Would you vote for Bush in 2008, if he could run?

Would you vote for Bush in 2008, if he could run?

  • Yes

    Votes: 48 24.4%

  • No

    Votes: 149 75.6%
  • Total voters
    197
No I would not. I did not vote for him the first two times. I believe that in a sense he IS running again because 9/11 Rudy is identical to bush in every disturbing way. Rudy's administration will be loaded with the same types of globalists.
 
Last edited:
Not only no.....

but HELL NO! And not only hell no............... Bush grew the Federal Gubmint faster and bigger than anyone in history. Entitlements that will bankrupt our children.............. he was better than the alternative the Demcong ran (talk about Globalists! STOP GLOBAL WHINING, AL!).
 
I voted FOR him in 2000.

I voted AGAINST Kerry's potential supreme court nominees in 2004. Didn't like either of the schmucks available, Bush or Kerry.

This year I'm voting FOR the guy that I think is best for the job, regardless of his poll numbers. Right now I think that's Ron Paul, but if Thompson gets his head in the game he can get my vote back.

But no east coast, new-england sissy tenderfoot commie liberal in republican swaddling clothes is getting my vote.

Bush running for term three, or putting off the elections like he hinted at in '04, will have me looking for a rooftop from which to vote. :mad:
(j/k)
 
It would take a really bad candidate on the left to make me vote for Bush a third time. Of course the DNC rose to the occasion of nominating morons in 200 and 2004 so who can be certain for 2008 (it doesn't look good though...).

Let's say I would not WANT to vote for Bush. I may elect to vote for the person least likely to get anything done though since "no legislation" is infinitely better than "bad legislation".
 
Like Azredhawk, I voted for Bush in 2000 and against Kerry in 2004.

But seeing what this dipdunk idiot has done to immigration . . . no way would I vote for him.

I just love it that national elections have become events to keep the worst people out rather than vote the best people in.

Sad commentary, ain't it?

Jeff
 
Like the two other times I voted for the Prez, I'd have to see against whom he is running. So far, nobody that the pusillanimous pansy DemocRATs have fielded would cause me to vote for one of them, against Bush, or anybody else.
 
NO!

But seeing what this dipdunk idiot has done to immigration . . . no way would I vote for him.
Click to expand...

Ditto....I was going to write something like that, but that will do for me also.
 
If my alternative is Billary 2.0, Uh, uh, uh Obama or Also ran 2004 Edwards, you can bet I would vote for President Bush a second time (to young in 2000).

However, the question is flawed in two respects. First-as has previously been pointed out-a vote for a canidate is sometimes a vote against another. Second, if term limits did not apply a President's second term would look alot like the first-they would be trying to get re-elected about a week after taking office.

I think that immigration reform would have looked a lot different, the war would have been re-evaluated and strategy adjusted sooner and a host of other topics would have been steered more toward the middle of the road. So, if eligable for a third term, the second term would have looked a lot different.
 
Absolutely not,he's probably the worst president we've ever had although one can argue that LBJ or Hoover or perhaps others were worse.
 
I voted for him both times as he was the only choice considering who else was running. So I would say I guess it depends on who else is running. I would take him over any of the Dems that are running. In a primary he's toast.
 
I'll vote for Bush, Barney, the flying spaghetti monster or anyone else who will give me justices in the mold of scalia.
 
I voted for him twice.

I would not vote for him again because of his spotty record and failure on some issues I consider very important.

I also would not vote for him as BDS needs to be put down with other useless fads, and won't as long as he is in office. We are moving toward rule or ruin politics and that is dangerous. Just look at Bolivia and other examples.

We assume here of course there is a legitimate replacement.

Between Bush, Hillary, Obama or Edwards, it is close but Bush probably would be it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top