.4 billion for the thrid quarter of 2004 because of that increased revenue? Whenever taxes are cut, fed revenue increases because of increased economic activity.

My first interest in politics was Reagan's re-election (I was about 13).

Mondale over Reagan
Dukakis over Bush
Perot over Clinton and Bush
Perot over Clinton and Dole
Nader over Gore and Bush
Kerry over Bush

This election is the first time I ever sold out and actually voted for a two-party candidate (Mondale and Dukakis I wanted to win but I was too young to vote for them).

It wasn't easy growing up in a Republican family.

I don't know which is more depressing - that your parents failed so miserably in raising you ( :D ) or that I'm older than you. Sigh.

Do you have a non-partisan source for this?


Oh, and I love the use of the word "only" when discussing the Federal deficit. Only Bush can get away with bragging that he has a plan to cut the deficit in half. You know, the deficit that is entirely his making. Turning a surplus into a deficit and then being lauded for halving the deficit (which he won't do)....it's like we're living in a bizarro world.

But we're not the leadership of the Democratic party. I don't give a rat's ass about the leadership of a party I'm only affiliated with because I had to pick something. I don't live in the rarified air of the "Beltway," nor am I a political junkie. I'm a small business owner. I have a day-to-day life, filled with such concerns as a president who wants to make the continued marginilization of my life into a constitutional amendment. I live a day-to-day life that involves the embarrassment and shame over Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib. Ilive a day-to-day life in which I'm infuriated over the amount of money being wasted this week on inaugurational ass-kissing. I'm still embarrassed over our initial pledges of money towards the Tsunami relief effort.
I don't look to polls to decide what's right and what's wrong. Polls are a lawyer's tool to use against an opponent, not a gauge of decency. If polls were all we needed, Saturday night would be a great night to throw on a toga and go watch Christians being eaten by lions, people love that kind of crap. If polls were all we needed, I'd either be, or have, a slave. Again, popular in the polls. I look to the office of the Presidency to inspire, to lead by example, to set a tone. That's why I hate this man so much. He embarrasses us in front of the entire world. :mad:

Dadgummit!

I took care of it for you, Scrooge.

Silly hippies....

Ah, finally the voice of reason.

Apologies to GD, but I've been using this thread as a dumping ground for my thoughts on Bush.

Today he said he has 'firmly planted the flag of liberty'. What the heck does that mean exactly? He says these things like 'freedom is on the march', 'coalition of the willing', 'global tyranny', and 'axis of evil'... can't he just say what he means without some scripted Rove-ian catch phrase attached? Bleh.