i'm not sure at all what it is you're trying to say here. i think there's some context in your head that you didn't include in the post. who's trust in whom is he planning to rebuild?

context in my head that I didn't include in the post. Oh yeah, that happens all the time for me. heh.

I have this naive idea of trust that when it all comes out in the wash, there's more good than bad policy/decisions that our leaders have enacted, regardless of party affiliation. That the exception isn't the good, but the bad (Nixon, for example). Bush, to me, broke that trust.

Talk this weekend sometime. I had the most amazing time...

Bastard Mark

I've actually heard some conservative commentary that it might be better for conservatives if Kerry is elected. The reasoning goes that Bush is not a true conservative (he has run up such a large deficit) and Kerry will not be able to fix what Bush broke in time to please everyone, so chances are good if he is elected that they will be able to get a real conservative into the white house in 2008 if Kerry is elected.

a friend pointed me to this article on salon about that situation, conservatives shouldn't vote for bush:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2004/09/10/conservatives/index_np1.html

And if it's true that they want to get a "real" conservative in the white hous in '08, then we must definitely make sure we remain vigilant during Kerry's four years....bleah.

a "real conservative"
would actually do very great things in this country.
because a "real conservative"
is actually anti-government.
and if there's one thing
we need less of at this point,
its government.
the good news for democrats
is that there isn't a real conservative
in the entire republican party.

as for the trust in the presidency,
i think the trust in the presidency
vanished with nixon and never came back.
imHo,
anyone who expects a republican or democrat
to have anyone's best interests at heart
other than keeping their parties in power
is deluded.

Given the current "terrorism war" (as pointed out by a sources, including high level operatives in both parties) whichever party is in the Whitehouse for the forseeable future is at very significant risk. Another event like 9/11 will be very bad for the party in power. Its one thing to have badness happen on your watch when you can claim ignorance (and have it believed), its another when you are actively trying to prevent another attack and it happens anyways.

which,
of course,
is completely irrational,
since even with amazing intelligence,
well planned terrorism cannot be stopped,
but i suspect you're right.

of course,
the assumption goes,
i think,
that if Kerry wins,
and retracts much of what "W" has done,
and actively seeks
to improve our image around the world
by improving our -actions- around the world,
the -desire- to create another 9/11 will reduce,
whereas if we give "W" 4 more
to avoid the risk of 9/11 part two
happening under Kerry,
we can rest assured 9/11 part two
will -definitely- happen,
whereas Kerry at least has -some- chance
of taking the steps needed to stop it.