Denver Post: GOP Elites Support Jeb Bush

OmniScience wrote:

archer wrote: . But hey, it's all good for the democrats (.and the country)

Right, Archer. Because the country is in soooo much better shape since 0 took office.

Nearly 50 million people on food stamps
High unemployment
Massive debt

Yeah,... good for the country.

Well at least the rest of the world has something to smile about now as our respect and influence gets washed away.

COLD day in hell before I would vote for Jeb.....there NEEDS to be 'fresh blood" in the W.H.....(my
vote WAS going to Hillary UNTIL Benagazhi....NOW I'm like a vampire....give me some "fresh
blood"......

archer wrote:

Rick wrote:

OmniScience wrote: If the past 2 elections have taught me one thing, it is that integrity, experience, and leadership qualities are no match for style and oratorship.

:YeahThat:

I think we can add that statement to the 1001 reasons republicans give for why they lose national elections. It couldn't possibly be that the tea party has drug the party too far right and the religious fanatics have hijacked the platform for their own purposes. But hey, it's all good for the democrats (.and the country)

I'm assuming you put Ted Cruz and Rand Paul in the "tea party" platform. So what exactly do they believe that you call "far right".

If you consider the last 5 yrs "good for the country" you have your head in the sand. The only thing that has been good is getting more people dependent on the govt at the expense of the next generation. If you are over 50, you may not care about the massive debt we have piled on. We have to quit spending the future's $$ today.

Oh, and I don't want another Bush running for prez. I would like a law that wouldn't allow anyone from the same family to run for the highest office. We need new blood, and new ideas. Of course I support term limits, because if you can get rich by being in office for a lifetime, you won't do what is best for the country, but rather best for you.

OmniScience wrote:

archer wrote: . But hey, it's all good for the democrats (.and the country)

Right, Archer. Because the country is in soooo much better shape since 0 took office.

Nearly 50 million people on food stamps
High unemployment
Massive debt

Yeah,... good for the country.

Yes, the country IS in better shape since Obama took office. How convenient of you to forget what GW did to this country and how bad his legacy has been for this nation. I think we should label Bush as the invisible president. The unemployment is all Obama, the recession was all Obama, yep, Obama started those unnecessary and expensive wars, the 8 years of Bush never happened. So much for taking responsibility for your own party's incompetence.

Rick wrote:

archer wrote:

Rick wrote: :YeahThat:

I think we can add that statement to the 1001 reasons republicans give for why they lose national elections. It couldn't possibly be that the tea party has drug the party too far right and the religious fanatics have hijacked the platform for their own purposes. But hey, it's all good for the democrats (.and the country)

So if the Republicans take the Senate (or come very close), how will you explain your theory? Will you blame it on the voters or will you blame it on failed liberal policies? I already know your answer because I have psychic abilities.

They will blame voter suppression or the Koch brothers.

Senate races are state specific elections, the presidency is a national election. But, the Senate is still a democrat majority. The house? Years of redistricting have taken the competitiveness out of many of them, yet still the democrats are polling well in long held conservative districts.I do believe that if the GOP keeps tracking further to the right they will leave many more moderate conservatives with no choice but to vote for democrats.

archer wrote:

OmniScience wrote:

archer wrote: . But hey, it's all good for the democrats (.and the country)

Right, Archer. Because the country is in soooo much better shape since 0 took office.

Nearly 50 million people on food stamps
High unemployment
Massive debt

Yeah,... good for the country.

Yes, the country IS in better shape since Obama took office. How convenient of you to forget what GW did to this country and how bad his legacy has been for this nation. I think we should label Bush as the invisible president. The unemployment is all Obama, the recession was all Obama, yep, Obama started those unnecessary and expensive wars, the 8 years of Bush never happened. So much for taking responsibility for your own party's incompetence.

Wow, Archer. Just when I thought you had a shred of common sense you spew this out.

"Even though 50-some percent of the American people think the economy tanked because of the last administration, that's not relevant," said the vice president. "What's relevant is we're in charge."

That's straight from your man Biden, Archer. You do realize how foolish you sound continuing to blame everything on Bush don't you?
The DEMs had the House, Senate, and Presidency for 2+ years and what did we get? More debt, higher unemployment, government health care which has been an epic failure to this point, and a massive increase to the number of people on food stamps as poverty has worsened. NSA spying, IRS targeting, the AP, Benghazi, green energy debacles, etc, etc, etc

This country is in better shape since 0 took office? Wow, are you lost.

Oh, and by the way I defy you to find any post I have ever made anywhere suggesting Bush was a great President. I never even wanted him nominated back in 2000

Omni,.where did I ever claim anything about your support, or lack there of, for Bush? I'm simply noting that I have not seen many Republicans ever refer to Bush and the mess he created during his presidency, nope it's all Obrama fault. Convenient amnesia.

archer wrote: Past....where did I ever claim anything about your support, or lack there of, for Bush? I'm simply noting that I have not seen many Republicans ever refer to Bush and the mess he created during his presidency, nope it's all Obama fault. Convenient amnesia.

How many failings of the Carter or Clinton administrations have you or other on the left brought up? Did you forget or were those perfect presidencies? And as I recall, the "mess" you say was all Bush's fault was actually a financial collapse caused in large part by the credit society created by both sides. There was going to be a crash, with or without the wars.

archer wrote: Omni,.where did I ever claim anything about your support, or lack there of, for Bush? I'm simply noting that I have not seen many Republicans ever refer to Bush and the mess he created during his presidency, nope it's all Obrama fault. Convenient amnesia.

archer wrote: .... So much for taking responsibility for your own party's incompetence.

I have no problem with criticizing the Bush administration for their failures, I'm just sick and tired of our Teflon "Transparent" President getting a free pass on everything. I remember quite well all of the "Stupid Bush" comments and the media continually portraying him as dumb and incompetent. Yet, President Obama knows nothing about the IRS, NSA, AP, etc, scandals, and overall, the media are as a quiet as church mice. If Obama didn't know about any of these scandals then he is either a far bigger idiot than Bush, or just a blatant liar. The double standard in the media is ridiculous.