Another Bush in the White House?
- 05-11-2006, 03:25 PM
Another Bush in the White House?
Pres. Bush proposed his Brother Jeb as a candidate it seems. So would you vote another Bush into the white house? Is it enough? Will you rename the President to "King" and make the USA a hereditary monarchy? Do you think Jeb could be even worse than George W.?? Questions over questions from good ole germany...
- 05-11-2006, 03:35 PM
Jeb Bush will be an even more effective President. The country and the free world will be truly blessed to have him at the highest office in the free world.
- 05-11-2006, 04:00 PM
if you sorta haven't figured out the American system of government.. usually everyone holding the position as president has some sort of connection with each other.. do some research and figure it out..presidents are not elected.. they are groomed and formed. Just like any other nation of power's heads of state.
as for george and jeb.. jeb would be a better international president then george.. but not as much of a suck up and horrid as bill clinton.
Jeb is a more true republican but is more on the right side in terms of spending. Socially he is a jon mccain but less fake... george.. i have no idea what he is.. but he really doesn't act like a republican.
Either way, i would not worry, countries that are worried are either doing something wrong... or want to. lol jk.. You really shouldn't worry.. american people just like your germans and any other proud people.. will ellect what you think is best for your nation. IE Hitler. Bush is no Hitler.. in both good and bad ways... but he was needed at the time.
I would be scared and have this 1938 feeling now about Iran. The UN, American liberals want to sit down and chit chat with this guy.. same as they wanted to do with hitler.... we all know what went on after that failed...
ps.. do you feel that your nation is still under american occupation since we have been there for some time now.
05-11-2006, 04:43 PM
Are you being sarcastic or do you think i am dumb?Originally Posted by MaynardMeek
Because i was being sarcastic up there.
Belive me i know the american political system probably better than most people on this board.
I just wanted to provoke a discussion and i didn't want it to turn in any discussion about Hitler or occupation but that's the first thing coming your mind when you hear 'germany'. second would be 'bier', third 'wurst'.
I know that your system being a presidential system has a clearly anti-1700s europe touch to it, and i have also read the federalist papers.
But maybe you can get it into your heads that you cannot just bomb any country because you think it's right.
I do agree with Iran being a threat to the world, but the Iraq war was (actually IS) a total disaster.
05-11-2006, 04:54 PM
05-11-2006, 04:59 PM
What's so bad about it?Originally Posted by Brent
edit: Just to explain my comment: I am studying for a masters dgree in politic science. I have done several studies on american politics, from the federalist papers to Bush administration bilateral economic relations. When i talk about american politics, it is from a european perspective, because i was born and raised there. When i ask you guys here, i am looking for your opinions. No need to tell me you vote your president.
05-11-2006, 05:14 PM
05-11-2006, 05:19 PM
Originally Posted by Brent
Sorry, i didn't want to offend anybody, i just wanted to make clear that i know what i am talking about.
Blame it on my bad english then.
Zat maybe ze reason, Herr Brent!
05-11-2006, 06:48 PM
Don't pretend that you know anything about what goes on in America's political system just because you read some ancient historic documents.Originally Posted by Speischerkater
We are not conducting our affairs based on some ancient documents.
If you think Iraq is a total disaster, that just proves that you don't really know what it going on over there, and have been getting your information from your biased, anti American media.
Oh yeah... for your info, we don't bomb any country just because we feel that we are right. We conduct policies and actions that are beneficial to our strategic interest.
Furthermore, if you actually KNOW about our political system, then you would know that there is no hereditary crap. Jeb Bush will have to fight for the GOP's nomination, and if he gets the nod, he will then go on to fight the Democrate's nominee and other 3rd party spoilers, in order to ascend to the highest office in the country.
05-11-2006, 07:01 PM
OTOH, if you are just here to start a bash fest on Bush, I am sure you can round up a party on that. There are a truckload of Bush haters here. lol
05-11-2006, 07:17 PM
The only bush that should ever be allowed in the white house again should be in the first lady's skirt.(yep biohazzard, I'm oficially lighting the torches and rounding up the bush haters )
05-11-2006, 07:20 PM
Mein deutscher Freund, ich apoloise für meine Mitfreunde auf hier.. Dort kein Erbarmen für die Mehrheit in amerika... Anfeuerungen, nimmt Sorgenanfeuerungen
05-11-2006, 07:27 PM
Ach ist spiescherkater, ein Ding, die Sie kennen müssen, dass Sie wahrscheinlich mehr um amerikanisch Geschichte wissen, die am meisten auf diesem Ausschuss. Leute in amerika sind schrecklich mit Geschichte und nur was sie glaubt, lesen mich, dass ich weiß, dass ich amercian. bin, glaubt aber ist in einer europäischen Rede um ein Kulturgeklirr aufgewachsen! lol ich weiß, dass Sie nur versuchten, eine Diskussion anzufangen, aber
belästige nicht, nicht wert es Forum..
05-11-2006, 09:41 PM
no wasnt germany bashing or anything, lived there for a month actually.. time of my life
.. i am just saying a people ellect what is needed. i actually find hitler to be one of the greatest leaders of the 20th even though his ways were not kosher and the germany today is not the germany of WW2 so no i do not think of hitler... but yes.. beer, wurst and david hasselhoff... cars too... oh and knives.
my question on american occupation... do you feel that since ww2 the american troops still in your country has not allowed for your own growth and direction.. thats all...
05-11-2006, 10:46 PM
Yeah genius... we're not governed by a monarchy, but thanks for the special ed political history lesson. I pray that the Wechsler, or even the Wonderlic test becomes the barrier to entry to run for the nom. You and your buddy Jeb would be excluded. Jeb makes GW look like Niels Bohr.Originally Posted by BioHazzard
05-11-2006, 11:15 PM
He denies he's even interested, and a long list of political analysts have already written him off with the belief that the appearance of political nepotism would be too unseemly for voters to put the brother of the current president in the Oval Office. But in politics timing is everything, and as the clock advances towards 2008, things are starting to fall into place to give Jeb Bush the momentum he needs to win the White House. And this isn't contingent on Hillary Clinton emerging as the Democrats' nominee--though if she does, the path will be all the smoother for another Bush.
Let's first dispense with the idea that Jeb's biggest liability would be his last name. Since when does name recognition hurt in politics? It's true that many of this brother's political adversaries would simply cross out "George" in their campaign literature and ink in "Jeb" above it. MoveOn.org and other Democratic interest groups would find plenty of willing donors. George Soros would likely make another multimillion-dollar pledge to drive the Bushes from Washington. But then again, they did all that last time, and we aren't discussing who will challenge President Kerry.
Misunderestimation isn't enough for Jeb to win, of course. Ideas matter more in politics than having an "electable" candidate. Right now the ideas of the Bush family are ascendant. Bush 43 didn't win the White House on the coattails of his father. Name recognition didn't hurt, nor had all the contacts he'd made in politics. But the fact that Bush 41 lost to Bill Clinton in 1992 meant that George W. Bush had a particularly steep hill to climb within his own party. Republicans who stayed home to see the father lose would not have put the son over the top in 2000 unless he'd won them over first.
Before stepping out onto the national stage, this Bush generation's ideas of incrementally smaller government proved popular with voters in two large states. George W. Bush defeated Democratic incumbent Ann Richards in 1994 to become governor of Texas and was re-elected in 1998. The Lone Star State is clearly among the most conservative in the country, but Gov. Bush helped turn what was once a reliably Democratic state into one where Republicans now dominate. Jeb, meanwhile, lost a hard-fought race for governor in Florida in 1994. But he came back four years later and was re-elected in 2002, despite the residual bitterness from the 2000 presidential election and the Democrats' decision to make his defeat a priority.
With a strong string of electoral victories, why would Republicans now turn their backs on the Bushes? It certainly wouldn't be because of Jeb's record in Florida. He's been steadily amassing an antitax, bedrock conservative record over the past seven years. There's not much there that the party's base is going to hate. Indeed, before he lost in 1994, the scuttlebutt on Jeb was that he was "the conservative Bush."
Political symmetry also favors Jeb Bush. Even if President Bush manages to get some sort of private Social Security account this year, it's now becoming clear that the bulk of the reform is unlikely to come until after 2008. Bush 43 may succeed in establishing the principle of private accounts within the Social Security system, but it will likely be the next president (perhaps Bush 44) who will have the opportunity to steer the bulk of our payroll taxes into such accounts. Voters gave FDR four back-to-back terms. They may now conclude that replacing the New Deal with an Ownership Deal will take sending a Bush to the White House in three or four successive elections.
Remaking New Deal entitlements into assets individual Americans can own may become a powerful political philosophy that nudges into oblivion FDR's already dwindling coalition of union members and entitlement beneficiaries. Jeb Bush's close association to George W. would be an asset if voters embrace the Ownership Society. By 2008 we'll also likely have a national consensus on how well the democratic experiment is working in Iraq. If Americans continue to support spreading democracy as our best defense against international terrorism, Jeb's last name will also be an asset here as well.
Perhaps the most compelling reason why Jeb Bush shouldn't be written off just yet came Friday with the Labor Department's jobs numbers. With some 200,000 net new jobs created in July and some 3.5 million new jobs over the past two years, it's getting harder to deny we are now in the midst of a Bush boom. John Kerry's claims of a jobless recovery notwithstanding, every job lost after the dot-com crash and the 9/11 attacks has long since been replaced. True, the housing market may yet tumble. But the Fed keeps raising interest rates out of fear the economy will get too hot, not too cold. If we get three more years of solid economic expansion, voters may decide that keeping a Bush in the White House is good for their wallets. After all, the Bush tax cuts are now set to expire in the middle of the next president's first term.
05-12-2006, 12:37 AM
lol I like you. In fact I may even go to your party, and I will bring beer! lolOriginally Posted by jarhead
05-12-2006, 12:40 AM
Was I addressing you specifically, Einstein? I was addressing a foreigner who obviously missed the finer points of our political system.Originally Posted by riskarb
Btw, get over it. GWB will go down history as one of the greatest US Presidents and will be known as the free world leader who fought and won the global war on terrorism. All your mindless hating amounts to nothing. You can't stop history in the making. So, eat your heart out !
05-12-2006, 12:47 AM
Why the hell are we still stationing troops over there, wasting over a hundred fifty billion dollars each year? We went there to defend Europe. Who the hell are we defending them from these days?Originally Posted by MaynardMeek
On that note, I heard news that there is rethinking of our Middle East strategy. Words are circulating at the highest level to the tune that, 'Why the hell are we defending the Middle East when the oil there is being repositioned to the Far East countries?'
05-12-2006, 12:48 AM
No.Originally Posted by Speischerkater
I think JEB needs to be removed from earth right now, by any means necessary.
My The 1 LOG: http://anabolicminds.com/forum/steroids/254164-my-one-log.html
05-12-2006, 01:11 AM
If Jeb runs, he will have little problem rallying the Republican base and fire up the rank and file. He will also carry the Hispanic votes too, as his wife is a Mexican and his children are biracial and bilingual.
If he picks Giuliani or McCann as VP, that is a sure-in ticket. The Democrates might as well save their campaign money. LOL
05-12-2006, 01:12 AM
05-12-2006, 03:21 AM
I'd rather not see another republican after 2008
NTBM 3 month Transformation contest:
05-12-2006, 03:50 AM
Originally Posted by BioHazzard
Can you understand english? I was making a joke about it being hereditary, and i also said i read a lot FROM the very begining of your own constitution TO bush administration politics. The Federalist Articles are what your whole Constitution is based on, so it would be very very dumb not to know it.
I know that there are pre elections and the election system, again, i was just being sarcastic.
And YES, european media is often anti-american, but not all of it. i am smart enough not to base my opinions on that.
So i don't know what is going on in Iraq?? Years after the war is officially ended by George W., there are still car bombs blowing up young US-American, british and italian soldiers. How many people have dies since this war has been officially ended??
There is still no gouvernment in Iraq, the Constituition is not accepted by 50% of the iraqi people etc etc. Man don't tell me everything is fine therem because it IS NOT.
And LAST, because i don't like Jeb and Dubya doesn't make me a America hater, or a stupid european that doesn't understand you country. You bush admirers really need to see that someday. You can still love the US and hate Bush, which i don't. I just think his policies suck ass.
05-12-2006, 04:04 AM
Haha, yeah we love David Hasselhoff. You can read about his dirty war with his ex wife everyday.Originally Posted by MaynardMeek
No problem with the occupation though. Ever since i can remember i thought the american soldiers were kind of cool. I can say that in my grandparents generation there were many that were glad to be freed from Hitler by America, Britain and France. The feelings against Russia were different though.
There are almost no Troops here anymore, so i see them maybe once a year on vacation to the south of germany.
Has it slowed us down? No. The way to the US market and the US occupation politics has given Germany, as well as Japan, were the policies were totaly different but as precise as can be, the chance to become a major global player in the economy.
But, and this time again to all the Bush admirers, just because it went good twice or so, doesn't mean it will work in Iraq the same. Some of you tend to see it the way, if it worked in Hitler germany, it will work in Saddam Iraq, because Hitler was worse than Saddam.
The problem is, we are both Christians. You are born out of us. This is Europe.
They are muslims. They hate christians. They call you "the great devil", not "the Land of the Free". They hate you because they fear you destroy their culture.
05-12-2006, 04:14 AM
Missing the finer points of your system? I don't think so. Like i said, i am getting a master degree in political studies. Don't tell me about american history or the political system, it is my job to know it.Originally Posted by BioHazzard
So let me tell you why troops are stationed here.
Because it is cheaper to fly from germany to Iran than to fly from the East coast. You are not here to Defend Europe, you are here to defend YOURSELF. It's your military hospitals in germany that save the lives of your soldiers that would never make it to the US because of the long flight.
It his here that your vehicles and stuff is stored for transport.
05-12-2006, 04:17 AM
05-12-2006, 09:54 AM
haha i am glad you found what you wanted.. but come on.. we are human being and thrive on drama and war so i am not going to just give you what you want without some sort of fight ;-)
you are 100% correct in regards to religion being a large part in why the occupation of germany, france etc worked. Even though americans have Jews slung in the mix of Dough Boys, Jews and christians have lived together long enough to just dislike each other like two brothers who wish to act civil during the holidays ( and there are good relations too) but Islam has refused to live with any modernizing religion. It will be harder but it will work. The obvious goal, our world government has is to keep islam.. but much like christianity, to water down islam to this middle of the road, passive, go to services on the high holy days only sort of religion. In short liberalize Islam. We have done it before. Japan. Japan was isolated for longer than islam. We put and had a national leader "see the ways" of the west and over time modernize. During said process, western armies had to deal with large factions of Japan loyalists.. aka samurai. Over time we got rid of them and they fell into history as a romantic sort of people with Tommy Cruse playing an American one (which i think is a bad rip off of the American Ninja movies.. which are kick A$$)
That wont happen to these loyalists today. Mostly because the samurai were true fighters... the loyalists today aren't fighters.. they are just going to kill themselves, plant road side bombs, in short, terrorist acts. Sure they are seen shooting their guns, but only if they are stuck in a corner and cant get out. The world is better off with these people blowing themselves up in their homeland.. the last time a nation sent suicide anything near the united states, we dropped two bombs and made the world a much more freaky place in the process. I am not worried that we would do that again.. mostly we dont have to due to the advancement of our weapons.
But sometimes I just wish some one sends a tidal wave and washes it all away...
"I'd rather not see another republican after 2008"
well.. good thing you are canadian, but i am very proud of who you guys brought into office. .. depends on the outcome of the 06 midterm ellections. But keep in mind you have not seen what a true republican should be with W Bush. As of right now the public opinon for house and senate is very very low for both parties, even lower than Bush's... its going to be up for grabs. I feel that republicans will keep majority.. the democrats are going to run on the wishes to only do investigations... americans dont really like that.. we want something to move, something to grow. Democrats can win if they stop trying to go after bush. If they start talking about imigration and security.. rather than bush/Iraq or making up NSA program issues.. they will win. Republicans will win if they hold true to their roots. America is a more conservative nation. Though we have a large and loud population on the shores holding very liberal views, the majority are blue blooded, flag waving, God fearing americans. ( good or bad) If the republicans try to become more liberal... they will lose.. and they should... and as of right now.. they are going in that direction... i have to find a new party... hummm Reaganocons...
What does this mean for 08. Through out the years of american poltical fun, Democrats have been on the wrong side of history each time. If in 06, democrats take over the house and senate, americans will not ellect a democrat.. mostly because they really don't have anyone that Americans will truly want. Clinton ( carpet bagger too much like a screaming ex wife), Gore, he could buy his way in due to the amount of money he made through google. ( he invented the internet ) Kerry, ugh.... Long short of it... Liberals love these people, democrats do not.. ellecting one of these liberals would be like a republican wanting to vote in Pat Robertson... I don't want to go off on a rant here but in reality "good" democrat presidents had great republican houses and senates.. Clinton ( and i am never shy on how i feel about this guy) was about 3 steps better than carter.. and carter sucked.. They both failed as presidents but clinton was saved due to Newt's house.
Anyway i have to stop this..
08 there will be one man for the job.. and that man is...
05-12-2006, 11:04 AM
05-12-2006, 11:33 AM
Personally, while I know George W tries hard, he just doesnt always do the right things. The way he handles internal affairs and disasters could definitely be re-worked. I would have to listen to Jeb talk, just because one person in a family makes mistakes does not mean the rest of the family is incompetent or stupid.
Similar Forum Threads
- By dirtysouthmuscl in forum AnabolicsReplies: 8Last Post: 04-29-2006, 10:38 PM
- By Zero Tolerance in forum Training ForumReplies: 8Last Post: 12-02-2005, 10:14 AM
- By Sticks in forum General ChatReplies: 2Last Post: 06-16-2004, 02:14 PM
- By WiNgS in forum General ChatReplies: 1Last Post: 05-07-2004, 07:42 PM
- By PC1 in forum AnabolicsReplies: 22Last Post: 01-22-2004, 07:53 PM