How best to attack Bush now?
- Thread starter dsm
- Start date
-
- Tags
- attack george w bush
Tricky
Briefly immortal
How could you have left out "the environment"?
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
I'd have to say that if you were going to focus only on one of these topics, I'd recommend the Iraqi War. Of them, its really the only one that is directly the responsibility of the president and can't be blamed on previous administrations, factors the president can't control, etc. Even if he had all the best intentions in attacking Iraq, he's still responsible for the consequences of it.
Tmy
Philosopher
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2002
- Messages
- 6,487
All of the reasons!! A good shotgun affect.
The demos had to bite there tonges during the war (ride out pres wartime patriotism) now that the wartime surge is gone Bush can be attacked wh/o an automatic backlash.
The right controled media likes to pretend that Bush is still untouchable but the truth is hes pissed off alot of americans.
The demos had to bite there tonges during the war (ride out pres wartime patriotism) now that the wartime surge is gone Bush can be attacked wh/o an automatic backlash.
The right controled media likes to pretend that Bush is still untouchable but the truth is hes pissed off alot of americans.
Crossbow
Seeking Honesty and Sanity
Well that is a good list you wrote up.
However, I think the one that will give him more trouble than anything else will be that business about who leaked the name of that CIA field officer.
A rather embarassing thing to happen to the son of a former CIA Director.
However, I think the one that will give him more trouble than anything else will be that business about who leaked the name of that CIA field officer.
A rather embarassing thing to happen to the son of a former CIA Director.
How 'bout with a stick?
In the meantime I blame Bush for the following:
1. My weight.
2. Marlins winning game 1.
3. Carrott Top's comeback.
4. Germany annexing the sudatenland.
5. Hurricane Isabel.
6. The Pharoahs.
7. Infomercials.
8. Tofu.
Any one of these things is good enough for me not to vote for him.
In the meantime I blame Bush for the following:
1. My weight.
2. Marlins winning game 1.
3. Carrott Top's comeback.
4. Germany annexing the sudatenland.
5. Hurricane Isabel.
6. The Pharoahs.
7. Infomercials.
8. Tofu.
Any one of these things is good enough for me not to vote for him.
fishbob
Seasonally Disaffected
You forgot the Planet X option, but I have to agree with Upchurch. The idea for war with Iraq came from the Bush administration.
arcticpenguin
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2002
- Messages
- 5,687
Bush will be traveling to Indonesia soon. The best way to attack him might be to have the Yellow Bamboo guys knock him over without even touching him.
I voted other because I think you have to combine all of them.
When combined the message says "Throw the Bum out!"
My fellow Californian's, against my better judgment, just fired the Governor of California. It seems there is a strong feeling surging across this nation to just throw all of the Bums out. Tap into that feeling, it's time to fire Bush and all of the entrenched politicians. They've been too busy listening to special interest and they have forgot to tend to the needs of the people.
When combined the message says "Throw the Bum out!"
My fellow Californian's, against my better judgment, just fired the Governor of California. It seems there is a strong feeling surging across this nation to just throw all of the Bums out. Tap into that feeling, it's time to fire Bush and all of the entrenched politicians. They've been too busy listening to special interest and they have forgot to tend to the needs of the people.
arcticpenguin
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2002
- Messages
- 5,687
I don't think the environment would be the top card to play. In tough times, the environment takes a back seat to the economy in most voters' minds.Tricky said:
Tricky
Briefly immortal
Maybe so, but it is the issue where he has been an unqualified and an unmitigated disaster. Also, it's one of those issues like "motherhood" that everybody is "for", so I think it is potentially a top card. Anything to do with "the war" is going to elicit partisan response, and most people recognize that the economy is cyclic.arcticpenguin said:
arcticpenguin
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2002
- Messages
- 5,687
How about his odd combination of a penchant for secrecy and disdain for civil liberties?
The church|state issue is a big one for me, but not for most voters.
Maybe he's not resonsible for the downturn in the economy, but you could argue that his strategy to deal with it is 1) ineffective and 2) a sellout to rich special interests.
The church|state issue is a big one for me, but not for most voters.
Maybe he's not resonsible for the downturn in the economy, but you could argue that his strategy to deal with it is 1) ineffective and 2) a sellout to rich special interests.
DavidJames
Penultimate Amazing
I don't think concentrating on the war will work. I think many American's believe the good guys won, bad guy is gone (yeah I know we don't know where). It's not another Vietnam, at least at this point and it's pretty much out of sight out of mind.
The environment will never work. It's to easy for the Repubs to paint anyone concerned about the environment as a wacko. Even many of the conservative "skeptics" on this board feel that way.
Terrorism - That's exactly what Bush will use. He will try to scare everyone into thinking we need to stay the course, we're rooting out the bad guys, raise the alert level at strategic times, etc. and unless another strikes hit's us here at home, he will claim his efforts have been successful and whether it's true or not, there is no way to dispute that claim.
It's the economy stupid - barring wars or tragedy's like 9/11, people really don't give a damn about much more than their own lot in life (not sure if I disagree either). Do we have jobs, can we afford a house, sending the kids to college, that kind of thing. Forget about the deficit, people don't care about that either and it's way to complex to relate it to their lives. Tax cuts for the rich, nope, that won't work. Here in America, where everyone can hope and expect to be rich some day, we want to have those tax breaks waiting for us when our shop comes in.
It's the economy!
Edit to add comment about civil liberties. Nope, that won't work either. It's cynical, but I think people will only care about this issue if it hits them, they really don't care if some guy with a foriegn sounding name is locked up in jail for month w/o a reason. Sad, but, I'm afraid, true
The environment will never work. It's to easy for the Repubs to paint anyone concerned about the environment as a wacko. Even many of the conservative "skeptics" on this board feel that way.
Terrorism - That's exactly what Bush will use. He will try to scare everyone into thinking we need to stay the course, we're rooting out the bad guys, raise the alert level at strategic times, etc. and unless another strikes hit's us here at home, he will claim his efforts have been successful and whether it's true or not, there is no way to dispute that claim.
It's the economy stupid - barring wars or tragedy's like 9/11, people really don't give a damn about much more than their own lot in life (not sure if I disagree either). Do we have jobs, can we afford a house, sending the kids to college, that kind of thing. Forget about the deficit, people don't care about that either and it's way to complex to relate it to their lives. Tax cuts for the rich, nope, that won't work. Here in America, where everyone can hope and expect to be rich some day, we want to have those tax breaks waiting for us when our shop comes in.
It's the economy!
Edit to add comment about civil liberties. Nope, that won't work either. It's cynical, but I think people will only care about this issue if it hits them, they really don't care if some guy with a foriegn sounding name is locked up in jail for month w/o a reason. Sad, but, I'm afraid, true
ssibal
Unregistered
S
The best reasons to attack Bush are:
1. Faith based innitiatives.
2. Human cloning.
3. Stem cell research.
1. Faith based innitiatives.
2. Human cloning.
3. Stem cell research.
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
Just out of curiosity, why do you feel a need to attack him?
I can understand you having different policies and beliefs, but shouldn't you just wait and let the facts speak for themselves?
Or better yet, wait and see who the democratic challenger is before making a decision. (Would you really want to get rid of Bush if the Democrats selected, oh, the reanimated corpse of Stalin to be their presidential nominee?)
I can understand you having different policies and beliefs, but shouldn't you just wait and let the facts speak for themselves?
Or better yet, wait and see who the democratic challenger is before making a decision. (Would you really want to get rid of Bush if the Democrats selected, oh, the reanimated corpse of Stalin to be their presidential nominee?)
Segnosaur said:
"Attack", as I've used it, is a word open to interpretation. Politics, being what it is, is always going to be "attack" based. Bush's opponents for the presidency cannot simply point out his mistakes, they will have to push those points to ensure they stick in the voter's mind. It's just the way it works...
Ahh. You make the mistake of believing the Democratic challenger would be the only one in the race.
Besides, framing the reasons why Bush is not liked now will help in deciding what type of alternative is wanted.