The Reform Party, AKA Why Bush will lose in 2004 Options

[ComradeRed]

In 1992, Bush's dad looked like he was going to beat Clinton. The country just had a very successful war and all was right. But then Bush lost. Why?

Because the Reform Party got 15% of the vote. That is MANY times what Ralph Nader got in 2000 and it is accepted that he cost Gore the election.

The Reform Party was created by conservatives who were angered by Bush Sr.'s excessive spending and tax hikes, as well as his interventions abroad. This Neoconservative streak in Bush Sr is EXACTLY what is being demonstrated by Bush Jr.

The record number of subscriptions to the American Conservative Magazine (http://www.amconmag.com) and the increasing number of conservatives who are anti-Bush (for various reasons, mostly either spending or foreign intervention), could potentially give Pat Buchanan of the Refom Party at least two or three million votes (Nader has close to 3 million), enough to switch some key states like Ohio to Kerry's side and win him the election.

Personally I find Buchanan to be a xenophobe and a religious fanatic, and I will vote Libertarian in 2004, but here is why he will probably get enough votes from disillusioned Republicans to cost Bush the election:

1) The Isolationist Vote

Many conservatives still believe in earlier foreign policies of Prudence and Humility. These people detest Bush's interventions abroad as well as his immigration policies, and courting of the Hispanic vote.

2) The Realist Vote

Realitsts see Bush's gallavanting about Iraq as extremely harmful to America's foreign policy credibility and as a distraction from the more important War on Terrorism. Realists deem Bush's foreign policy to be Wilsonian: creating a world of good fighting evil and using military force whenever possible, rather than a world of realism and pragmatic foreign policy, and resorting to primarily diplomacy. Most realists like Reagan's foreign policy, which, though made out today to be Neoconservative, was actually fairly restrained and prudent.

3) The Fiscal Conservative Vote

Fact: Bush is the biggest spender ever in the White House. He makes FDR look like a conservative. The War in Iraq doesn't even begin to explain it. His tax cuts, moreover, only increasing teh deficit, are further alienating 'balanced budget' conservatives, who may vote Reform or Libertarian in the coming election.

4) The Conservative Populist (Nationalist) Vote

American nationalists, mostly working class, suffering from job loss and outsourcing, and seeing that Bush is unwilling to take a hardline against affirmative action, will probably vote for the much more nationalistic Buchanan this time around as well.

5) The Small Government Vote

These people, mostly former Republicans, may very well be mostly aligned with the Libertarian Party in 2004. Seeing Bush as "Big Brother" Republicanism, with measures such as the PATRIOT Act and even threats to resume Selective Service, as well as Bush's coddling of the Big Corporations and business subsidies, no longer believe that the Republican Party is committed to small government (which was Reagan's campaign platform). With the Republican Party itself, and especially Bush, having abandoned Reagan's promises, these people will see no further reason to support the neoconservative, big-government Republicans.


For these reasons, I firmly believe that Bush IS going to lose in 2004, and that Buchanan's candidacy will be a major factor. Reform and Libertarian Parties combined have the potential to get 4-5% of the vote away from what would MOSTLY, but not entirely, be Republican votes, enough to swing the favor decisively to the Democrats.

If Bush wants to stay in office, it would be wise for him to turn away from his staunch neoconservatism, or risk alienating a third part of his own party.

[EmeraldKnight]

I envy your speech writing skills.. thats all i have to say.. not debating this topic because I hope that you're correct and Bush loses

[*kryogenix*]

should this be in debate? i don't see any arguments so, i'm going to move it to lounge.

[ComradeRed]

should this be in debate? i don't see any arguments so, i'm going to move it to lounge.

Meh I wanted someone to argue against it so it could be a debate. My argument is that Bush will lose the election because of Pat Buchanan.

[initial-seven]

i dunno and i dun really care......

[Spirited Away]

I wanted to argue... but I don't really know anything about... the reform party.. heck i didn't even remember it existed...............

[*Kathleen*]

i dunno and i dun really care......

Um...why wouldn't you care? This is the next president we're talking about here...

[ComradeRed]

I wanted to argue... but I don't really know anything about... the reform party.. heck i didn't even remember it existed...............

The Reform Party got 15% of the vote back in 1992. Totally screwed up Bush Sr.'s chances.

[IIO__oII]

=/ y is george w bush so bad? y does everyone hate him? he found saddam hussan [sp?] ... hes doing OK... so y go hating on him? hes a pretty good president, if u ask me =]
can U do better ^_^

[onenonly101]

i rather have Bush win and i think/hope he does. I want a president who can make up his mind and not be afraid of sticking to his decisions

[EmeraldKnight]

i rather have Bush win and i think/hope he does. I want a president who can make up his mind and not be afraid of sticking to his decisions 

even if his decisions cause us to lose face in foreign politics, even if he costs us billions of dollars? because of his war and tax cuts, our federal DEFICIT for this year is speculated to be over $500 BILLION

[onenonly101]

every president has a deficit yes not taht big but we were going to go to war no matter what president was in office. Every decision has its flip side but at least he sticks to it, also it was not just him, reps, senators, we vote these people into office. Those countries that we "lose face" still want are approval and respect in what they do and alot of them at first did not want to go to war but then they came to send troops there. Are influence is big and people will be with us no matter what

[EmeraldKnight]

Those countries that we "lose face" still want are approval and respect in what they do and alot of them at first did not want to go to war but then they came to send troops there. Are influence is big and people will be with us no matter what

People will be with us no matter what? Um.. how much support did we have for the Iraqi war? How many countries have pulled out?

every president has a deficit yes not taht big but we were going to go to war no matter what president was in office

Um.. no, there are many ways the Iraqi war could've been avoided/less costly, but thats a whole 'nother debate

And.. every president has a deficit? dude.. Clinton left office with a SURPLUS and here Bush comes along and gets us HALF A TRILLION DOLLARS IN DEBT

Every decision has its flip side but at least he sticks to it, also it was not just him, reps, senators, we vote these people into office

Well.. he's the one that appoints the cabinet members and he's the one that ultimately makes most of the decisions.. and yes, every decision has its flip side, unfortunately the flip side on his decisions are pretty horrible

[IIO__oII]

i rather have Bush win and i think/hope he does. I want a president who can make up his mind and not be afraid of sticking to his decisions

mee too!!! i mean, hes a good president..

[EmeraldKnight]

mee too!!!  i mean, hes a good president..

Meh.. that's your opinion...
If you considering going from a surplus to half a trillion dollars in debt the work of a good president.. sure, why not
We need Minda here.. he actually knows politics pretty well

[angel-roh]

this one doesnt look like it supposed to be in a debate cus theres no arguement for us to talk about...it's like ur telling a news to us...

[onenonly101]

People will be with us no matter what? Um.. how much support did we have for the Iraqi war? How many countries have pulled out?

they might have pulled out or waited to join, but they still came

[EmeraldKnight]

they might have pulled out or waited to join, but they still came

Who? specify please

[onenonly101]

Canada

[EmeraldKnight]

thats one of them, but the majority of our allies did not come

Minda... get over here, we need your statistics XD

Anyways, the fact that they waited to join shows that other countires are hesitant, and the fact that some pulled out shows how we no longer have support, so how can you say that other countries will be with us "no matter what"?

[onenonly101]

Ok I shouldn't have said people will be with us no matter what because that isn't true. They did though support us at one time and that is the only thing that mattered is that we had a big enough influence for some to change their stance on not joining.

[EmeraldKnight]

They did though support us at one time and that is the only thing that mattered is that we had a big enough influence for some to change their stance on not joining. 

Key word there: "had" do we have that influence now?

[Spirited Away]

Spain.

I mean Spain supported us, and only pulled out because the were bombed. Or that may just be an excuse...

oh wait.. what's the topic again? Reform party? what's that? (I'll research)

[onenonly101]

At this point in the war, no we don't. That is another reason why i think we should pull out now

[EmeraldKnight]

I think she's right.. we are getting off topic, I shall go research the reform party as well