Contour Enthusiasts Group Archives Forums General Common Interests Would Bush be re-elected without 9/11?

without 9/11 would bush stand a chance of re-election?YesNo

this is a serious question because personally i think this is what his platform for re-election is based on.

his 'resolve' to protect america from imminent attack, defeat the terrorist countries, and bring the war to anyone who looks at the US sideways seems to be his only strong points.

if 9/11 didn't happen it would be a lot more obvious how badly our country has done under his rule.

he wouldn't be re-elected, our economy was gonna go down anyways, it was bound to happen and I guess the time it chose was during these 4 years, 9/11 triggered it more but bush would have lost to this ailing economy. I wanna see him in the debates, how he talks and all its gonna be funny plus I'm not watching the RNC cause all I hear is "..when 9/11 happened...etc.." its being stretched a lot now, we'll wee what happens

so you think the issues with our economy, health care, employment rates, foreign policy, etc are all a result of 9/11? i think that's exactly what the bush admin would like us to believe.

..but i didn't start the thread to debate those topics. i'm just asking the question do you think bush would be a good peace time president. you have to use your own intuition as far as how much progress you think the we've made (or lack of) has been affected by 9/11 based on the situation he started his presidency with.

How has America done bad under Bush?

Job losses and economic stagnation? I've said it once and I'll say it again: one has to be an abject fool to believe that a modern presidential administration has single-handedly manipulated the overall health of the US economy through their policies. There may exists segments that have been affected by policy, but by FAR AND AWAY it's been other factors that have lead to the growth or decline...

A sitting US president and Congress would have to enact ENORMOUS economic mandates to yank the behemoth that the US economy is one way or the other. This hasn't happened; the Fed rate changes aren't the type of policy change I'm talking about, either. While sizeable, they've had much less effect on the US economy than other factors.

Think back to the telecom bust, the dot-com fallout, trading scandals and finally 9/11 as major factors behind the recent dips in the economy. Pray tell what in the Hell Bush had to do with ANY of these?

Foreign policy? That depends on how you view the world and some of our "allies". Although the Bush administration could have used a little more tact in dealing with some of our European counterparts in certain situations, don't frame all of the current uneasiness in Europe and Asia on Bush. To do so is reckless and rather ignorant. Don't forget that there is a power struggle inside the EU and that the multitude of US relationships in Europe pose a threat to those that would see themselves as the political "kingpin" of the EU. North Korea and Iran are treading carefully these days; much more so than in the past. Libya has renounced their terrorist ties and seeks to rejoin the civilized world. Iraq is climbing out of decades of oppression, albeit slowly and not without some difficulty.

There do exist strained relationships within the UN, the EU and NATO, though these will mend in time. Bush has used the "stick" more often than the "carrot" in the international arena; the times at hand called for it's initial use and though we've been ovzealous in some areas, the international community now should hold NO misunderstanding on our concerns with terrorism, WMD and Islamic extremism, unlike in the past...

Social policy? This hasn't been a Bush strongpoint; it's played second-fiddle to the security concerns that have cropped up since 9/11. There's no denying this. Then again, apart from a few pieces of environmental legislation, Clinton didn't get SQUAT accomplished in terms of social policy during his 8 years in office. He simply rode the economy during this time.

Environmental policy? This is where I part company with some conservatives and get a little cranky with Bush's record.

It's a complex world; I'm not going to hinge my vote off of ONE singluar event over all others. If I did, I would have dismissed John Kerry from day one, instead of looking deeper at his political stripes.

IMO, w/o the events of 9/11 the republicans....er, their puppet Bush wouldn't have been able to scratch off some entries of their "to do list" left by Bush Sr. and Regan. We are now handeling the BS they created in the 80's and 90's. Why should we give dubbya any credit for doing so, it was wrong then and still is today....especially since he lied to do it.

M. Moore brought up a good point about "sending your own kids off to die in Iraq". If anyone in the upper class had to consider that they may be sending their own kids to die, they may not be so quick to send them in harms way. We aren't the world's police, nor should our military be treated as such. So don't give me "they knew what they were signing up for". Yes I served in the military, so I'm speaking from my point of view. Look at what class of Americans are in the overall population of US military that are in Iraq and Afganistan.

That is what Bush is using to attempt to get re-elected. Kerry is a chump too, to bad there isn't a solid 3rd party