It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is It Possible That President Bush Will Be President Again?

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 29 2005 @ 10:56 AM
link   
I don't know if there is a thread like this or not. If so Please move it Mods.
For a long time I have felt that President Bush will be the only President we will ever have again.
I think I heard not long ago that they were going to try to pass a law where a President can serve more than 2 terms.
Did that law pass?
Does anyone else think this also?
I would just like to know your opinions.




posted on Nov, 29 2005 @ 11:21 AM
link   
The bill didn't even make it to comittee. Bear in mind that before an amendment to the Constitution goes into effect, it must be ratified by 34 (or more) States. That can take decades. If the Republican controlled Congress passed an amendment specifically to allow Bush to be "elected" a third time, George's popularity would have long since waned before enough States ratified it.

However -I feel the same as you. A President could seize power simply by having the right people in the right place at the right time.

Consider how Saddam Hussein, the elected President of Iraq, pulled it off... He addressed his legislature, gave a speech about certain persons trying to overthrow the government, and soldiers came and carted half the legislative branch away. The ones who were left were so terrified that they "voted" him all their power.

Think about it, Bush could manufacture some evidence, fake an assasination attempt, and seize control. I don't think he will, though. America is a large and well armed country.



posted on Nov, 29 2005 @ 11:28 AM
link   
One scenario where this could happen is:

Terrorist attack, natural disaster>Marshal law declared>elections suspended

Remember you saw it here first.

I hope I'm wrong but I think the neo-cons are so drunk with power, they are not about to relinquish their control. They feel this their GOD Given destiny to lead this nation to their New World Order.



posted on Nov, 29 2005 @ 11:28 AM
link   
Didn't I see this before in 1999. I also believe that I heard it in 1987. What is it that every two term President is going to be President for ever? Reagan was supposed to start WW III to remain in power and Clinton was supposed to stage a disaster and seize power through FEMA. I'm dying to see what people say Bush will do.



posted on Nov, 29 2005 @ 11:33 AM
link   
I have never thought this about any other President and I have lived long enough to see a few in office.
It's just a "feeling" that I have .
So, from what is being said, it is possible that this could happen.
I guess all we can do is wait and see.



posted on Nov, 29 2005 @ 11:37 AM
link   
I do understand the feeling poeple have at is seems this guy will be in office (sadly) for ever. But Bush and our severly limited two party system are just figure heads. Bush has his orders and he mearly regurgitates them, if it wasn't him it be somebody else. I think you gotta look behind the curtain.



posted on Nov, 29 2005 @ 11:39 AM
link   
Bush doesn't need to be re-elected. The Republican party will try to hold on to power with someone else, like Jebb Bush. The politicians are just puppets for the powers that be who really run things.



posted on Nov, 29 2005 @ 01:16 PM
link   
I dont think it will happen. This is just my opinion, but I dont believe Bush is this evil person some make him out to be. There are scandals sure, but what president hasnt had them, and the fact that the same allegations have been made on other two-term presidents doesnt make it any more rational for me to believe. So, I'm sorry but I dont buy this one.



posted on Nov, 29 2005 @ 01:20 PM
link   
I will tell you that laws do not matter. I fully
expect him to stay. We will be needing him (according to him) to save us from the evil enemy wrath.
He stays, i go.

Dictators serve until they are removed or die.


[edit on 29-11-2005 by dgtempe]



posted on Nov, 29 2005 @ 03:23 PM
link   
Considering Bush's approval numbers are 37% and the continuing heat the press and former administration aides like Col. Lawrence Wilkerson are putting on the administration, I find it difficult to believe the American press and public would lay down to an unconstitutional attempt to retain power. Especially if Bush's approval sinks to 25% or below by 2007-08.

Furthermore, with the voting debacle in Florida in 2000 and the suspected possibility of electronic votes being reversed in Ohio in 2004, I view it as more likely that a continued Republican administration allied with Bush is all they need to retain power that is publicly legitimized by the election process. The problem with electronic voting systems is that there is no paper record of the votes, and according to an audit of the 2004 Ohio results, there seemed to be little attempt to prevent the potential for back-door entry and corruption of the data. If you recall, national news reports of exit polling in Ohio predicted that Kerry would win several key districts in Ohio. But the results proved otherwise, thus began the electronic voting fraud debate.

I'm not saying I believe this will happen again or that the the Republican party as a whole should be suspect of this kind of thing. The possibility of vote fraud has existed in every election and it's unfortunate that electronic voting is no different. But to sum up my view, if Bush and his allies wish to continue controlling the White House (and I don't see why they or any other administration would not want that for themselves), they would rely on electronic voting fraud as the first choice.



posted on Nov, 29 2005 @ 04:44 PM
link   
My guess is that it won't really matter if a democrat or a republican gets elected. The higher echelons that get to be candidates are all bought and paid for.
I doubt Bush has any real control in the White House, he's just a not so smart figurehead. He even has to ask permission to go to the little boys room.




posted on Nov, 29 2005 @ 04:45 PM
link   
OMG!!!! Bush is not a dictator. You have the freedom to demonstrate, speech. If he were this dictator then you would not be able to say such things about him without being whipped up by some secret police. Its stuff like this that make me just wonder if people are going off their meds, paranoia is a dangerous thing.



posted on Nov, 30 2005 @ 07:43 AM
link   
Luda, sounds propostrous, doesnt it? Well, its not that far-fetched. Supposing we have a police state? Supposing we are in a full fletched war? This would be the perfect opportunity to "postpone" elections indefinately...

Not paranoid, just realistic.


Let me add that THIS administration would take FULL advantage of anything to stay on.


[edit on 30-11-2005 by dgtempe]



posted on Nov, 30 2005 @ 11:22 AM
link   
As regards future leadership of our country, I recommend you read this post and links:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

President Bush cannot be 'elected' again, but any number of possibilities could occur to keep the current regime in power for an indefinite amount of time.

After what we've seen over the past few years, it's simply naïve to think that this leadership will give up the power they've worked so hard to gain. Whoever is behind the Bush Machine will rule for a good long time unless people (Congress, basically) wise up enough and fight hard enough to prevent it.



posted on Nov, 30 2005 @ 01:44 PM
link   
It's not possible that he will be president again. If he somehow found a loophole which would allow him another term, there would be instantaneous revolts throughout America. Even his base would turn against him, etc.

That is not to say that "Bush clones" (other PNAC members) will never become presidents themselves. Obviously a lot of people (majority?) share his thinking and will vote for other presidents who are nearly exactly like him (though they will probably be brighter and better speakers...).

- Attero

[edit on 30-11-2005 by Attero Auctorita]



posted on Nov, 30 2005 @ 01:49 PM
link   
Altero, they would get their way once again. There would be no revolt and we'd be stuck with what would then be known as a DICTATOR.



posted on Nov, 30 2005 @ 02:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempe
Altero, they would get their way once again. There would be no revolt and we'd be stuck with what would then be known as a DICTATOR.


There is no hope for the world if people are such cowards. Though sometimes I believe you are right that people would rather keep their cozy lives than revolt, this is America, our country was created by those who sought to evade oppression. I still believe that spirit exists today.

- Attero

[edit on 30-11-2005 by Attero Auctorita]



posted on Nov, 30 2005 @ 02:16 PM
link   
The use of the word "regime" cracks me up.

regime
n 1: the organization that is the governing authority of a
political unit;
That pretty much describes whatever party is in power.
---------------------------------------
Benevolent Heretic: You are correct, the conservatives and "The People" did work hard to get into power, but remember, too, that the Demokrauts were in power for 40 years, and really screwed thing up. It's "The People" who are behind, not the "Bush machine", but the Conservative agenda, which basically means being behind the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Why are so many people against that?

dgtemp: and other as paranoid and conspiratorial; please read the following, then notice who signed it:

Executive Orders Bypass Congress

This is a call for the people of the United States to defend their rights.

What are Executive Orders? They are laws established by U.S. presidents. These laws are not passed by the House or the Senate and create an end-run around the Constitution.

These executive orders are simply printed in the Federal Register. After 30 days, these orders become law and carry the full impact of any laws passed by Congress. These laws are unconstitutional, because the Constitution does not afford any person the right to create laws by himself that negate the Constitution.

Executive orders:
10995: Seizure of all communications media in the United States.

10997: Seizure of all electric power fuels and minerals, public and private.

10999: Seizure of all means of transportation, including personal cars, trucks or vehicles of any kind and total control of highways, seaports and waterways.

11000: Seizure of all American people for work forces under federal supervision including the splitting of families if the government finds it necessary.

11001: Seizure of all health, education and welfare facilities, public and private.

11002: Empowered the postmaster general to register all men, women and children in the U.S.

11003: Seizure of all airports and aircraft.

11004: Seizure of all housing and finance authorities to establish Forced Relocation Designated areas to be abandoned as "unsafe".

11005: Seizure of all railroads, inland waterways and storage facilities, public and private.

12919: Signed June 3, 1994, by President Clinton. Encompasses all the above executive orders.

This is all part of the new world order, to have the United Nations run us. This is also a part of the Biodiversity Treaty. Refuse to become sheep; become informed citizens before it is too late.

There is evidence of all of this if you would but ask and seek the truth.
Jean A. Oswald. Shaler
------------------------------------------------
LudaChris: if politicians are bought and paid for, it's mostly by the campaign donations from "The People". I agree with you in that no matter who is in office, there will be those who *itch and whine and cower in paranoia.

SwearBear: Yeah... they said Reagan wasn't too smart, either. Read one of his books Also, Bush's scoires at yale were much higher than Kerrys. However, there are a lot of intelligent people out there. but they're just not very smart. That would cover 75% of college professors.

enhancedesign: Exit polls are worthless; your vote is a private thing, and many say the opposite just to screw things up. It's nobodies business who you voted for. I agree with you about the possible mis-use of electronic voting. I believe we should go back to all paper ballots, with no absentee votes except for military who are off-shore. Of course, if you do some research on "Chicago-style" elections, it will shed some light as to why the Dem's were in chargefor 40-sosme years. The conservatives can't match that kind of "machine". 9-11 reporting took precedence, but of the 12 or so recounts in FloriDUH, all showed Bush as the winner.
Many people mention that Diebold is owned by a Republican, but the other two companies that make voting machines are owned by a Dem... not many mention that.
Also, it depends on what polls you read, who gives them, and how the poll is worded. I find it rather odd... well, not really... that ex-president pantload was the only president that they did two polls for; one for his personal life, and one for his presidential life.

Bandar Paul: The problem isn't the two-party system; the problem is we have one American party... the Conservatives, and one Euro-Socialist Party... the Dems. The "Constitutional" party is just the opposite of it's name; the Libertarian" party is more Socialist than anything, and the "Green" party is also Euro-Socialist... they should call themselves the "Global" party, which they are, and that should scare most anyone with any sense at all.

MagicaRose: No, that law didn't pass, and Congress or the Senate can't pass a law like that; it requires a Constitutional amendment, which all the states must ratify (not bloody likely) and as someone else saud, it would take many, many years.
We should also go back to term limits on Congress and the Senate, too, but that's not likely to happen either.... sadly.



[edit on 30-11-2005 by zappafan1]



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 02:41 PM
link   
infowars.net...

This is an editorial piece arguing the Clintons and Bushes are more allies than enemies and I find that viewpoint worth considering. The Clinton-Bush connection is important to note since they've been our consecutive leaders and Hillary will likely run for President in 2008. To continue the supposed "regime" in 2008, I would guess the conspiracy would be to get a president elected who is allied with the Clinton-Bush backers. Doesn't matter if the next president is Democrat or Republican. Hillary vs. John McCain or Rudolph Giuliani perhaps? I could see that happening.

So to reiterate my earlier post, I find it unlikely that Bush would do something drastic to retain power in 2008. There is no need for this as it's more likely that his backers and allies will work together behind-the-scenes to get one of their own elected and continue their agenda.

Also for your consideration, a poll related to 2008 potential presidential candidates:
www.pollingreport.com...

[edit on 2-12-2005 by enhancedesign]



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 05:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by zappafan1
The use of the word "regime" cracks me up.

regime
n 1: the organization that is the governing authority of a
political unit;
That pretty much describes whatever party is in power.


Then why does it crack you up?



Benevolent Heretic: You are correct, the conservatives and "The People" did work hard to get into power, but remember, too, that the Demokrauts were in power for 40 years, and really screwed thing up.


I guess that's a matter of opinion. I was a lot better off a few years ago than I am now. My husband's job was sent overseas and we just learned that our property taxes went up $200. All our taxes are higher. Economically, we were in a LOT better shape before this administration.

We're at war. Terrorism is rampant around the world. The people of the United States are totally divided and furious at each other. And most of them are furious at the administration.

I guess it all depends on your point of view.



It's "The People" who are behind, not the "Bush machine", but the Conservative agenda, which basically means being behind the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Why are so many people against that?


I don't know of anyone who is against the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

enhancedesign - That poll is scary! Hillary or Rudy? Ugh! I sure hope a lot changes before then! Yuck!




top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join