Since there are so many people that are critical of our current admin, who would you choose to run this country AND WHY? Time to break down some other people.

Where is Chuck Norris??? I guess Bush will have to do

i think i've explained two or three times why i'd like for Wesley Clark to be the next president

where's the anybody but Bush button?

Shouldn't have listed all the Dem names, most people don't know who they are anyways

Originally posted by SDuquette
Shouldn't have listed all the Dem names, most people don't know who they are anyways

you're right

I saw MSNBC walking around Iowa with pictures of the Democratic candidates. People couldn't name one, EVEN Lieberman :egads: but these are the same people when shown a picture of the guy doing the interview couldn't point him out either.

there's only a few democratic candidates that CAN win, the list needs to be whittled down first

I sure hope Dean or Kerry get the nomination. Can you say "slaughter"? :D

hmm wonder who has CL's vote

Bah, no one likes Bush, he got us bankrupt and killed. Polls lie, so do the ballots.



Ignore me, I'm trying to be a lib

Originally posted by SDuquette
Bah, no one likes Bush, get us bankrupt and killed. Polls lie, so do the ballots.



Ignore me, I'm trying to be a lib


or you could be an ignorant bigot who lives in a zero sum world and only cares about themself...

Ignore me, I'm just being a conservative

Originally posted by stckyfngz
or you could be an ignorant bigot who lives in a zero sum world and only cares about themself...

Ignore me, I'm just being a conservative

I'll skip the ignorant bigot part as I certainly hope I'm not one despite being described as conservative on here a lot (I respect other's right to their own religions, freedom of expression, sexual preference, etc., etc.).

But on the zero sum part, that's definitely a Liberal game... they always love to say if you cut taxes it will increase the deficit. That has consistently proven to NOT be the case, but what IS the case is that usually with tax cuts there's a HUGE increase in spending for 'stimulus' purposes as well. It's pretty much a quid pro quo, some politicians go along with the tax cuts in return for a good ol' pork barrel bill. Of course one politician's 'stimulus' or 'investment' is another's pork barrell project.

The Liberals also love to play a game by describing a decrease in the RATE OF INCREASE in spending as a "cut" (and almost always talk about how it hurts either 'working families', 'children' or 'seniors').

Originally posted by bitkahuna
I'll skip the ignorant bigot part as I certainly hope I'm not one despite being described as conservative on here a lot (I respect other's right to their own religions, freedom of expression, sexual preference, etc., etc.).

But on the zero sum part, that's definitely a Liberal game... they always love to say if you cut taxes it will increase the deficit. That has consistently proven to NOT be the case, but what IS the case is that usually with tax cuts there's a HUGE increase in spending for 'stimulus' purposes as well. It's pretty much a quid pro quo, some politicians go along with the tax cuts in return for a good ol' pork barrel bill. Of course one politician's 'stimulus' or 'investment' is another's pork barrell project.

The Liberals also love to play a game by describing a decrease in the RATE OF INCREASE in spending as a "cut" (and almost always talk about how it hurts either 'working families', 'children' or 'seniors').

you missed my point...no worries

labels, general broad strokes (like all conservatives are bigots) and the likes are ignorant childish behavior. That was my point. Do all conservatives think a like? probably not...neither do all liberals...actually most of us are liberals; some are laissez-faire liberals while others are welfare liberals

it's GW and Carl Rove who seem to be realists that's where the zero sum comment came from

let me ask you this...do you blame the republican party for a platform of isolationism during World War II? do you blame all republicans for a delayed entry into WWII? is it the conservatives fault millions of jews died because we wanted no part of the war?

just be fair and call a spade a spade

Hillary gets my vote!!!:thumbup: :thumbup:

Originally posted by stckyfngz
where's the anybody but Bush button?

I second that. I even have my own "Anybody but Bush" campaign signs ready to go

Originally posted by stckyfngz
where's the anybody but Bush button?

By making a statement like this, you are basically condoning ANYTHING that anyone has done that is negative, but at the same time bashing everything BUSH does regardless of it is negative or positive.

I guess this mean Hitler would have made a better US president then huh, because he would have been to busy Gassing us, performing experiments on us, killing anyone that stood against him (like Saddam), but to you, I guess you think Bush is far worse..?

Everyone ignores the thousands that were killed under Ret. Gen. Wesley Clarks NATO control and his breach of direct orders.

Originally posted by 1SICKLEX
Hillary gets my vote!!!:thumbup: :thumbup:

She's at least as polarizing as Bush, but she will be a formidable candidate if she runs, because she's so much more polished than any of the Democratic amateurs currently running. Bill may be a liability for her though.

Originally posted by 2Lexus430s
By making a statement like this, you are basically condoning ANYTHING that anyone has done that is negative, but at the same time bashing everything BUSH does regardless of it is negative or positive.

I guess this mean Hitler would have made a better US president then huh, because he would have been to busy Gassing us, performing experiments on us, killing anyone that stood against him (like Saddam), but to you, I guess you think Bush is far worse..?

Everyone ignores the thousands that were killed under Ret. Gen. Wesley Clarks NATO control and his breach of direct orders.

ah...actually no it doesn't. It just means I want Bush OUT

how much more clearly can I write it?

plus I don't what to hear you whine and cry about "anybody but Bush" SAVE IT. I had to listen to "anybody but Davis" as justification for a steroid eating, pot smoking, wife cheatin', bad acting, I've lived in America most my adult life and still can't pronounce California gover-nator during the California recall. So what's good for the goose is good for the gander

you have two choices either deal with it or don't...

"anybody but Bush 2004"

Originally posted by stckyfngz
ah...actually no it doesn't. It just means I want Bush OUT

how much more clearly can I write it?

plus I don't what to hear you whine and cry about "anybody but Bush" SAVE IT. I had to listen to "anybody but Davis" as justification for a steroid eating, pot smoking, wife cheatin', bad acting, I've lived in America most my adult life and still can't pronounce California gover-nator during the California recall. So what's good for the goose is good for the gander

you have two choices either deal with it or don't...

"anybody but Bush 2004"

I forgot that I said "anyone but Davis"... wait.. I DIDN'T! And I personally explained that I didn't support Arnold.

I wouldn't say that ever, I would say choose someone BETTER than Davis... Typical Liberal argument.

I'm going to run for President, since I fall into that "Anybody but BUSH" category.

And Quit with the "I don't what to hear you whine and cry", your starting to play a stupid B.S. game of attacking or making condescending remarks about other members.. This is a debate forum and everything that has been said has been in debate form, except your recent comments. (and maybe a few from months ago, but that’s been cleared up)

Originally posted by 2Lexus430s
I forgot that I said "anyone but Davis"... wait.. I DIDN'T! And I personally explained that I didn't support Arnold.

I wouldn't say that ever, I would say choose someone BETTER than Davis... Typical Liberal argument.

I'm going to run for President, since I fall into that "Anybody but BUSH" category.

And Quit with the "I don't what to hear you whine and cry", your starting to play a stupid B.S. game of attacking or making condescending remarks about other members.. This is a debate forum and everything that has been said has been in debate form, except your recent comments. (and maybe a few from months ago, but that’s been cleared up)

that's great for you, but you don't represent the majority of Republican's who did say "anybody but Davis" so your moral HIGH ground is lost...you can thank all those who did say "anybody but Davis" for that.

I can't believe you're making me explain the statement "anybody but Bush".

No It doesn't say that he has done all wrong nor does it say that his replacement can do no wrong. Life isn't that simple, only YOU are trying to make it that simple. Life isn't black and white there is a gray area. This whole you are with us or against us is stupid. Plus as a practical matter the Presidency will come down to TWO MEN. So if you can get the democratic nomination GO FOR IT! It does not mean that I will vote for Hitler (although Germany did elect him) it means that I will vote for either Clark, Clinton, Dean, Gephardt...whomever...well except Sharpton and Lieberman

it's pretty simple stuff that's why I didn't feel it necessary to explain it

and by the way every time you make the statement "Typical Liberal" your doing the same thing your complaining about....your being a hypocrite in you're own post. First you complain about being lumped into a large group that did make the statement "anybody but Davis" then you call me a typical liberal...what's the difference? you ask me to stop making personal attacks then you make one towards me...make up your mind

Originally posted by stckyfngz
that's great for you, but you don't represent the majority of Republican's who did say "anybody but Davis" so your moral HIGH ground is lost...you can thank all those who did say "anybody but Davis" for that.


Please post one time that a Republican said those words.... If they did I must have missed it.

Originally posted by stckyfngz

I can't believe you're making me explain the statement "anybody but Bush".

No It doesn't say that he has done all wrong nor does it say that his replacement can do no wrong. Life isn't that simple, only YOU are trying to make it that simple. Life isn't black and white there is a gray area. This whole you are with us or against us is stupid. Plus as a practical matter the Presidency will come down to TWO MEN. So if you can get the democratic nomination GO FOR IT! It does not mean that I will vote for Hitler (although Germany did elect him) it means that I will vote for either Clark, Clinton, Dean, Gephardt...whomever...well except Sharpton and Lieberman

it's pretty simple stuff that's why I didn't feel it necessary to explain it


No its not that simple, look at it this way: You were given pretty much EVERY candidate that is running, instead of choosing one and explaining your reasons for it, you make a baseless statement that is so broad that it requires clarity. This shows that the only stance you have is an Anti Bush stance, but you can't explain in detail or choose why any candidate would be better.

If you think Bush is doing such a horrible job that a comment like “Anybody but Bush” is merited, then at least explain the flawlessness of your choice in candidates and why they would be able to do so much better.

Originally posted by stckyfngz

and by the way every time you make the statement "Typical Liberal" your doing the same thing your complaining about....your being a hypocrite in you're own post. First you complain about being lumped into a large group that did make the statement "anybody but Davis" then you call me a typical liberal...what's the difference? you ask me to stop making personal attacks then you make one towards me...make up your mind

On the contrary, you make comments that are unclear and horribly bias to the facts and hold a gross double standard. This happens to be a Typical Liberal Stance on many topics.

Originally posted by 2Lexus430s
No its not that simple, look at it this way: You were given pretty much EVERY candidate that is running, instead of choosing one and explaining your reasons for it, you make a baseless statement that is so broad that it requires clarity. This shows that the only stance you have is an Anti Bush stance, but you can't explain in detail or choose why any candidate would be better.

may be you don't listen too talk radio, or may be you don't live in California. I don't know? All you had to do was turn on talk radio in California and you could hear the "anybody but Davis" chant...is it on this board? I have no idea, nor do I care...am I making it up? does it exist? are you kidding me? seriously...I don't care that much to make stuff up...may be things happen in this world without your knowledge...Did that ever occur to you?

I guess you just don't get it, but here it is plain and simple: I don't like the direction this country is going in. I don't like Bush, Rove, Rumsfeld or any of the other neo-cons. Give me McCain or Powell. Give me a balanced budget. (or one CLOSE to it) Bush's second round of tax cuts were unnecessary and he hasn't cut back on government spending. So he's growing the government, funding a war and giving away tax cuts. AWESOME! Who couldn't do that? Bush is centralizing powers and reducing CONSTITUTIONAL checks and balances. (although congress must share in the blame) Not a big fan of Ashcroft either. How many reasons you need?

or let me ask you this...how many reasons you used to eliminate Clark as your candidate? There are even better Republican options then Bush as far as I'm concerned...heck I long for days of old conservatives who believed in little government and a balanced budget...

and yes Clinton put the screws the world too, but he did it with a smile on and they took it. No one likes to be bullied around and part of being President is using TACT, something GW is missing...

Now we have the world trying to acquire nukes so the US won't invade. GREAT!

I even dislike the way he walks, the whole tough guy attitude is stupid and don't get me started on the way he talks...as far as I'm concerned he should just let Tony Blair speak for him

which of these are horribly bias facts? where's the double standard?

I fall under the category that BOTH sides lie and neither truly represent my values or beliefs. And to take everything they say with a grain of salt. So yes I will vote for the lesser of two evils; while I wait for a real candidate to run

On the contrary, you make comments that are unclear and horribly bias to the facts and hold a gross double standard. This happens to be a Typical Liberal Stance on many topics.

Lies and deceit are more of a conservative quality if you ask me...anything to win baby!

Please post one time that a Republican said those words.... If they did I must have missed it.

here ya go...

Fox's O'Reilly website:

Another right-wing conspiracy. That's the subject of this evening's Talking Points Memo. California Governor Gray Davis (search) says his recall problem is a hostile takeover by the right wing. But with an approval rating barely over 20 percent, Mr. Davis must be taking LSD if he really believes that.

Just about everybody in the Golden State wants the guy out of there with the possible exception of Barbra Streisand (search). Governor Davis should own up to his incompetence and quit. He raised spending more than 30 percent a year in his term, pandering to special interest votes and he misled the voters about the financial disaster that has to befallen California.

Davis has no solutions, only tired accusations. Now you would think that Davis would just resign to retain a measure of self-respect. Hey, great. 80 percent of the folks think you're doing a bad job. They're not all conservatives. Got it?

In any other situation, a business, a club, even a family, if you lead the enterprise into bankruptcy, you pay a price. You either get fired or lose all credibility. For far too long Americans have put up with elected officials who lie to them and turn in terrible performances.

Leon Panetta (search), who ran the Clinton White House for a time, says the recall is bad because it creates chaos. With all due respect to Mr. Panetta, whom I like, Davis is the one who created the chaos. A recall can only improve things for the people.

Talking Points hopes people all over the country start thinking recall. That message might wake up a few of these power hunger palls who will sell you out in a heart beat.

These louts should be held accountable and partisan politics be damned. So I applaud the California recall, which has even changed the alphabet. Now it's ABD, Anybody But Davis

Is this good enough for you? Do you now see where I'm coming from?
What's GOOD for the GOOSE is GOOD for the GANDER.
Nothing made up, nothing to confuse here. Just a simple statement right back at ya.
Don't make this more complicated then it is.
"Anybody but BUSH 2004"

Originally posted by stckyfngz
here ya go...

Fox's O'Reilly website:

Another right-wing conspiracy. That's the subject of this evening's Talking Points Memo. California Governor Gray Davis (search) says his recall problem is a hostile takeover by the right wing. But with an approval rating barely over 20 percent, Mr. Davis must be taking LSD if he really believes that.

Just about everybody in the Golden State wants the guy out of there with the possible exception of Barbra Streisand (search). Governor Davis should own up to his incompetence and quit. He raised spending more than 30 percent a year in his term, pandering to special interest votes and he misled the voters about the financial disaster that has to befallen California.

Davis has no solutions, only tired accusations. Now you would think that Davis would just resign to retain a measure of self-respect. Hey, great. 80 percent of the folks think you're doing a bad job. They're not all conservatives. Got it?

In any other situation, a business, a club, even a family, if you lead the enterprise into bankruptcy, you pay a price. You either get fired or lose all credibility. For far too long Americans have put up with elected officials who lie to them and turn in terrible performances.

Leon Panetta (search), who ran the Clinton White House for a time, says the recall is bad because it creates chaos. With all due respect to Mr. Panetta, whom I like, Davis is the one who created the chaos. A recall can only improve things for the people.

Talking Points hopes people all over the country start thinking recall. That message might wake up a few of these power hunger palls who will sell you out in a heart beat.

These louts should be held accountable and partisan politics be damned. So I applaud the California recall, which has even changed the alphabet. Now it's ABD, Anybody But Davis

Is this good enough for you? Do you now see where I'm coming from?
What's GOOD for the GOOSE is GOOD for the GANDER.
Nothing made up, nothing to confuse here. Just a simple statement right back at ya.
Don't make this more complicated then it is.
"Anybody but BUSH 2004"

I though that O-Reilly "use to be" a republican.... I believe he has been an Independant for some time now..

So try again.... and regardless of what you or Al Franken "say" he is, you labeling him something he says hes not.

Originally posted by 2Lexus430s
I though that O-Reilly "use to be" a republican.... I believe he has been an Independant for some time now..

So try again.... and regardless of what you or Al Franken "say" he is, you labeling him something he says hes not.

if you believe that I've got some wonderful swampland you should look into...

plus Franken re-printed O'Reilly's 1994 voter registration card and it says Republican (page 75)
(so he's been an independent for 7 years at most)

how would someone go about making that up? that's slander and if it's not true, why isn't O'Reilly suing? (again)

if it looks like a DUCK, walks like a DUCK, quacks like a DUCK, it must be a DUCK....O'Reilly is a republican apologist regardless of what he denies.

Originally posted by stckyfngz
if you believe that I've got some wonderful swampland you should look into...

plus Franken re-printed O'Reilly's 1994 voter registration card and it says Republican (page 75)
(so he's been an independent for 7 years at most)

how would someone go about making that up? that's slander and if it's not true, why isn't O'Reilly suing? (again)

if it looks like a DUCK, walks like a DUCK, quacks like a DUCK, it must be a DUCK....O'Reilly is a republican apologist regardless of what he denies.

Personally I don't (and have not) supported most of what O-Reilly says, Check my posts if you don't believe me...

And I did say that he was a registered Republican some time ago.. 7 years is some time ago.

I was a registered Democrat 4 years ago.. Now I'm a Registered Republican.. People can change their views such as I have. Why would he sue for Libel ? he has admitted that he use to be a Republican.. He has never denied that he was a Republican in the past, your hatred for Fox News would just make you think he is.

O-Reilly also criticizes Bush on a regular basis, so maybe you just would like to believe that he supports all us Republicans when he really does not. Most of my views differ from his.

Originally posted by 2Lexus430s
Personally I don't (and have not) supported most of what O-Reilly says, Check my posts if you don't believe me...

And I did say that he was a registered Republican some time ago.. 7 years is some time ago.

I was a registered Democrat 4 years ago.. Now I'm a Registered Republican.. People can change their views such as I have. Why would he sue for Libel ? he has admitted that he use to be a Republican.. He has never denied that he was a Republican in the past, your hatred for Fox News would just make you think he is.

O-Reilly also criticizes Bush on a regular basis, so maybe you just would like to believe that he supports all us Republicans when he really does not. Most of my views differ from his.

right on

I never said you were like him, I just used him as an example of someone who did say "anybody but bush"

sorry if I've given that impression.

Originally posted by stckyfngz
right on

I never said you were like him, I just used him as an example of someone who did say "anybody but bush"

sorry if I've given that impression.

its cool:thumbup:

I'm voting for either Dean or Kucinch. Bush has not impressed me with the way the handles the economy and the current Middle East situation. IMO, all Bush really cares about is a stronger Israel at the expense of Israel's neighbors.

Just wanted to draw to everyone's attention the fact this poll really doesn't represent the AMerican sentiment at this point. Somewhere around 45% of Americans have said that they will not reelect George Bush, and roughly the same have said that they would. So the 30-15 split here isn't a very accurate portrayal of most americans. You also have to consider this is a Lexus website, and statistically speaking, this is probably a predominantly middle to upper class segment of the population. According to Karl Rove (Bush's political advisor), as people get rich, they vote Republican. SInce it was such a wonderful quote, one im sure all you conservatives will love and agree with, I'll post it here for you.

""As people do better, they start voting like Republicans...
...unless they have too much education and vote Democratic,
which proves there can be too much of a good thing." - from the Daily Texan, March 19, 2001

now did this guy shove his foot in his mouth or what. But its really too true!

What? This poll is 100% scientifically accurate, and is approved and administered by the greatest minds in the field of polling and politics. Bush will win by a landslide! :egads: :D j/k According to most of the polls, the next election looks like it will be very close. I think things will change when the Dems elect their candidate because they will have all their support rallied behind one candidate.

So the question is: who will the Dems nominate for their presidential candidate? Here's the poll: http://www.clublexus.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=104259

Looks like Gore and Dean are going to be raising money together.

Originally posted by 93LexoGS300
I think things will change when the Dems elect their candidate because they will have all their support rallied behind one candidate.


I'm not so sure about that, they are like a bunch of women criticizing eachother because of their makeup and hair-do. I would be hard pressed to see huge support behind any one Dem cendidate, my prediction is no matter who it is, there will be some backstabbing going on.

Originally posted by SDuquette
I'm not so sure about that, they are like a bunch of women criticizing eachother because of their makeup and hair-do. I would be hard pressed to see huge support behind any one Dem cendidate, my prediction is no matter who it is, there will be some backstabbing going on.
That's usually what happens in primaries, every candidate goes after each other. But when the party finally chooses their candidate, there is more solidarity.

wow that 68% vote for Bush is like his new 70% approval rating.......:p

Originally posted by BAWLEX94
Just wanted to draw to everyone's attention the fact this poll really doesn't represent the AMerican sentiment at this point. Somewhere around 45% of Americans have said that they will not reelect George Bush, and roughly the same have said that they would.

Not to burst your bubble, but polls are not very representative in my opinion. Usually the sample size is under 5,000 (even less) and to extrapolate 5,000 people to the opinion of 200,000,000 eligible voters is not very scientific, I don't care what the actuaries or statiscal sampling techniques say.

Being a CPA and a numbers guy I know this all too well. Besides many polls are taken with loaded questions (both Democratic and Republican) in order to produce the result that they want for their particular soundbite. It just depends who performs the survey and who pays for it.

To me the only polls that count are the actual ones. The caucases, primaries, and the November election. And these really aren't polls, per se.

For example, the polls weeks ago in Iowa had Dean and Gephardt leading the pack. Oops, Dean finished 3rd and Gephardt, well can we sing..... Na, na, na , na, hey hey hey Good bye! And he kept saying the Midwest was his stronghold. Go figure.

BTW, do any of you realize that Kerry is on the Board of Tenet Health Care (THC), whose stock has dropped by over 60% in the last year ( was over $50 sh after the split, now it is struggling to maintain $15 sh) and many of the executives left with big dollars. The drop in stock price happened over the course of a few months. One even cashed in options for $110M. Yet, Kerry did little or nothing. Sounds like we have Democrats that are part of the big old corporate evil world too. But does anyone in the media talk or give this any exposure like they do Cheney and Halliburton? Hmmmm....

For those who didn't listen to the speech last night, Bush did not use the Democrat or Republican words, instead he used "We" and included the Democrats and gave all of Congress credit for passing the tax cut and the positive signs that our economy is showing rather than just give credit to the Republicans and play the partisan game. Additionally he challenged all of Congress to work on the issues that he feels are important and why. He covered a number of controversial topics and did not run or hide from anything. And he gave clear reasoning as to why he feels certain ways towards various issues. (at least as much as he could considering all the topics he did cover). This is more than we are getting from any of the Democrats.

And considering how much he has been criticized I took the speech as more of his way of standing up for himself, since he has really avoided biting back over the last few months, per se. And he did it in a positive manner and without name calling, which he could have easily been justified to do.

All I hear out of the Democrats is divisiveness and negativity. Please move on and tell us something we don't already know. Until you do, they are no better having Al Sharpton as their candidate over Dean, Kerry, or any other person they put forward. Tell us what is your plan is, with more specifics than you have rather than just telling us what is wrong. Yes, some candidates have laid out some parts of their platforms, but they have not laid out enough, especially in light of all that they complain about.

I agree with everything you posted.

Also, how many times during the Democrat Response did we hear them used the terms "The Democratic Party believes"... They talked about Bush splitting parties? I didn't hear him once mention parties.

Something tells me this is about the ratio it will be in the real election, you know, hanging chads and all

Originally posted by IronCobra
I agree with everything you posted.


Thanks .....

I must say I am surprised that this debate died so quickly! LOL! Applying logic and common sense, rather than political rhetoric gives things a whole new perspective.

Besides do people really believe that GWB is sitting behind his desk going...

1) Let me see how I can take money from the poor and give it to the rich...
2) Let me see how many national parks I can destroy by strip mining them...
3) Let me see how I can get all the gay and lesbians ........
4) Let me blah blah ...
5) Let me blah blah.....

But if you don't apply common sense and logic, this is what the Democrats want it to it look like. Unfortunately the Democrats are as masterful at selectively editing the facts they want, as Osama Bin Laden is at running and hiding. Not to say that the Republicans are perfect or don't need work either, but the way the Democrats rail negatively about just about everything could cause even the worst impersonator to do his best impression of Donald Sutherland from Kelly's Heroes..

"Always with the negativity Man, always with the negativity"

Not only am I a big fan of Bush, but the thought of any of the Democratic candidates winning (with the exception of Leiberman) scares me. However, we all know that Leiberman will never get the nod from the Dems because he is to "Bush-Like".

This poll should be redone with Bush/Kerry/Edwards

Originally posted by SCHEME
This poll should be redone with Bush/Kerry/Edwards

Out of the Three on the CL poll note only Bush has any votes.. lol

Bush :thumbdn:

Arnold [Schwarzenegger] :thumbup: :D