Could Bush Lose It?

[Dripdry]

Democratic policy over the last 20 years has been what has pulled this country out of debt.
I'm curious, why is it more the Democrats' fault?

[Schlep]

I'm not sure what you're referring to, this country was going into debt hand over fist until a majority Republican congress was picked in the mid 90's, which cut spending on alot of programs that were put into place by Democrats.

My memory on this could be wrong, feel free to correct.

[Gutsman]

The election is still more than 1.5 years away, I think the economy would have picked up a bit more by then, and people would not be as negative about the economy.

[spacecowboy]

No, he's not, but he's not getting any favorable tax breaks either. The guy making $37,000 would pay out about $10,000 in taxes using Arnold's scale. I just peeked at my income tax filings for 2001. After exemptions, my taxable income was around $47,000 and the taxes for that amount were around $6700. I recieved an income tax return of $1500 for that year. So, for a household income of over $55,000, I was only taxed around $5300.

I'm saying that to someone making $37,000 a year, $10,000 means more than $10 million does to Arnold. Even $5,000 is a large amount to pay for a middle class family. If I had $37 million a year, I wouldn't complain so much about paying $10 million in taxes...wait...yeah I would.

SC

[Gutsman]

That's all they ever do... Complain, complain, complain, complain... "Where's Bin Laden?? Hm? Hmmm? You can't find Bin Laden!! Ha ha, he he, ho ho... Where's Saddam? Hm?? You can't find Saddam!!! Where's the WMDs?? You can't find 'em!! Ha ha ha, he he he, ho ho ho..." I'm not voting that in, sorry

I'm not really a die hard Republican, but I've grown to become a big hater of the Democratic party, due to the reasons that Nightwolf listed. I just wish that we have a better alternative, a 3rd party maybe. At this point I would hope Bush gets reelected, not because I like him, but because I just don't think the Democrats deserve to win ANYTHING.

[Calliander]

The election is still more than 1.5 years away, I think the economy would have picked up a bit more by then, and people would not be as negative about the economy.

That's what I'm hoping; not just for my sake (getting a higher paying job would be nice), but for the people who don't even have a job now that can't get one because all of these companies will not hire anyone. But what if it doesn't get better? Nothing Bush has done so far has boosted hiring, and that's what scares me most. What if attaining a job is as difficult a year from today as it is today?

I'm saying that to someone making $37,000 a year, $10,000 means more than $10 million does to Arnold. Even $5,000 is a large amount to pay for a middle class family. If I had $37 million a year, I wouldn't complain so much about paying $10 million in taxes...wait...yeah I would.

That $5,000.00 to the person making $37,000.00 a year is a down payment on a car; savings towards a child's college education; gas money; bills; a new computer so that a child can take advantage of current study tools; a cadre of things. In other words: a little bit more room for financial maneuverability. If you've got $37 mil and you lose $10 mil, you've still got $27 mil.

But that doesn't mean you eliminate taxes for the $37 thou guy and hike taxes for the $37 mil guy. It just means that I wish I had that $10 mil the big guy's losing.

I'm not really a die hard Republican, but I've grown to become a big hater of the Democratic party, due to the reasons that Nightwolf listed. I just wish that we have a better alternative, a 3rd party maybe. At this point I would hope Bush gets reelected, not because I like him, but because I just don't think the Democrats deserve to win ANYTHING.

Well, really, though; we ought to have some better results on Bin Laden by now. And it's also kind of funny that the same people who didn't want to give U.N. inspectors time to find WMDs are now saying that they need more time to find the WMDs in Iraq.

I think they've got plenty of good reasons to hammer away on these things because they're important no matter which side of the coin you're on. For instance, how do you feel, knowing that our government basically lied to the world in order to carry out a war? Does it bother you, or do you shrug it off? Why or why not?

Personally, I think we did a morally correct thing, but I don't know if the way we went about it was moral. I don't think Saddam was an imminent threat (nor do I think North Korea is, or else we'd hear more about that), and we could have waited for world approval before going in there. But that's just me, and I like to hear the opinions of others on the matter.

[Gutsman]

I guess some of things do bother me, but I dunno, foreign policy issues have never been the deciding factor in presidential elections, and I don't think it will be in this next one either. Like they said, it's always about the economy, stupid. If the unemployment rate is still hovering at 6.5% by this time next year, then Bush probably will lose. Bush's problem now is that the tax cut and other policies he implemented to boost growth and employment are not kicking in fast enough. Fiscal policy tends to work very slowly.

[spacecowboy]

That $5,000.00 to the person making $37,000.00 a year is a down payment on a car; savings towards a child's college education; gas money; bills; a new computer so that a child can take advantage of current study tools; a cadre of things. In other words: a little bit more room for financial maneuverability. If you've got $37 mil and you lose $10 mil, you've still got $27 mil.

But that doesn't mean you eliminate taxes for the $37 thou guy and hike taxes for the $37 mil guy. It just means that I wish I had that $10 mil the big guy's losing.

I agree completely, but it's incorrect to say that the rich are being taken advantage of by tax laws.

SC

[Dripdry]

I'm not sure what you're referring to, this country was going into debt hand over fist until a majority Republican congress was picked in the mid 90's, which cut spending on alot of programs that were put into place by Democrats.

My memory on this could be wrong, feel free to correct.

http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/news/oped..._ft_091202.htm

(nor do I think North Korea is, or else we'd hear more about that)

Just because we don't hear about it doesn't mean it isn't an issue, particularly when the government has no idea what the they're going to do about it.
Hasn't North Korea been stating for decades that once it reaches nuclear power, it's going to do to Japan what Japan tried to do to it back in (I think) the Korean War years? Wipe Japan off the face of the earth. No, I don't think North Korea poses a threat to us, but they certainly seem to pose a threat to another world power.
Also, I've gotten the distinct impression, from what I can gather, that the reason we aren't hearing about it is because it's nearly an impossible situation. Noboody in any big chair wants to talk about it. The government is basically stuck on what to do about North Korea. Basically, we have a situation where if North Korea sees us make any move to strike, Seoul gets pounded with the heavy artillery hidden in their underground bunkers, almost instantaneously, and a pretty big handful of civilians will die.
Thoughts?

[Wolffen]

I'd like to see a Republican (maybe, I dunno, McCain) commit political suicide and run against Bush for the Republican ticket. Not gonna happen, but I can dream.

Does Bush stand a chance of losing? Yes. As has been mentioned, the economy isn't doing so great from the avg. person's POV. There is a distinct chance we'll see the market get back up to 10K and still see very little change in the job market. Too many companies and corporations are exploring alternative sources of cheap labor, or enjoying the benefits of forcing their employees to take up slack from fired coworkers. They feel empowered by the current job market to treat employees as easily replaceable commodities.

Bush's best chance at being re-elected would come from (a) a revival in the job market, and (b) the continued ignorance, in-fighting, and ineptitude of the Democratic party. Maybe once a single candidate is focused on by the Jackass party, some focus will occur. The Democratic party needs to rethink itself and tell the American people why it's different from the Republican party. "Democrats: We're Wishy-Washy" doesn't make a great party slogan, but that is their slogan as far as I'm concerned.

Whoever opposes Bush needs to hammer on the following: (1) Fiscal Responsibilty in government. (2) Job Market/Economy. (3) Missing terrorists and WMD (assuming none are found in the next 18 months). (4) Corporate corruption (funny how Enron, Worldcom, Tyco, etc. have all disappeared from anyone's agendas). (5) Medicare and Social Security (always a fun campaign topic). (6) Foreign Policy. (7) Environmental Policies. (8) Media Policies (see FCC's recent rulings that allow a single company to control more of city's media than ever before). (9) Privacy & Loss of Freedom (see Patriot Act, TIA, TIPS, potentially even DMCA).

I'm sure there's more. But that's a start.