How Do I Win Arguments against Bush Republicans?

Hello.  So, I'm a Brit, but I take an active interest in the 04 election on account of how I remember when the US President was the LEADER OF THE FREE WORLD... and I think it's healthy to take an interest in who your leaders are.  So when I meet American expats, I always fish for their voting intentions.  Until now, it"s always been Dem, so we bitch about Bush together, and sometimes they also bitch about Kerry and I say, you know, I think he's OK!  And that's that.

So last night for the first time ever I meet a hard core Bushite, in a room featuring a couple of other undecided, leaning Kerry Americans..

and he's taking them on, featuring such gems as

• the economy's looking pretty good
  
• Clinton is to blame for this 911 mess, being soft on terrorists
  
• Kerry is a hypocrite on abortion, as he claims to believe life starts at conception, so that means he is in favor of killing living people etc etc
  
• draft talk is just scare talk, if anything happened, either president would have to deal with it, so if a draft is needed, it is needed - but either would have to do it.  but it is unlikely.
  
• Bush won Florida, straight up

so I figure number 1 I disagree on, number 2 is total horseshit, and number 3 I don't know enough about, but what matters is the policy more than the thought behind it.  number 4 I think is horseshit also, and number 5 almost froze my mind with so many possible arguments against.

But anyway, the point is this - how can I best argue against such a guy?  I don't want to get into a fight - this guy is in my circle of friends.  And he's not the persuadable type.  I just need to passive-agressively make comments during his talking point reel-offs that scupper his arguments.  And I can't sound too preachy, cos I'm a Brit, and I don't want to trigger some 'HEY, it's not your election, butt out' trump card.

So, where can I get 1 or 2 line dismissals of common GOP talking points?  Just stuff that I can drop into the mix and throw him off a little when needs be?  I want to make him look just dumb enough that other people in the room end up thinking he's off base, without actually geting into a proper 1-on-1 with the guy.

Thanks!

•  you cant win

  those people are too blissfully ignorant.  they wont come around, so dont waste your breath.  instead convince independents, undecideds and apathetic nonvoters how important it is to register and vote for kerry.

  by Muboshgu on Tue Sep 07, 2004 at 09:35:25 PM PDT

  •  Oh, sure

    I have no interest in converting this guy.  Even dissuading him from voting would require major efforts, and probably couldn't be done without making me look like a polical obsessive type.  And there's always that "you're not even American" angle, which would nuke me if done right.

    All I need to do is to throw some lines in, trip him up, and make it easier for the other people around to dismiss him.  They are the ones I am after.  In particular, a whole lot of absentee Indiana voters leaning Kerry in my current circle.... worried about the draft and abortion.  I am just trying to shore them up without preaching.....

    by BleedingKnuckleLiberal on Tue Sep 07, 2004 at 10:05:40 PM PDT

•  The only way to win arguments ...

  ...with hardcore Bush Republicans is to hit the "restore file" button on their lobotomies and take them back to the time when Republicans opposed deficit spending and nation building with the armed forces.  

  by Meteor Blades on Tue Sep 07, 2004 at 09:37:28 PM PDT

•  the first step

  Just try to make him doubt Bush. Don't try to sell Kerry.

  by Carl Nyberg on Tue Sep 07, 2004 at 09:38:46 PM PDT

•  Just laugh.

  Say, the economy is good? Read the paper. This stuff is all crap. I'll show anyone who is sincerely interested why, but you're not, so let's not get into it. It's a waste of energy. Or something to that effect. Make sure your independent friends know you have answers if they want them, but don't get sucked into a stupid, tiring debate.

  by ZoBai on Tue Sep 07, 2004 at 09:39:15 PM PDT

•  Your a smart guy

  Comvincing him is not possible but the undecideds would certainly be swayed by a Brit saying something like 'it's a shame what your President has done to Americas prestige  on this side of the pond.Europeons always looked to America for many things that were important and are now so disappointed its going to take years and a different leadership to regain that".

  by ctkeith on Tue Sep 07, 2004 at 09:44:57 PM PDT

  •  Quite Right

    This is right on the money.  Particularly because Americans have been told that the British are our best friends ever (this week), but also because most Americans secretly want to be liked by the rest of the world.  If you confidently assert that the whole of the globe understand all of these things to be horseshit, and it is only a minority of Americans that believe these things, I think you'll find that surprisingly persuasive.  The more dismissive that you are, the more effective that it will be.

    -Waldo Jaquith

    by Waldo on Tue Sep 07, 2004 at 09:55:38 PM PDT

    •  "Change the subject, PLEASE!"

      The more dismissive that you are, the more effective that it will be.

      Even better, when the subject comes up, just say you don't even want to talk about Bush, that even mentioning his name makes you want to vomit.  My friend was like this regarding Arnold Schwarzenegger, he just did NOT want anyone in the room with him to even MENTION his name.  If you conservative American friend brings up G.W., just say, "ugh . . . change the subject, PLEASE!", and laugh like someone was talking about Dan Quayle or something.  Generally give the impression that you would give G.W. about as much serious consideration as you would Jessie "The Body" Ventura (former WWF wrestler who became Governer of Minnesota).

      A poster above mentioned not to touch on Kerry, which you shouldn't unless pressed; if people are talking about Kerry, you don't have to join in, but if your opinion is solicited, make sure your friend understands that the one thing Kerry makes you feel about America is respect; not fear, but respect.  Talk about how much more "dignified" Kerry is, how he's exactly the kind of American politician that Europeans LOVE -- especially Brits, you have no idea how much residual longing for approval from the U.K. the U.S. still has, it's something Fruedian -- and act flabbergasted that people don't see what an obviously better candidate he is.  Show full faith in Kerry, and if pressed about certain smears, write them off dismissively as if they were critiques of a drooling street urchin.  (Sorry to the street urchins out there!)  You know they're just political smears, with no substance -- indeed, the fact that you're British means you can easily show disdain for what you might justifiably consider trivial details about Kerry that the Bush/Cheney '04 team is making up or distorting.

      If your friend brings up the war in Iraq, you're on your own -- you guys invaded too!  We're really in the same boat on this one, huh?  I bet ol' Canada is snickeringly jolly about the fact that it didn't kowtow to Bush back in Spring '03, eh?  Shit.  Well, at the very least, show no hesitation to exhibiting a complete trust in Kerry as a war leader -- in fact, as with your friend's draft example, you can just shuck it off with a "well either one can take care of Iraq and the War On Terror, it's really the U.S. intelligence community and armed forces that are responsible for success.  (You might throw in dumfoundness at how G.W. can actually be believed to be good at fighting terrorists, considering how much bigger Al Qaeda is, how many more terrorist attacks there have been under Bush's watch (in Europe!  Make him understand that he's living in a bubble, being from the U.S. and not near any Arab countries, etc.), and how much more dangerous Iraq is than it should be.

      Just some ideas.

      by Jason Bergman on Tue Sep 07, 2004 at 10:22:43 PM PDT

  •  Oh Yeah I forgot

    Call the bush guy a WANKER in front of the others too.LOL

    by ctkeith on Tue Sep 07, 2004 at 10:15:14 PM PDT

•  I suggest

  you read ultrageek's diary.
  

  by bumblebums on Tue Sep 07, 2004 at 09:50:47 PM PDT

•  Truth

  Republicans are allergic to it.  They hate it.  Just tell the truth, and back it up with a few links.  (Google is your friend.)

  the economy's looking pretty good

  For China.  Not here in the U.S.  Great articles today in the Houston Chronicle and Detroit Free Press to make the point.  In 2000, Bush promised to create 5 million new jobs.  It's 2004, and he's 6 million short.

  Clinton is to blame for this 911 mess, being soft on terrorists

  The Clinton administration thwarted the millenium attack at LAX.  The Clinton administration successfully prosecuted those who attacked the WTC in '93 (and that attack happened when he was in office for only one month, so blame must be laid with Bush I).  The Clinton administration found those responsible for Oklahoma City (right-wing nut jobs) and subsequently shoved Timothy McVeigh off this mortal coil.  Osama?  Clinton attacked him in Afghanistan.  If the GOP hadn't been screaming "wag the dog" and blow job, he may have been able to do more than missile strikes.

  Kerry is a hypocrite on abortion, as he claims to believe life starts at conception, so that means he is in favor of killing living people etc etc

  Kerry is exactly where the overwhelming majority of Americans are on abortion.  Against it, but pro-choice.  Most would never choose abortion for themselves, but they don't feel the government should be involved in the decision-making process.  It between the woman, her doctor and her conscience.  No room for George.

  Draft talk is just scare talk, if anything happened, either president would have to deal with it

  Is the president Commander-In-Chief, or not?  By sending the bulk of our military forces to fight those who did not attack us, our real enemies go stronger and are emboldened to launch an attack.  If you're North Korea, don't you like your chances of attacking South Korea a lot better than you did two years ago?  North Korea knows we'd have to have a draft to fight them now.

  Bush won Florida, straight up

  Straight up bullshit.  Do you think 26,000 Jews in Palm Beach County voted for Pat Buchanan?  

  by HarveyMilk on Tue Sep 07, 2004 at 10:28:36 PM PDT

•  anti-bush

  #2 "Regarding US domestic terrorism, look at the record.  The Clinton administration took it seriously, and scuttled the millineum plots, including a plot to blow up LAX.  The Bush adminstration failed to take terrorism seriously, and failed to detect the 9/11 plot.  Just read chapter 8 of the 9/11 report to see the horrific details of Bush's sorry performance.  Republicans know how to read don't they?"

  #5 "Jeb Bush committed election fraud in Florida.  The improper and illegal disenfranchisement of blacks in Florida is well documented.  Shitfire, they tried to do it again just this year."

  oops, slipping away from the Queen's English into West Texas Anglish ...

  #2 again "That ol' boy not only got hornswoggled by bin Laden on 9/11, but he fucked up Iraq to boot.  Tell you what, bin Laden wanted Bush to withdraw from the holy land of Saudi Arabia, and take out that infidel Saddam.  Shoot, that C-student intellect came right on through when ol' Dubya fell right into bin Laden's line of thinking."

  by zzmarkzz on Tue Sep 07, 2004 at 10:29:43 PM PDT

•  First of all ...

  On the economy raise the issue of Bush's disastrous fiscal policy. Here is an argument I just posted:

  I'm voting for Kerry and institutional gridlock. The Republicans will veto his spending programs and Kerry will veto extensions of the Bush tax cuts. The most fiscally responsible adminstrations in the last fifty years were Clinton and Reagan, who both had the opposing party in control of Congress. The most fiscally reckless adminstrations have been Bush and LBJ, who both had their party in control of Congress. By coincidence, LBJ and Bush both took our country to war based on false pretenses.
  For a true fiscal conservative there is no other choice than a vote for Kerry and institutional gridlock.

  Even Bill Kristol admitted that supply side economics is a better political theory than economic theory. Ask your friend if he thinks sound economic theory supports additional tax cuts in the face of massive deficits. Rush's argument is that there were only four years between Reagan and Clinton, therefore Reagan's tax cuts caused the boom in the 90's. Remind him that Reagan raised taxes three times (he called them tax reform measures), Bush 41 and Clinton raised them once each.

  On the soft on terrorism charge bring up the 1998 open letter neo-cons presented to Clinton essentially urging him to invade Iraq. It was signed by Abrams, Armitage, Bolton, Feith, Perle, Rumsfield, Wolfowitz, Wurmser, Kristol and Kagan among others. If he already thinks Clinton should have invaded Iraq or agrees with the open letter, then ask him if invading Iraq in 1998 would have stopped Bin Laden from carrying out 911. The only rational response is no.

  Kerry's position is the same as JFK's. He doesn't believe's he should represent the American people and not the Pope if elected President. Not wanting to impose his religious views on America is not hypocritical, it is as American as apple pie. Maybe your friend also thinks Kerry would be obligated to impose the Catholic prohibition on condoms on Americans as well. If so, then forget about it. You can't argue with a closed mind. Agree to disagree on this issue. There is not even a consensus in the catholic community on these issues. Your friend is attempting to impose an ultra strict papal doctrine on Kerry that is a minority view in the Catholic church. This is a straw man argument that you can't win if he thinks his straw man is indestructable.

  Most people are not aware that the Civil Rights Commission did a post election investigation that discovered that 80,000 black voters had their ballot rejected for spurious reasons. Jeb is trying the same thing this year with another "felon" purge. You probably can't win this argument if your friend has been brainwashed by Hannity & O'Reilly.

  by JollyBuddah on Wed Sep 08, 2004 at 12:33:54 AM PDT

  •  In the first sentence I meant filibuster, not veto

    sorry, my bad.

    by JollyBuddah on Wed Sep 08, 2004 at 12:37:08 AM PDT