Bush isn't going to win. He's damaged goods.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

All of Bush's "strengths" have been turned into Bush cliches. The voters now see stunts like the aircraft carrier landing in a different light. They are aware of it when * tries to exploit terrorism fear.

They are going to start wondering soon what he will do NEXT if he is given another four years. They won't like the answers.

There is no reversing the damage done to Bush before November.

He's going to lose.

[pauliedangerously]

1. Agreed

And I think Moore's new flick is going to drive him insane.

:toast:

[yardwork]

20. He's already insane. Totally. Around the bend.

But, yes, he can get even worse. Maybe he'll break down in public.

[Kahuna]

25. That's what I'm thinking. The boy king is close to a public meltdown...

If we keep the pressure up, it's bound to happen. :evilgrin:

[doni_georgia]

53. Welcome to DU paulie!

Glad to have you here.

But I doubt it will drive him insane. If I'm any judge, I'd say the White House physicians have upped the chimp's Depakote. That's why he's acting so happy.

Mac in Ga

[Arkana]

55. Don't insult Depakote

I have a mild form of epilepsy, and I take Depakote for it...don't malign a perfectly good drug by associating it with the White House Filth-in-Chief.

:evilgrin:

[PoliticsSportsMusic]

2. Not if Diebold has anything to say about it.

No matter how badly we beat them on the issues and no matter how badly they make themselves look we lose if we don't get some real interest in making sure the voting machines are trustworthy. Call me crazy but I just don't trust facists.

[TheDebbieDee]

9. At a Meet-Up in Kansas City earlier this week............

an attendee stated that we (Democrats) shouldn't worry about electronic voting results in the upcoming election. He said that the Democratic hackers will be better than the repub hackers this year ; ^ )

[Joanne98]

22. Are the Leaque of Women Voters having their election today?

I haven't seen a thread yet. If Maxwell is replaced we can get HR2239 out of committee. On a funny note. The NYT had an article today about the Hugo Chavez opposition saying he was going to steal the election with e-voting machines. ha I guess this works both ways.

[crossroads]

33. Me either!!!

Welcome to DU! :hi:

[wellstone_democrat]

3. Not where I live (Texas)

Out here in the boonies west of Dallas and the other "big cities" you could have him strangle kittens and babies on TV and they'd believe he "had a good reason!"

Actually, I think the Reagan Death-o-thon 2004! could do damage. They are ALL weepy from yesterday and starting to think their boy* Bush* might be "using" their Saint Ronnie. Its a fine line between identification with the idol and using him. Bush* , as usual, has probably gone too far. But not yet, not here.

[Just Me]

44. Here in the Appalachias, I've heard fundies worry he's the anti-Christ.

I kid you not,...a complete reversal after the prison abuse pictures. His "popularity" is actually hurting him cause these people believe the devil tricks them into doing evil deeds.

What's weird is that, on a certain level,...I totally agree with them because those who seek to successfully convince others that doing egregious acts is okay are very deceptive and quite polished at being "popular".

[merh]

57. Only talk radio available here

is the Fox conservative radio, I happened to listen to Mike Savage ranting about the Bush Elite, wasting so much money, tax dollars, on the funerals of RR. He was irate and a lot of conservative callers were calling in and agreeing with him. They all believe RR was a great man and deserves appropriate memorials, but the pomp and circumstance of the last week was out of hand. One caller said that we revolted against Britian because we didn't like the monarchy and we don't need a monarchy in the U.S. Conservatives are angry at Weed and his elite cronies...

You have to laugh, Weed boys tactics have back fired again.

[kaitykaity]

4. All Kerry has to do is ask Reagan's question.

"Are you better of today than you were four years ago?"
The answer for most people is a resounding "NO".

[caledesi]

5. Yeah, I'm there - Damaged Goods....VG nt

[Melodybe]

10. I agree, Bushco is done. Everyday things are worse for them.

It feels great, doesn't it!

Not time to pop the corks just yet; we have a lot of work to do, but the last dish is about to be served.



:toast: Till the day John Kerry steps foot in the white, I hope everyone can feel all the good will from around the world. Everyone wants Bushco gone.

[Skittles]

6. as usual, a Democrat has to clean up the f***ing mess

it will take years and years this time and a lot of the damage, like the lasting legacy of the prison scandal, will last forever.

[doni_georgia]

46. Agreed. An entire generation has been poisoned

and then some.

When I visited Italy fifteen years ago, I stayed at the apartment of a woman (whose graddaughter, incidentally, I was engaged to at the time) who had been livingthere since the second World War. She thought I was wonderful - especially for an American. Apparently she had had both German and American troops billeted on her during the war, and she thought the Germans were far better guests. She was still a fascista, forty-odd years later.

This is the problem we face. Here in the South, for a hundred years and more, there has been no shortage of fools who insist on carrying on the Civil War in their attitudes, politics, words and deeds. These are the same lumps who manage to fly Confederate and U.S. flags from their pickup trucks with no apparent sense of the contradiction therein. President Bush has played very, very effectively to these people on their political, social, and religious levels. Those of us down here who dare to voice discontent with or opposition to the President or his war are at best given strange looks or glares. Some of the more mediocre - and more aggressive, and more uneducated - types will give us single-finger salutes, cut us off in traffic, tailgate us, or imply that were are atheists or heathens or terrorists, simply because we don't walk in lockstep with their own misinformed, misanthropic, slanted views.

This is not "America," at least here. And this isn't just limited to the folks you see in the fleamarkets with the dinner-plate belt buckles and waterslide-length sideburns. I was very nearly run off of Ga. Hwy 400 several days ago by a well-dressed, fiftyish woman driving a brand-new, top of the line Infiniti. Yes, I received half of a peace sign when her efforts were unsuccessful. What was more disturbing was that this happened in what is probably the most prosperous and wealth-laden area of Atlanta, instead of in the hinterlands. A core number of upper- and middle-class Americans have been duped, either by their greed or their religious views, into thinking that there can be no agreeable or loyal dissent in this country anymore. I lay the blame for this state of affairs squarely on the shoulders of the current administration and its "with-us-or-against-us" dogma.

For this reason, I have decided that - as angry as I am at the sly, treacherous, lying, thieving, merciless, murderous man who now sits in the Oval Office - I will not respond to aggression with aggression. There are cores of influence on the right and the left that are fairly solid and stable and aren't going to move in their opinions. As in chess, the game in politics is to capture and control the center. When MLK marched in the southern states, the rednecks turned out in brutal force. It backfired on them mightily. The rest of the nation was treated to the spectacle they made of themselves. As a result, most public opinion turned against these sorts of individuals and remained turned against them for a very long time.

We are now at a similar watershed moment, with one crucial difference: unlike the African-Americans in this country who could not hide their color, we are a heterogeneous and diverse group of people. At any time, any one of us could simply decide to fade into the woodwork when the heat gets turned up too high. To fight this battle to thaw America's frozen heart, we have to get close to the heat and be willing to remain there. We have to be willing to stand up, knowing that we will be ridiculed and abused for our stances. Only in this way can we sway the center - the people who observe injustice and feel their first pangs of misgiving.

We will not win by browbeating the sleeping conscience of this nation. We will win only by drawing the unjust and excessive response of our opponents and by being willing to endure the barrage for the sake of our principles. Let the haters snicker, because their laughs will burn in the stomachs of bystanders, and their bravado will be revealed as their cowardice. Make no mistake: these people are cowards. The rednecks of the sixties were cowards. The warmongers in the White House are also cowards. Unless they can control us through fear, they cannot defeat us, because they are themselves subject to, and controlled by, that same fear with which they would burden us. FDR had it right - the only thing we need to fear is fear itself. Our conniving president posits a War on Terror. I recommend a War on Fear, and that we start by cleaning house right here at home.

Mac in Ga

Yes I know I'm a pompous blowhard, but I mean it. I've had it up to my eyebrows with this unelected schoolyard bully and his pack of sycophants. Time for all the kids on the playground to remember that we outnumber them.

[Cleita]

7. I think I figured out why he's so happy these last few days.

I think he has been assured that even if he loses, he will still be President. I don't know how the neo-cons are going to pull it off but wait for something smarmy to happen. He's acting like Arnold did during the California recall fiasco. Arnold refused to debate except at the final one. He didn't even campaign very much and ran only a few stupid ads. One reporter noted he was walking around like the governorship was a done deal for him even though there were several other strong candidates running against him. This is exactly like Junior is behaving. :tinfoilhat:

[MarLopez2]

32. Eek.

For some reason, this doesn't make me feel relieved.

[newyawker99]

45. Hi MarLopez2!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[beachman]

8. it's his to win or lose right now

Kerry just isn't all that inspiring. It's risky running on anybody but Bush, but it might work in this situation.

Still, let's be realistic. The economy has picked up, and most elections hinge on that.

If Bush starts withdrawing from Iraq, then there won't be such high negatives.

If Kerry really wants to win, he needs to make energy independence or some new idea, a major focus of the campaign and give people a reason to actually go out and vote. Gotta remember that most people don't vote, and getting them to vote because they hate Bush is not as effective as getting them excited about something.

[Vickers]

12. " getting them to vote because they hate Bush is not as effective..."

"... as getting them excited about something"

In past elections, I would have agreed with you, but not this time. Folks feel that he is so bad for the country, it is motivational.

[beachman]

15. why not advocate energy independence?

I just don't see Kerry doing what it takes to win. Sure, people are mad at Bush, but why cannot Kerry state he will in 5 years end dependence on fossil fuels or something like that.

And if Kerry wins without a mandate other than "staying the course", what will he be able to do as president?

[Vickers]

16. We won't end dependence on fossil fuels in 5 years

It would be a unfulfillable promise. Why make it?

Your points are valid, but against the backdrop of the sheer stupidity and greed of BushCo, I can overlook many of Kerry's faults/shortcomings.

[beachman]

18. really? why not?

You don't know until you try. Sure, it would take awhile to change over, but it is entirely possible that we could be well on our way to ending our dependence on fossil fuels and the Middle East in 5 years.

[never cry wolf]

27. Kerry HAS called for a major push to energy independence!

It cannot be done in 5 years or 10 years.

Read a bit, ok?

http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/energy/

[beachman]

35. but is this really a major focus?

Heck, Bushs web-site probably calls for the same. Haven't seen it, but in politics, impressions count.

Kerry, if he is serious, should have the public thinking:

John Kerry = Alternative Energy

They are not doing that, and consequently, we cannot expect much traction on this.

[never cry wolf]

40. He has called for it to be an initiave...

similar to the first JFKs call to reach the moon, a national goal of utmost importance.

boosh has NO such inkling.

Look it up.

[beachman]

42. i live in Florida

When I see ads from Kerry's campaign showing JFK's promise amidst a back-drop of the space shuttle take-off or something, and then Kerry making a similar promise in a major speech to end fossil fuel dependence, then I'll take him seriously.

Promises on web-sites don't mean much.

[MarLopez2]

34. Mandates eh?

Well, he's not going to win a mandate on something that anyone on the street would likely call unrealistic. I understand what you're getting at and it's valid point. Just needs a different issue. Iraq anyone?

[beachman]

38. everyone wants new energy sources

And there is no reason we cannot do this. Iraq is one issue, but it's a short-term issue. If Kerry comes out and says he will enact a Manhattan style project, spending 100-200 billion a year like we are doing in Iraq, instead of on invading the Middle East, then he'd win in a landslide.

Ever wonder why he doesn't?

I tend to think the energy cartels have too much influence in both parties.

[MarLopez2]

39. Well...

It's one thing to have a solution, it's another to convert an entire economy and civilization to that solution. It's not my contention that an alternate source of inexpensive energy is unrealistic, but that doing both of the above in five years is. I think Kerry's own remarks on this subject are about as far as he can go at present.

As for cartel control, be careful what you ask for. Somebody's going to have to deliver the hydrogen (or whatever) to market even after we have a solution.

[beachman]

41. the solution and technology has been there for yrs

Cheap, non-polluting forms of energy production have been available ever since we built the AC/DC power grid system we have today. In fact, the designer of our power grid said it was obsolete in 1896.

Kerry could just say he is going to institute a crash program for developing new forms of energy production that are beneficial to the environment.

You have no idea how entrenched the energy cartels, utilities, etc,..are.

I was just visiting the Smithsonian last weekend, and was amazed at the utter propaganda on leaving Tesla's name out of things. They do so because he broke with the establishment. He designed the Niagra Falls power plant, but you won't see his name associated with it.

You see several life-sized posters of Edison and comment on how "another system" was more efficient than his, but never mention the inventor, tesla, whose system it was.

There's more to this story, but for a different thread one day.

[merh]

59. They say they are pulling out, but........

They are building 14 new, state of the art bases in Iraq. (Actually, the construction of one of the bases has hit a snag, seems we are building on ancient archaeological digs of Babylon and have angered a lot of people in Iraq and the rest of the world.) The gall of this bunch is they still want to close bases here.

[beachman]

63. air bases though can exist after withdrawal of most ground forces

I think we need to cut defense spending a lot, but air bases don't bother me so much, nor Naval stuff. We need some stuff like that. We just need only about half or so of what we have.

If we can close bases elsewhere, I don't care if we keep bases in Iraq or elsewhere myself.

And maybe this sounds bad, but do we need a bunch of air bases here in the US?

I just want defense spending cut, a lot, but keeping some forward bases in hot spots is not such a bad idea.

[Kazak]

11. I'll say it again...

We've simply got to turn out the vote.

[susu369]

13. Excuse me

don't forget: bu$h* did not WIN the first time.

[Cleita]

14. Yes, but he is President. What willl they do this time after he

loses so that he remains President?

[calimary]

17. The Reagan orgy will only serve to underscore that.

It has thoroughly, if perhaps subliminally, welded into the zeitgeist that bush. DOES. NOT. MEASURE. UP. And if that's not bad enough, it's also welded into place the concept that the republi-CONS' BEST DAYS ARE BEHIND THEM. Repeat - BEHIND THEM. NOT in front of them.

Over and over I heard comment, speaches, punditry, all incredibly WISTFULLY stated, about how the two political parties (led by Reagan on the right) could at least talk to each other and discuss their differences without all the malice and hatred and namecalling and divisiveness we have now. HOW many times did we see those clips of Reagan joking with Tip O'Neill????? How many times did we hear some talking head come back out of that and comment about how the opponents were opponents, alright, but NOT adversaries. That people could talk to each other. That there wasn't this negativity that we have now.

BETTER STILL: I saw, this morning (Saturday) on CNN, a political analyst who traced the negativity back to the 1988 campaign (HELLO, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, AFTER REAGAN. AND GUESS WHO CAME AFTER REAGAN?? HELLO?) the bush-senior versus Michael Dukakis, and the Willie Horton character assassination of Dukakis by the senior bush campaign. This guy even went so far as to reference the dreaded, damnable Lee Atwater as having started this. (He also said, and I'd forgotten this, that Lee Atwater got his start during the REAGAN regime, and was Reagan's campaign manager. He later ascended to chairman of the Republican National Committee, and thus was able to set in stone his scorched-earth style of campaigning, and that's led us to the sorry state we're in now.)

What we've come to now has been directly because of the bushes, and Reagan opened the door to all that. THAT'S when it started. I, for one, am tickled to death to hear people on the air actually reaching this same conclusion, because I think it's the correct conclusion, in fact, the ONLY conclusion to reach.

Our little bushie boy now inherits that mantle of reckless negativity and ruthless character-assassination with his darling soul-brother, kkkarl rove. Let us also remember that young georgie-poo AND kkkarl rove BOTH - repeat - BOTH studied at the feet of Lee Atwater (probably worshipped there, too), and learned all the dirty tricks from Atwater himself. They were his two leading students during that time when little george was working in big george's campaign. They are the true sons of Lee Atwater, which means they're tantamount to being sons of Satan himself. Sons of a vile, poisonous, puss-oozing viper, who have since spread filth and flesh-eating bacteria all over the political landscape like a huge, viral infection. They are the AIDS virus incarnate. No, they're worse. The Ebola virus of politics. THEY are directly and personally responsible for the tone and timbre of politics being so negative and awful now. Aided and abetted by people like Rush Limbaugh and other assorted media vermin who spread their cancerous message from coast to coast.

All that Reagan postmortem stuff about how generally congenial things used to be is gonna sink in, slowly but thoroughly, over the next days and weeks, until people turn around and realize that THIS is not what Reagan would have wanted or stood for, or stood by. And then bushie boy goes down to ignominious defeat, insignificance, and the dustbin of history. Perhaps a fate worse than death for him. It'll mark him in history as no better than his failure-of-a-dad, and that will be a bitter pill for him to swallow for the rest of his days. Because he has a serious complex about being the son of george senior, and what he wants most out of life is to tower over his father. He will be reduced to being no better than his father - and even that will be the BEST anyone can say about him. He'll be lucky, in fact, to be regarded as no better than his dad. I suspect he'll fare much worse than that, even.

Which be just FIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINE with me.

[Disturbed]

21. Perception becomes reality

The mis-perception that the Media hanmmered this week about Raygoon will stick with millions. What is that mis-perception?

The perception that is starting to emerge about GW Bush is that he is loser, who was fine with the V. Plame outing and torture of detainees.
If that perception sticks, he is a goner.

[yardwork]

23. Good points, calimary. Here's another - Junior has wrecked Poppy's rep

along with his own. By the time all the investigations are through digging up the filth on this family, everyone in the world will hate the name Bush.

And Poppy Bush deserves it, imo, for being the head of the crime family, and for helping his son steal the presidency. He should have known better than to expose dimson's evil incompetence to the world. He should have found a safe harbor for dimson, hidden someplace where he could do little damage.

[buff2]

26. That was a great post

and I agree 100%. :hi:

[doni_georgia]

51. To borrow a phrase normally used by people I normally consider idiots

In this case it's appropriate:

DITTO!

Mac in Ga

[Art_from_Ark]

64. I've got to disagree

Reagan disparaged "liberals". His rapport with Tip O'Neill was like Dubya watching movies with Ted Kennedy. Reagan did not have to work with Democrats for the first 6 years, because he controlled the Senate and had enough boll weevil Dems in the House who would lick his boots for him at his beck and call. In 1987, however, Reagan found the going less chummy with the Dems after they regained control of the Senate.

[Art_from_Ark]

65. One more thing

How will you feel if, 20 years from now, historians proudly proclaim that "one of George Bush's greatest strengths was his ability to work with Tom Daschle"?

[crossroads]

36. Hear Hear! Well Said! Wish I could have put it that well...

Great posting...
:toast: :kick:

[calimary]

49. Thanks, buff2 and crossroads.

Did anybody (assuming you saw all or part of the service at the National Cathedral on Friday morning) note the VAST difference in the eulogies? Brian Mulroney came out (after a videotaped tribute by the ailing Maggie Thatcher - that, whatever you may think of her, could only be described as GRAND and SUPERBLY ELOQUENT) and contributed remarks that were also MOST eloquent and easy on the ears - a fabulous, deep, bell-toned, mellifluous voice. Then we had a tinny, pinched, nasal, whiny presentation by bush one. All I could think of, in comparison to the other two, was the word "TWERP." Followed by an equally tinny, pinched, nasal, whiny, and (worse) drawling presentation by bush two. All I could think of, in comparison to the first two, was, again, the word "TWERP." And I realized then and there - that this is the key to the bush men. They're nothing but twerps. Old and middle-aged twerps, but twerps nonetheless. It was like being served two rather large, thick prime ribs of beef, along with two little pieces of paper. The comparison was GLARING.

If kkkarl rove had really been on top of it, he would NOT have allowed anything at that service from either Thatcher OR Mulroney. I mean, even Gorbachev, who has sort of an average-guy look, himself, appeared more presidential, by far, without even saying a word from any podium. The comparison was just too sharp, and too painful. It made his man look small and lacking by comparison. It was a study in contrasts. World-class oratory versus - pardon the pun - the bush leagues. I'll say one thing for twerp and son, their surname is quite fitting.

[yardwork]

19. I think you are right. Welcome to DU!

I just hope they don't steal it again. If they do, this time I'm taking to the street.

[Skittles]

24. please remember

he didn't win last time.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

29. Damn right he didn't win last time!

nt

[MarLopez2]

30. No substitute for vigilance.

I'm not sure if thats a relief or a lesson to recall. Will we be saying the same next year around this time? The popular vote means nothing, the electoral map is too tight to get complacent here.

[Mnemosyne]

28. Martial law

major terror attack before or after election and I believe * can remain in office or prevent Kerry from taking office.

Can't recall where I read, but will try to hunt down source.


edit> excuse me, postpone election also possibility

[MarLopez2]

31. Well...

Call it the Rudy precedent.

[Mnemosyne]

61. rudy precedent?

[SOS]

37. Hopefully

He will be forced from office before the election.

[proud patriot]

43. Yet we must remain steadfast

We must not relent . Simply getting bush out of office
isn't enough . We must have justice . bush and company
must be indicted and brought before the international
War Crimes Court .

If America is to save face we must let justice be done .

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bridget Burke]

48. We'll see the proof.

Little Bush was damaged before he was born. It took Babs 2 pregnancies before she figured she really ought to lay off the gin whilst knocked up.

I really doubt Kerry is the far-left radical you fantasize him to be. He's a bit to the right of me but I'll be glad to vote for him.

Sorry, your fragile little brain-damaged boy is going down.

[calimary]

50. Uh, he doesn't stand for anything you or I stand for? Guess again.

Kerry shares just about EVERYTHING I care about, on the environment, ALONE. Or maybe you stand for having a hard-on for war without ever having fought in one, or having had to face killing your fellow man (well, unless you can preside over executions at state prisons, that is). Perhaps you stand for allowing foxes to guard henhouses. Irresponsible spending and tax give-aways to those who need it the least, and during wartime, when the whole country can least afford it and we're already running on fumes? You stand for different things than I do, so please don't lump us together. You do me and the truth, not to mention John Kerry, a gross disservice. Kerry is NOT damaged goods. It's little bushie who is.

Fellow traveler, you might find more sympatico at other sites than this one. Suggest you try the Free Republic.

[wabeewoman]

52. There isn't anything wrong with Kerry

(other than the contrast of the people he ran against in the primary who were better speakers). I had to LOL at your post. If anyone is 'damaged goods' it is bush. You obviously haven't read Kerry's platform or else you don't stand for what I stand for. Part of bush's problem in running against Kerry is there is nothing he can accuse Kerry of that he isn't more of: flip flopper, bush wins; liar, bush wins hands down; big spender, bush; big government, bush; take away your freedoms,bush; war hero, opps not bush; sanctity of life (if you count all life) bush loses. Tell me one thing bush has over Kerry...

[doni_georgia]

56. Uhhhhhhhh

Damn, they'll let anyone in here.

But that's OK. I may disagree, but you have that privilege, and shame on me if I were to deny it to you. The fact that you're here is in itself indicative that our sitting presidunce is pretty much as bad as most of us believe. So welcome, pull up a chair.

All I have to say is that my tax money is in better hands with the UN than with this administration. And believe me, I have no illusions of the ineffectuality, pettiness, corruption or connivance of that particular body.

Maybe Kerry isn't my perfect candidate, but the fact is, he's closer to where I stand than Bush is. I've said this before, and I'll say it again: I'd vote for my bulldog against Bush, and that dog's so stupid that he chews on paint cans.

And you make one point that we all would do well to consider: what you and I believe is important. Instead of focusing on our differences, let's find what we have in common and work from there. Where we differ, let's agree to noninterference on trivialities, be willing to listen, and place less importance on holding bad positions than on willingness to alter one's position as we learn. Someone who refuses to adjust to conditions is just stupid. If you saw an Eskimo on a beach dressed in full winter garb, you'd think he was an idiot, but more to the point, he'd KNOW he was an idiot (a sweaty one at that). So - is it more productive to tell him he's stupid (which is insulting his intelligence and which he knows far better than you do) or offer him a Speedo and some Coppertone? Hell, you're on the beach too, aren't you? There's the commonality and the willingness to work together. If he refuses the offer out of pride or some misguided idea, well, then he's just really stupid. And he deserves to broil. And apparently he wants to, so I'm just going to let him.

Mac in Ga

[boobooday]

54. There is no other day

I look forward to with more anticipation, than the day this SOB loses the election!

Oh we SHALL party!

:headbang:

http://www.wgoeshome.com

[UNIXcock]

58. Bush never had any strengths

... and it went downhill from there!

[Norquist Nemesis]

60. Looking forward to the week ahead!

I'm not a betting person but I'm feeling better as time goes on toward the Nov. election! :bounce:

[SarahB]

62. Probably.

I see them milking and pillaging as much as they can before it's over though.