The amazing rise of the angry little doctor. (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 03, 2024, 10:22:51 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2004 U.S. Presidential Election
  2004 U.S. Presidential Election Campaign
  The amazing rise of the angry little doctor. (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: The amazing rise of the angry little doctor.  (Read 18580 times)
emergingDmajority1
Rookie
**
Posts: 245


« on: November 26, 2003, 03:38:37 PM »

you can politicize 9/11 all you want, it is the gift that keeps giving for republicans.

I think America is starting to tire of the fear mongering. The approval rating is somewhere between 48-53, the unnamed Dem is breathing down Dubya's neck.

It won't be Dean. Our party has made a ton of mistakes over the past 3 years, walked through alot of Rove minefields. But we're not dumb enough to run Howard Dean.
Logged
emergingDmajority1
Rookie
**
Posts: 245


« Reply #1 on: November 26, 2003, 03:49:42 PM »

you talk big. Almost as if Bush is still polling at 70%!!! lol

The Democratic field is strong, and every candidate can compete with Bush (except Dean, but even he's at 39-40%) The key here is to take the attention off the bumbling fool in the white house and launch and all out smear campaign against the candidates. Lucky we have so many otherwise it would be even more concentrated. But many are still more qualified to be President than Bush, even after 4 years in office (or make that 2 years in office and 2 in crawford)

Are Dems angry? you bet. But with Gephardt we have the best of both worlds, we have the anger, and somebody who can appeal to the Deanie liberals.....if they give him a chance. He's a well rounded candidate.

Logged
emergingDmajority1
Rookie
**
Posts: 245


« Reply #2 on: November 26, 2003, 03:57:58 PM »
« Edited: November 26, 2003, 04:01:15 PM by emergingDmajority1 »

Hey, I have nothing against the war(or conflict or whatever you want to call it) in Afghanistan. I would have rather sent more troops and resources there to finish the job. Of course we can't now with the war in iraq spreading us thin.

I do believe (and I won't admit it to my lib friends) that Saddam had some trace amounts of WMD, not sufficient to go to war with him but something at least. We couldn't sell the war with mass graves because the american people don't care....the only way was with WMD.

9/11 and WW2, no comparison at all. We were not attacked by an army, but by an ideology. The Taliban wasn't exactly preparing to storm the jersey shore if you know what I mean....

winning the war on terror with few allies will prove to be difficult. Israel is a crucial ally, and the rising tide of anti semitism in Europe is very troubling.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.022 seconds with 13 queries.