Bush Supporters: What do you expect?

[Steve_MB]

@RikWriter

In 2001, the House was barely under GOP control and the Senate was briefly 51-50 for the Republicans until Jim Jeffords became an Ind., making it 50-50-1.

I trust that the Senate building still has sufficient men’s room stalls after one of them got converted to Jeffords’ new office.

[tnetennba]

@Bricker

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA…

That’s fine. You continue to tell each other how stupid, ignorant, and corrupt the majority of voters are, and we will continue to elect Republicans. I am perfectly happy with that plan. You get the smug sense of moral superiority, we get the actual seats in Congress, the White House, federal benches, and state capitols. This is a division of responsibility I heartily endorse.

Don’t forget the war and the debt. You get that too!

[tnetennba]

I find it interesting that a few of you are projecting that Bush will enact aggressive tax cuts that will benefit the wealthy, while simultaneously pursuing his war. War is expensive, of course, and there’s no way to pay for it while giving tax cuts… unless, of course, the tax cut is shifted to Joe Slob. How will Joe Slob, who voted for Bush because Bush hates gays, feel when he feels the hard penile thrusts of Bush’s fiscal policy deep in his colon?

[tnetennba]

@cricetus

I find it interesting that a few of you are projecting that Bush will enact aggressive tax cuts that will benefit the wealthy, while simultaneously pursuing his war. War is expensive, of course, and there’s no way to pay for it while giving tax cuts… unless, of course, the tax —* is shifted to Joe Slob. How will Joe Slob, who voted for Bush because Bush hates gays, feel when he feels the hard penile thrusts of Bush’s fiscal policy deep in his colon?

*Tax BURDEN is shifted to Joe Slob, of course.

I need a nap.

[Airblairxxx]

@plnnr

I’m taking a more circumspect view and wondering what the next four years hold for the country in a social sense. The past four years have been some of the most divisive in a long time (1968 probably being the high (or low) water mark). I pointed out in a few threads a while back that the venom people seem to carry with them has just reached astronomical levels - you could actually hear the hatred in people’s voices when they spoke about one or the other candidates (I was guilty of that myself). I have to wonder if that level of vitriol on both sides can be sustained.

I’m not a pollyanna, and I don’t to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony, but I don’t believe the situation in general is going to get any better. Interesting times. Scary, but interesting.

Well, I for one don’t know if that will happen. Let me repeat an aphorism from, I think, George Will (Og help me): This election is close because it is intense, but it is intense because it is close.

The fact is, Dubya is now legitimate, that can’t be denied any more.

But while the government is overwhelmingly GOP, it’s not like the electorate is. 51-48, and the gains in Congress are deceptive because much of the House gains were due to Texas redistricting, and in the Senate the Democrats had to replace 5 Southern senators.

Of course, I hope that the left uses this election as a motivating base. Time to get organized, establish some think tanks, create a farm system at the state and local levels and come up with a coherent message. Just like the righties did after the Goldwater debacle–he won about 50 EVs in 1964, but the GOP stormed to victory in 1968.

[sqweels]

Shibboleth:

Perhaps intelligence pointing to one or either helping to support or direclty act as insurgents in Iraq, perhaps.

The term “tar baby” comes to mind.

Bricker:

sqweels - do you understand that a majority of voters don’t seem to agree with your assessment? Now, perhaps you’re right and they’re wrong. But merely repeating the same talking points that failed to convince the electorate seems… a bit hardheaded.

Appeal to the masses. You were repeating the same talking points which duped the electorate.

RikWriter:

No, sorry, that’s an outright lie.

OK, you’re right. Iraq is not a base for terrorist operations outside of Iraq–yet–but there is a strong liklihood that it will be.

[RikWriter]

@TonyF

Prove it, and prove it in context.

It’s easily proven. Iraq, before the war, was the home to the largest terrorist training camp in the world in Salmon Pak. Saddam also provided monetary support to Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad, as well as providing safe haven to wanted terrorists like Abu Nidal.