Jump to content

Talk:George W. Bush 2004 presidential campaign

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

Moved page to align with format of U.S. Presidential election, 2004, etc. see Talk:John Kerry presidential campaign, 2004 for more. jengod 00:00, Mar 11, 2004 (UTC)

Nice work Jen. -SV(talk) 03:22, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC) (links Bush campaign, Kerry campaign

The name is the way it is because it follows the pattern set by U.S. presidential election, 2004 jengod 22:11, Mar 19, 2004 (UTC)

Vote!

[edit]

I seek your input at Wikipedia:WikiProject POTUS Campaigns. Please come weigh in. jengod 23:06, Mar 19, 2004 (UTC)

FY

[edit]

It took me a while to guess what FY stood for. Would it be over the top for the first usage of it to have 'Financial Year (FY)'? Or to just replace FY with 'Financial Year' for each of the three occurances? Feel free to remove this message later.

Since fiscal year (or financial year) is a common economic term I think it would be ackward to replace it. Fortunately there is a wiki for "fiscal year" so I linked the first occurance I saw of FY, does that make it more clear without wordiness? Rbsteffes 22:16, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)
When I read it I had no idea what FY meant. (I have to tell that English isn't my maternal language). Then I clicked the link and felt euhm... "fooled". I want to be able to click links if I don't understand something or wish more information about it, not to find out that FY 2001 means Fiscal Year 2001. Adding 8 letters, so the text reads fluently for more users, is worth it. My opinion. KevinGovaerts 00:37:00, 2005-08-26 (UTC)

Mention of other candidates

[edit]

Shouldn't there be at least some mention of other candidates that will be in the election? For example, Ralph Nader may end up being critical, as could possibly Libertarian candidate Aaron Russo. Rei 17:37, 14 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Information on those would best be located on a page for the 2004 election itself, not on Bush's campaign. I've added a link to it at the end of the first paragraph of this article. Vesta 06:37, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Issue positions

[edit]

Will someone go through the "Issue positions" and pick out the ones which are actually stances from the current campaign, and not actions he's already taken, as well as NPOV and de-"he said, critics say" them? Thanks, [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 19:22, 2004 Aug 4 (UTC)

The catch is what can be used for reference to differentiate between stances he holds and actions he's taken? This may relate to the question I am asking below. Rbsteffes 19:26, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Actions he's taken determine the stances he holds. Mentioning actions he has taken explains the stances he holds. I can say, "He wants to strengthen the homeland," but doesn't Senator Kerry desire to do the same? Because he is the incumbent president, his actions and performance in the first term are very important in not only his profile regarding the first term, but his election profile as well. How one does while they're in the presidency often also dictates their electability. NeevaN 02:16, Aug 6, 2004 (UTC)
That's kinda what I was thinking and why I mentioned that below. Actions Bush has taken in the White House and Kerry has taken in the Senate directly affect their electability, but that's not the issue. I think what Meelar is saying is that this is about his CAMPAIGN, not whether or not people believe him, or what his history is. It should reflect what he promises not what he has done.

Could someone still NPOV the issue positions? This is my first Wikipedia entry/edit and I would like to see how to improve writing in a neutral point of view. NeevaN

Thank you for NPOVing my entries. I see more clearly the quality Wikipedia is looking for. --NeevaN 02:58, Aug 11, 2004 (UTC)

Reference to Previous Campaigns

[edit]

Should mention of campaign promises made in his previous campaigns and their outcomes be made in this article? Examples Promises kept and promises stalled- Philadelphia Inquirer Tue, Jan. 20, 2004 Rbsteffes 19:25, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Previous campaign promises relate specifically to his 2000 campaign. I would recommend not including promises on this entry, but rather another entry regarding his 2000 election and his first term. However, if it solely deals with his actions he has taken and his stances on issues, include them in this article because they would be relevant. NeevaN 02:03, Aug 6, 2004 (UTC)


"Memorable Quotations"

[edit]

Is this really the place for ridicule, especially without citation? I don't want to delete it offhand in reference to NPOV but it seems to me the Memorable Quotations part crosses the line.

The quote has been widely cited. I agree it makes him look stupid, but he did say it, and whether or not he actually is stupid is a judgement for readers to make. Others are free to add quotations that reflect well on him. Adam 12:46, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Ok, but the quote is still has very little to do with the Campaign, which is the topic of this particular article. Perhaps it would be better served as a link to a "Bushism" page or something along those lines. Not to mention, the quote was delivered to pentagon strategic planners, who DO spend their days thinking of ways America could be harmed. It's called vulnerability analysis. Rbsteffes
He said it in the course of the campaign, and it is plainly campaign rhetoric. And you know that that is not what he meant. Adam 14:00, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)
I don't know any such thing. You'll notice though, that I didn't change it, because you are correct was in the course of campaign rhetoric. I just personally think it's equivalent to posting the images of Kerry's daughter in the see through dresses she wore to some parties under the heading of 'Kerry Family Values'. It's based on fact, but it's still just an attempt to be insulting. That's actually why I suggested you put it on Bushisms where it belongs, in my point of view. Rbsteffes P.S. You can indent to show you are following a thread of coversation with the colon (':')
I'm not particularly committed to having the quote or indeed the section in the article. But I do think it falls in a different category than photos of Kerry's daughter. Whether or not a candidate has the intellectual capacity to be President is a real campaign issue, while what dress a candidate's daughter wears is not. It is a fact that Bush's intellectual capacity is widely doubted. The fact that he can say such a moronic thing in public is therefore a legitimate campaign topic. Adam 00:28, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)
There is no way this quote belongs on this page. This clearly belongs on the Bushism page. I do not understand how one could put this quote on this page. His "intellectual capacity"??? We're not doing character analysis; we're giving information as if it were an encyclopedia. Memorable quotations are like: "These acts shattered steel, but they cannot dent the steel of America's resolve," "We will not tire, we will not falter, and we will not fail," and "Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists." The most memorable time of his presidency was the 9/11 attacks. These quotes signaled his idea of recovery, his resolve, and the famous "Bush doctrine." This is no place for one quote that makes him look bad. Completely against NPOV. I'm thinking of acting unilaterally and taking this down, but I want feedback. --NeevaN 02:57, Aug 11, 2004 (UTC)
The problem with your argument, NeevaN, is that they are "memorable" quotations. Memorable does not necessarily mean a quote that will make others look favorably upon you, it simply means that it is a quote that sticks out in people's memories. That quote certainly sticks out in my mind. I do think that you should add the quotes you have in your post, if you are concerned about the POV issue. If you put up a quote or two that shows him as a competent man, then there will be no NPOV problem. StellarFury 14:41, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

If he said those things in the course of the campaign, then you are free to add them to the category. The category of "Memorable campaign quotations" is perfectly legitimate in this article. and an accurate quotation of Bush under that heading cannot be POV. If the quote makes him look bad, that is his fault for saying it, not mine for quoting it. You are free to add quotes that make him look good. Adam 12:27, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)

The quote has been removed, as this is not an actual quote from Bush's campaign. The line was said at a bill signing, which is a presidential duty, which has little to do with Bush's re-election campaign. Idono 03:00, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Come along now. Are you trying to tell me that a public bill signing ceremony in an election year is not a campaign event? Adam 03:39, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

A campaign is a series of operations designed to bring about a particular result. President Bush did not sign a bill as an operation for his campaign, but as a duty of his status of President of the United States. Idono 03:47, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I conclude from that that you are either extremely naive about politics or else a Republican who doesn't want Bush's dopey quote to appear in this article. Adam 03:52, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I don't understand that it is so important for you that this quote be in this particular article. There are other articles about President Bush that this quote may be relevant in, rather than an article about his campaign for re-election.

This article is about Bush's campaign to be re-elected as the United States President in 2004. Do you not realize that this particular "memorable quote" on this subject is irrelevant? Perhaps a more relevant quote for this subject would be a quote where Bush is actually campaigning, not signing a bill. Being a citizen of a United States, and watching the campaigns of both President Bush and many other candidates, I can easily make sense of what President Bush does for his Campaign, and what he does to act as United States President. Idono 04:16, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

What total bollocks. Everything a President says and does in public during election year is campaigning. Please do not insult the intelligence of other users here. Adam 06:20, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Idono-- thank you for taking down that quote. It never did belong there. There is a difference between Presidential duty and campaigning, as you have acknowledged. Politics isn't everything. NeevaN

Adam-- Idono has never criticized your intelligence. However, I believe you criticized his when you said "I conclude from that that you are either extremely naive about politics..." If you are so intent on posting that quote on Wiki, put it in a relevant article. NeevaN 07:06, Aug 23, 2004 (UTC)

Bush's stance on Iran

[edit]

I guess we also need a section on Bush's stance on Iran. roozbeh 13:43, Sep 25, 2004 (UTC)

Stupid page name

[edit]

George W. Bush presidential campaign, 2004 is a very unnatural page name. 2004 George W. Bush presidential campaign is far more likely to be linked as-is instead of being piped. Why the odd page name? --mav 19:20, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

To replicate structure of U.S. presidential election, 2004, etc. jengod 21:34, Oct 19, 2004 (UTC)
That makes it even more stupid. I should have changed all those page names right after they were first created over two years ago. This ultra idiotic page-naming scheme has spread like a cancer throughout these types of articles. There is no excuse for it. Just because there are a lot of articles that are named that way, does not mean we have to continue doing this or that it can't be changed. I volunteer to help in a grand renaming project. Heck, I could probably fix all US-related articles myself. --mav 00:01, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I just work here. :) jengod 01:14, Oct 21, 2004 (UTC)


Fake "protected" tag added?

[edit]

I noticed that ip68-10-25-55.hr.hr.cox.net [68.10.25.55] anonymously added a protected tag to the main article earlier today. Seeing no reason for this, I removed the protected tag, especially seeing as how it was done anonymously. Radman1 19:44, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Passing of Former President Ronald Reagan

[edit]

I fail to see the relevancy and am inclined to strike this section altogether. I see that RickK has already struck a line or two. Can someone please argue in favor of this section to the 2004 presidential campaign? It appears to be pure speculation, IMHO. Radman1 22:08, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I have no problem with deleting the entire paragraph. RickK 22:37, Oct 26, 2004 (UTC)

I cannot access the official reelection site

[edit]

Both yesterday evening at home and this morning at work. I Access it from Western Europe. http://www.georgewbush.com Sockpuppet for work Sockpuppet for work 06:30, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

  • This appears to be done intentionally by the Bush campaign folks, in order to "guarantee access" to the U.S. voters in expectance of a severe traffic hike during the final days leading up to the election. I've linked in an article. -- [[User:Radman1|RaD Man (talk)]] 23:46, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Incidentally the current non-usa alternative has frames with pornographic content advertising. A no-no? Hardwick 11:19, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The bulge

[edit]

Ha ha, I can't believe this article actually devotes four paragraphs to discussion of the bulge. I wonder if anyone is really going to care about such trivia in 50-100 years from now. —Mike 08:01, Oct 29, 2004 (UTC)

Project Vote Smart

[edit]

I fail to see need for this article to include the information on Bush's refusal to respond to Project Vote Smart. Who will agree that this information should be removed? 65.100.247.168 02:02, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Updates

[edit]

Considering the time-sensitive nature of a campaign, I don't know whether updates (see, e.g., the Iraq section) need updating so much as they need a revision of their verb tenses. Fearwig 07:25, 25 May 2006 (UTC) update: made some changes, namely phrasing for neutrality and tense.[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:DebateBulge1.jpg

[edit]

Image:DebateBulge1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:51, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

History worse ever duo

[edit]

I wonder How stupid these two goons think we are, They are Criminals And worthless people . They better hope there is no god, Cause the Lies and Murdering And stealing They both are guilty of could send them to hell.along with Rumsfeld They stole the Office of the people, Glad history Has past them by Now maybe we can live like Americans again and not some thugs who works for the Crime Boss GWB and The dick Chenny Wont shed a tear when these 2 goons past —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.164.255.63 (talk) 02:17, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on George W. Bush presidential campaign, 2004. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:58, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on George W. Bush presidential campaign, 2004. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:20, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on George W. Bush presidential campaign, 2004. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:30, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:George_W._Bush_2004_presidential_campaign&oldid=1208661327"