Bush stomping hard in little Ol Iowa with 7 Electoral Votes because he lost it 2000

[dmcowen674]

Why am I not surprised CAD has never mentioned this "oversight".

4-15-2004 Though Iowa carries only seven electoral votes, Bush and Kerry are battling hard for the state.

Both men and their aligned interest groups are airing TV ads there. Bush lost the state in 2000 by fewer than 5,000 votes.

It was the second time since taking office that the president marked the April 15 tax-filing deadline in Iowa. Bush's previous Iowa visit was to Cedar Rapids on April 15, 2002, where he raised money for Harkin's opponent.


The Kerry campaign released an Internet ad that uses a cartoon sketch to illustrate "the dark cloud George Bush has hung over the middle-class by pursing reckless, out-of-touch policies that have driven up everyday costs like education and health care." It depicts a suburban family receiving a spate of bad news in the mail: rising college tuition, health care and energy costs, all courtesy of Bush, pictured on the stamps.

Both Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney benefited from the tax cuts they pushed through Congress.

Bush and his wife, Laura, paid $227,490 in federal income taxes last year_ or about 28 percent of their adjusted gross income of $822,126. In 2002, about 31 percent of their adjusted gross income of $856,056 went to federal taxes.


The difference from one year to the next was even more pronounced for the vice president.

Cheney and his wife, Lynne, owed $253,067 in federal taxes last year_ or about 20 percent of their adjusted gross income of $1.3 million. In 2002, they earned slightly less but paid more in taxes, 29 percent of their $1.2 million in income.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Why am I not surprised CAD has never mentioned this "oversight".

4-15-2004 Though Iowa carries only seven electoral votes, Bush and Kerry are battling hard for the state.

Both men and their aligned interest groups are airing TV ads there. Bush lost the state in 2000 by fewer than 5,000 votes.

Bush is savy enough to realize that he will need every vote that he can get. He has alienated some states and will have to recover the potential loss in those by recovering the votes in others.


Regarding income tax refunds:

One also has to look at where the income was derived from.

Also, are you implying that the pushed the tax cuts through to benifit themselves, or is that just a by product.

When you pay by reducing tailpipe smog are you also benefiting yourself by ensuring that your car runs better?

And is cleaner air a valuable by product?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

So what is the point of your thread here dave? You have multiple topics it seems. Pick one because I was going to post about his appearance today. But if you want to whine about his taxes - there is already a thread about that. If you want to make this a tax-cut thread fine but pick something already. If you don't I'm just going to start my own about specific things.

CkG

 

[EagleKeeper]

Point of the thread seems to be that Bush is stumping in IA for votes. Using the Tax cuts as an example on how he is helping others.

But Dave is stating that those tax cuts also help himself.

Kinda like Congress voting themselves a tax raise.

Maybe all elected politicians (Congress/WhiteHouse)should be denied equal rights.
They can vote on a tax cut but not receive it while in office.
But according to the liberals, if the raise taxes, the Congress/Whitehouse must pay the extra tax burden.

 

[drewshin]

But according to the liberals, if the raise taxes, the Congress/Whitehouse must pay the extra tax burden.

and the conservatives think that they should drag black men from the back of their trucks? generalizing is so fun!

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Point of the thread seems to be that Bush is stumping in IA for votes. Using the Tax cuts as an example on how he is helping others.

But Dave is stating that those tax cuts also help himself.

Kinda like Congress voting themselves a tax raise.

Maybe all elected politicians (Congress/WhiteHouse)should be denied equal rights.
They can vote on a tax cut but not receive it while in office.
But according to the liberals, if the raise taxes, the Congress/Whitehouse must pay the extra tax burden.

OK - Bush lost Iowa by just over 4000 votes in 2000. Iowa will vote for Bush this time I have seen quite a bit of enthusiam here locally to re-elect Bush and I've volunteered time to help with that cause.

But anyway Bush was in town to address an Economic conference on Strenthening Rural America. There were bankers and people from other Rural states who are attending this two day conference.
President Addresses Economic Conference

CkG

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
OK - Bush lost Iowa by just over 4000 votes in 2000. Iowa will vote for Bush this time I have seen quite a bit of enthusiam here locally to re-elect Bush and I've volunteered time to help with that cause.

But anyway Bush was in town to address an Economic conference on Strenthening Rural America. There were bankers and people from other Rural states who are attending this two day conference.
President Addresses Economic Conference

CkG

Don't count your chicken-hawks before they're hatched.

Based on my completely unscientific observations of the formerly die-hard Republicans who dominate boths sets of families (hers and mine), Bush has lost a lot of support here. There are scattered hold-outs -- one of my mother's sisters is a raving loon about Bush, puts you to shame Cad -- but a good two-thirds or so of the ones who supported Bush in 2000 say they will vote against him this year. They disagree with Iraq now that the WMDs story was shown to be a ruse, they all know people who've lost jobs, and they see the scandals coming out of the Bush administration and say he's not the man they thought he was.

Doesn't prove anything, of course, but it's a great trend.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Bush will need Iowa because he will lose NV

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
OK - Bush lost Iowa by just over 4000 votes in 2000. Iowa will vote for Bush this time I have seen quite a bit of enthusiam here locally to re-elect Bush and I've volunteered time to help with that cause.

But anyway Bush was in town to address an Economic conference on Strenthening Rural America. There were bankers and people from other Rural states who are attending this two day conference.
President Addresses Economic Conference

CkG

Don't count your chicken-hawks before they're hatched.

Based on my completely unscientific observations of the formerly die-hard Republicans who dominate boths sets of families (hers and mine), Bush has lost a lot of support here. There are scattered hold-outs -- one of my mother's sisters is a raving loon about Bush, puts you to shame Cad -- but a good two-thirds or so of the ones who supported Bush in 2000 say they will vote against him this year. They disagree with Iraq now that the WMDs story was shown to be a ruse, they all know people who've lost jobs, and they see the scandals coming out of the Bush administration and say he's not the man they thought he was.

Doesn't prove anything, of course, but it's a great trend.

Well, so far I've talked to alot of people and quite a few who redily admit they are Democrats are voicing support for Bush over kerry. Undecideds aren't really saying too much on their leanings (hence "undecided)as they are concerning themselves with a variety of issues. I've found most to be suprisingly candid about what they like about Bush and what they don't like about both of them. Bush isn't scoring many points on Iraq but he is doesn't seem to be taking a hit on the economy as some might wish to think. But anyway that's what I'm getting from the people I've talked to here locally so far(phone and face to face) But the one thing I find reassuring is that alot of people who said they didn't vote in 2000 were definately going to vote this time - which IMO is good

So while you family anecdotal evidence my suggest one thing - talking to those you have no influence over or with may give a better picture of things. But yes - it will be a tough fight here in Iowa especially here around the metro since this seems to be one of the three liberal spots in Iowa.

CkG

 

[nutxo]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
OK - Bush lost Iowa by just over 4000 votes in 2000. Iowa will vote for Bush this time I have seen quite a bit of enthusiam here locally to re-elect Bush and I've volunteered time to help with that cause.

But anyway Bush was in town to address an Economic conference on Strenthening Rural America. There were bankers and people from other Rural states who are attending this two day conference.
President Addresses Economic Conference

CkG

Don't count your chicken-hawks before they're hatched.

Based on my completely unscientific observations of the formerly die-hard Republicans who dominate boths sets of families (hers and mine), Bush has lost a lot of support here. There are scattered hold-outs -- one of my mother's sisters is a raving loon about Bush, puts you to shame Cad -- but a good two-thirds or so of the ones who supported Bush in 2000 say they will vote against him this year. They disagree with Iraq now that the WMDs story was shown to be a ruse, they all know people who've lost jobs, and they see the scandals coming out of the Bush administration and say he's not the man they thought he was.

Doesn't prove anything, of course, but it's a great trend.

Your relatives are just bashing Bush to shut you up!


j/k

 

[ElFenix]

since the real point of this thread seems to be so that dave can point out how much shrub paid in taxes... REPOST!

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Well, so far I've talked to alot of people and quite a few who redily admit they are Democrats are voicing support for Bush over kerry. Undecideds aren't really saying too much on their leanings (hence "undecided)as they are concerning themselves with a variety of issues. I've found most to be suprisingly candid about what they like about Bush and what they don't like about both of them. Bush isn't scoring many points on Iraq but he is doesn't seem to be taking a hit on the economy as some might wish to think. But anyway that's what I'm getting from the people I've talked to here locally so far(phone and face to face) But the one thing I find reassuring is that alot of people who said they didn't vote in 2000 were definately going to vote this time - which IMO is good

So while you family anecdotal evidence my suggest one thing - talking to those you have no influence over or with may give a better picture of things. But yes - it will be a tough fight here in Iowa especially here around the metro since this seems to be one of the three liberal spots in Iowa.

CkG

Assorted points:

I think the Dems screwed up by selecting Kerry. Say what you will about Dean, but he inspired passion throughout a broad base of Democrats and independents. So did Edwards to a lesser extent. I can only speculate about what happened behind the scenes, but it looks to me like Kerry was selected by the party core as the safe choice. Unfortunately, he doesn't inspire many people outside that core group. Kerry co-opted Dean's message, but he lacks the spark and vision to keep that broad base committed to the Dems. The Dems won't win this election without them.

I agree the economy is turning, and it's looking more and more like it will finally be a sustained recovery. This will help Bush, though there is little chance we can regain all the jobs lost before the election. It can still hurt Bush, but the potential impact will weaken as the economy strengthens.

Re. my family, you'd be surprised at how little I try to influence them, at least directly. I mostly avoid much political talk at family gatherings because so many people can't handle it without becoming agitated. I do a lot of listening, but not much talking (believe it or not). I acknowledge some indirect influence since I'm a source of ammunition for my wife and my mother for their respective sides of the family.

Finally, Iraq and terrorism are the wildcards. If things go well on those fronts, it helps Bush. If not, Bush is extremely vulnerable. He has only a few months to make his rosy picture come true.

Anyway, it will be interesting.

 

[Shad0hawK]

so what is your point? that only states with lots of votes matter to the dems? we knew that already.