Hypothetically, you mean? The tax-cuts for the rich were not a good cause, and did nothing for the economy. The war in Iraq was not a good cause, and did nothing for the US.
I agree this is very likely to happen in the next four years. I don’t agree that this is a “major component of the economic recovery”, but believe that it is coincidental to it. I expect to see a continue in growth of the budget deficit in the absence of substantive cuts in government. Do you see a place where budget cuts will take place, or do you concur that the deficit will continue to grow? If you believe that the economy will grow enough to offset the loss income from the tax cuts what rate does the economy need to grow to effectively offset this?
Beyond tax cuts, what if anything has Bush done for the economy?
It’s also clear that no Bush will work to strengthen the existing public school system. So what happens to middle class families that cannot afford private schools yet don’t qualify for vouchers? And are there sufficient or really any affordable private schools that are not Christian?
I am not a lawyer so don’t fully understand your second sentence. Can you simplify this for the lay person, please? Also please explain how Gore v Bush was not an activist court ruling?
I expect that Bush will replace both Rehnquist, O’Connor and Bader-Ginsberg. This will most likely mean at least partial overturn of Roe v Wade in the near future.
I expect a second war in either Iran, or more likely Syria, and continued conflict in Iraq for the foreseeable future.
I expect larger tax breaks here somehow, just haven’t figured out how yet. Maybe actual credits or direct payments to faith-based outreach programs?
That’s what I’m looking forward to, anyway.
[/QUOTE]
A couple of other wild cards: if Arafat dies, how does this affect Palestine/Israel? Bush claimed to be a friend of Israel in his campaign material, so can we expect a continued hardline with Palestine, or a softening if Arafat is out of the picture?
How will Bush handle Cuba in the future?
What about migrants from Mexico? Will there be an amnesty program?
What will Bush actually do in re Social Security? I actually favor some privatisation here, but don’t see how it can be paid for. O’Neill and Greenspan had estimated the cost in the trillions, IIRC. Just tack that onto the deficit?
That’s your baseless assertion that has no basis in reality. The tax cuts greatly benefited MY family, which is not rich. The war in Iraq was a good thing in that it removed a base of operation and support for terror and freed millions of people from brutal tyranny.
Actually, Bush having won the popular vote doesn’t mean to us that your not stupid, ignorant, or corrupt. It just means that at least half of the voting population is right there with you.
How much money did your family get back? My tax cut was completely swallowed up by the increase in cost of living. My salary was frozen, and with a decimated job market it’s not likely me or any of my peers will be moving up in the world.
Like many Americans, I see you have the war in Iraq confused with the war on terror. Bush repeatedly alluded to a “terrorist state” as if terrorism is a form of government.
It doesn’t matter whether Bush will be running again. It might be Jeb, although he’s on record as saying he won’t seek the White House in 08. Or Schwarzenegger (whom I’d actually prefer to Bush). Or someone else. But you really have to expect Bush to do things that he and his team believe will allow the party to maintain control of the White House, Senate and House. Mid-term elections should be very interesting in two years. My gut now is that the Republicans will make even further gains then.
That’s really uncalled for here. Bricker has consistently shown that he is not stupid or ignorant. I’m not sure how you’d evaluate corrupt over the Net, but find no basis for that either. You don’t need to agree with his politics but his intentions seem to be purely honorable, and I don’t recall ever having seen him attack someone personally.
No, I’m a democrat for Kerry.
But you have to take what you can get.
My family did not have any increase in the cost of living other than gas, and we don’t have to drive that far to work. My wife is a professional (pharmacist) and can get a job anywhere, and keep it. Perhaps you should try retraining.
No, I have no confusion whatsoever. I am aware that the largest terrorist training base in the world was in Iraq. I am aware that Iraq was giving money to Hamas and Islamic Jihad and supporting the families of suicide bombers. I am aware that Iraq was giving safe haven to several infamous terrorists in the days before the invasion. Apparently you’re the one confused. Or simply in denial.
First of all I do get a great deal of satisfaction out of Bush winning.
As to what I expect from a second term:
Bush will continue to agressively fight the war against terrorism. He’ll continue the good job he’s doing here.
Bush will make the tax cuts permanent and possibly make even more tax cuts. He’s might also work to simplify the tax code.
With a second term, Bush doesn’t have to worry about re-election. This frees him up to touch some of the riskier political subjects that he’s avoided so far. Social Security could see some real reform and maybe even privatization. This would be great.
Also, school vouchers are a real possibility now.
Another big thing is SCOTUS appointments. Bush can appoint conservative judges who will be strict constitutionalists.
While I think these are all wrong-headed, it’s in line with what I expected in this thread. Each of these deserve their own thread, and I’m officially at work now, so… maybe later.
Same difference.
You have a point. 
And if Bush can show me that he’s capable of vetoing one spending bill (just ONE) I’d gain a bit of respect for him. Maybe it’s not that he just doesn’t want to cut government spending, maybe he just doesn’t know what the word “veto” means. 
This is a nice little list of things that scare me most. However, it is a legitimate list of hopes. I hope you are extremely disappointed, but fear you may get everything you want.
Frankly, I don’t like his spending habits. That and his immigration policies are the main beefs I have with him. I, however, don’t believe that a Massachussetts liberal like Kerry is going to be more fiscally responsible.
It really doesn’t matter exactly what he produces at this point. Iraq will be having democratic elections in a matter of months, but you will shrug it off as just a “puppet government” with no real value. The freedom of millions of people will clouded by your “we’re only there for the oil” ideas. Anything he does at this point will just be brushed off by all the sore losers out there.
See, what I was banking on there was a Mass (semi) liberal and a Republican congress. It wouldn’t matter what he wanted to spend, Congress wouldn’t give it to him. It’s harder for a Republican congress to say no to Bush. They’re beholden. And besides, look at those puppy dog eyes. Okay, here’s another $80 billion for Iraq. We know you’re good for it.
There certainly is something to be said for a divsion of power in the government among the parties, but my personal preference is for the president to be a Republican while the Senate is (barely) controlled by Democrats and the House is close to evenly divided.
Oddly, from some of the responses here, they will say the same things about America. It seems ironic to me in the extreme that the democratic party will become the one of the most anti democratic group in history soon.
That remains to be seen. Personally, I regard the prospect as highly doubtful, what with much of the country being under the unchallenged control of insurgents and terrorists, and Kurdistan being pretty much opposed to being ruled from anyone in Baghdad. But please do check back in come January to discuss how it’s going, however. I’m sure we’ll have plenty of threads on the topic.
I will shrug it off as a puppet government if it is indeed a puppet government. Given that an actual democratically-elected government would almost certainly result in some flavor of a Shiite theocracy, I suspect the puppet would be preferable in many ways, as long as it was stable. But I don’t really see that happening either. Remember, the stated goal here is to transform Iraq into a shining beacon of democracy in the Middle East. Anything less is a failure for Bush, and I believe that he will fail badly at achieving that goal due to a fundamental failure to understand the realities on the ground. But again, we shall see. Check back in a couple years so that we can discuss how the situation is in Iraq.
Quite the contrary. If Bush even manages to create a stable Iraq, I’ll be extremely happy. If he manages to create a stable, democratic, and pluralistic Iraq that respects basic human rights and serves as a linchpin for transforming the Middle East, I’ll be freakin’ ecstatic. But I expect to be deeply disappointed on both counts.