• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Why do Republicans think Americans are ready for a third Bush term?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
xaeniac said:
Because they want revenge on Clinton's. Ultimately they will lose that battle and I'm an independent. Repubs need to nominate a conservative for once.
Click to expand...
^this.
People are tired of the cronyism.
No more Bushes.
No more Clintons.
 
Last edited:
gryphus said:
Why do Republicans think Americans are ready for a third Bush term?
Click to expand...

I haven't seen any evidence that Republican voters think this, just Jeb and his supporters seem to think it.

I saw a segment on the Maddow show last night. They had a piece on Repubs running and used polling from Real Clear Politics. Jeb Bush, at this point in time, appears the least likely to get the nomination according to their presentation.

Fern
 
Fern said:
I haven't seen any evidence that Republican voters think this, just Jeb and his supporters seem to think it.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I haven't found a single conservative friend or acquaintance who wants Jeb to get the nomination.
 
Fern said:
I haven't seen any evidence that Republican voters think this, just Jeb and his supporters seem to think it.

I saw a segment on the Maddow show last night. They had a piece on Repubs running and used polling from Real Clear Politics. Jeb Bush, at this point in time, appears the least likely to get the nomination according to their presentation.

Fern
Click to expand...

If I recall, and correct me if I'm mistaken, wasn't eventual candidate Romney also way down deep in the lineup about this same time frame?

Any Repub candidate will have to pay heavy tribute to their party's base and the ever rightward bound ideological slant it's sliding down.

Doesn't matter who the Repubs put up, or put up with, they're all going to have to follow the master ideological game plan that identifies who they are as a political entity.

The only discerning factor that separates each Repub candidate is not so much what each one will do as that's already chiseled in stone in their ideology, but rather HOW each one will achieve those ideals in the from of legislating laws that gets them there.
 
dank69 said:
Fuckin loser
Click to expand...

Yup. Net neutrality is a no-fucking-brainer, doing nothing more than keeping the Internet the same. The arguments against it amount to "Gov't can do nothing right", which is sort of a conservative catch-all but ultimately is non-specific and unsubstantial rhetoric. Especially when applied to net neutrality, which merely regulates the ability to change data flow via traffic discrimination, which inevitably harms consumers and businesses that need good bandwidth and latency.
 
Fern said:
I haven't seen any evidence that Republican voters think this, just Jeb and his supporters seem to think it.

I saw a segment on the Maddow show last night. They had a piece on Repubs running and used polling from Real Clear Politics. Jeb Bush, at this point in time, appears the least likely to get the nomination according to their presentation.

Fern
Click to expand...

Huh? Really now, how hard is it to Google search?

RealClearPolitics 2016 Republican nomination polling average has Walker and Jeb Bush statistically tied, well ahead of the rest of the field.
 
tweaker2 said:
If I recall, and correct me if I'm mistaken, wasn't eventual candidate Romney also way down deep in the lineup about this same time frame?
-snip-
Click to expand...

The presentation on Maddow's show mentioned this. Romney had equally poor numbers this far, however it was noted that Romney didn't have much in the way of 'real' opponents and was thus able to overcome it. Romney had Gingrich, Paul and Santorum.

Fern
 
Because the base would just LOVE some more of the red part of this graph. In case you were wondering its job losses/growth per month Bush vs Obama
bar-chart-monthly-job-losses-and-gains-under-gwb-and-bo-2008-jan-20121.jpg
 
I wouldn't vote for Bush. I wouldn't vote for Hillary. Where does that place me? 😉

Might not even vote at all. Seems the money elects the presidents these days, while the common vote doesn't seem to matter anymore. They're all a bunch of corrupts, no matter what party they hail from.

The greatest reform we could have in this nation would be term limits.
 
Last edited:
Doc Savage Fan said:
If you prefer his self image to mine, I'm OK with that. I'm sure that the reasoning you used to reach this conclusion is quite sound.
Click to expand...

I didn't reason to reach this conclusion. I didn't even have to conclude it. It's a truth that has been obvious to me for a very long time. It is silly of you to think I my intention in telling you his self image is healthier than yours in this particular instance was done to make you feel bad. It is obvious you already feel bad, we all hate ourselves. I told you to save you from such stupidity. Do not lose faith in others because it will keep you from losing faith in yourself. I told you because you labor under the delusion that you have more faith than you actually do. You have just not done the psychotherapy to know it. It's unbelievably hard to get to. Trust me. I know.
 
I wouldn't vote for Jeb just because of his view on net neutrality. If he can't understand that simple concept, then I'd hate for his mind to be blown on foreign policy. Anyone against net neutrality is practically in bed with corporations, they are suffering from corporate Stockholm syndrome, or somehow identify with people far wealthier than they. Jeb is the first.
 
Moonbeam said:
I didn't reason to reach this conclusion. I didn't even have to conclude it. It's a truth that has been obvious to me for a very long time. It is silly of you to think I my intention in telling you his self image is healthier than yours in this particular instance was done to make you feel bad. It is obvious you already feel bad, we all hate ourselves. I told you to save you from such stupidity. Do not lose faith in others because it will keep you from losing faith in yourself. I told you because you labor under the delusion that you have more faith than you actually do. You have just not done the psychotherapy to know it. It's unbelievably hard to get to. Trust me. I know.
Click to expand...

2woex5l.jpg
 
Subyman said:
I wouldn't vote for Jeb just because of his view on net neutrality. If he can't understand that simple concept, then I'd hate for his mind to be blown on foreign policy. Anyone against net neutrality is practically in bed with corporations, they are suffering from corporate Stockholm syndrome, or somehow identify with people far wealthier than they. Jeb is the first.
Click to expand...
latest
 
sportage said:
HEHEHE. I love right wing ideology thinking. More heads have been bruised and walls cracked from listening to ideology republicans theory.

This is not exactly rocket science, fellas.
If it talks like a Bush, and it walks like a Bush, it's a Bush.

But ANywho...
The democrats need not get this one right, it is the republicans that will get this one right in the end. And they will remember all the other Bush years.
Sometimes a chance is far too risky to even consider giving.
Like if a guy tries to put a gun to your head, should you give him the chance he will miss?

So far, Jeb is exactly like all the other Bush clan.
Jeb hired all the same Bush drones to run his campaign, quack.
Jeb is against marriage equality, quack quack.
And Jeb, while he is married to a hispanic and has half hispanic kids, never once did Jeb go to the man in charge i.e. John Boehner and suggest old Johnny let immigration reform go to the floor for a vote. Nope! Nay Jeb. Quack quack quack.

What we have here is a duck. And if you can't tell one duck from another, you're quaking up. 😉
Click to expand...

Suggesting the fellow seek knowledge and make an informed decision is "right wing ideology thinking"?
 
Why does anyone think we want another Clinton or Bush as president...

Sure, depending on your p.o.v., one is a lesser evil than another but time for some new blood imo. As long as they're not insane which unfortunately is what it looks like we're going to get considering the state of U.S. Politics today....

https://soundcloud.com/rockymountainmike/the-letter

I don't care how many people I offend... Got to pee in Obama's Pool again...
Click to expand...


....
 
Last edited:
Greenman said:
Suggesting the fellow seek knowledge and make an informed decision is "right wing ideology thinking"?
Click to expand...
Yes it is. 😉

blankslate said:
Why does anyone think we want another Clinton or Bush as president...

Sure, depending on your p.o.v., one is a lesser evil than another but time for some new blood imo. As long as they're not insane which unfortunately is what it looks like we're going to get considering the state of U.S. Politics today....

https://soundcloud.com/rockymountainmike/the-letter




....
Click to expand...
Amen. No more Bushes, no more Clintons. No political aristocracy, period. I even wish we had strict term limits to limit our existing political aristocracy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top