The Election

[Adam]

When I think about it, I know quite a few republicans that would have voted for the democrat candidate, if they thought he was a viable candidate- they were not really pro-Bush.

 

Last time the Democrats got a guy in office, it was a man from a red state, who garnered a conservative base.

 

That being said, I think what the election was is the conservatives overcoming the vocal minority, which is the liberals.

 

Anyone agree or disagree- I expect some very interesting opinions.

[jimshiz]

I voted FOR George W. Bush. He is the best Republican President since Ronald Reagan. I can not think of a Democrat who I would ever vote for over George W. Bush. I liked Kennedy, Truman, & FDR. But, if I was able to vote, I still would have voted for Nixon over Kennedy even knowing about the Watergate "scandal" and the Marylyn Monroe B.S.

 

I would NEVER be for an Amendment that would allow Schwarzenegger to run. But, if he were allowed, he would NOT be my first choice to run - neither would Rudy.

[DC Tom]

When I think about it, I know quite a few republicans that would have voted for the democrat candidate, if they thought he was a viable candidate- they were not really pro-Bush.

165830[/snapback]

 

Conversely, I know quite a few Democrats who voted for Bush because they didn't believe he was a viable candidate. I think the bottom line is that for far too many people this election was about who would be the less pathetic choice...personally, I don't think anyone won.

[Berg]

When I think about it, I know quite a few republicans that would have voted for the democrat candidate, if they thought he was a viable candidate- they were not really pro-Bush.

 

Last time the Democrats got a guy in office, it was a man from a red state, who garnered a conservative base.

 

That being said, I think what the election was is the conservatives overcoming the vocal minority, which is the liberals.

 

Anyone agree or disagree- I expect some very interesting opinions.

165830[/snapback]

 

 

I voted for the lesser of two evils - AGAIN.

[Guest RabidBillsFanVT]

I voted FOR George W. Bush.  He is the best Republican President since Ronald Reagan.  I can not think of a Democrat who I would ever vote for over George W. Bush.  I liked Kennedy, Truman, & FDR.  But, if I was able to vote, I still would have voted for Nixon over Kennedy even knowing about the Watergate "scandal" and the Marylyn Monroe B.S.

 

I would NEVER be for an Amendment that would allow Schwarzenegger to run.  But, if he were allowed, he would NOT be my first choice to run - neither would Rudy.

165869[/snapback]

 

I hate Kennedy- he was vastly overrated, didn't even write Profiles in Courage, and made horrendous decisions. Nixon was the better choice in 1960.

 

The more I read about Truman, the more I admire him. He fought gallantly in WWI when he didn't have to, got us through the early crisis with the USSR after Stalin's increasing pressure, and told Macarthur where to go-imagine a military officer deliberately ignoring the President's orders!

 

Honestly, I would have had a VERY hard time believing that if you were able to vote in the FDR era that you would have voted for FDR. He was the Clinton of the era- NOBODY drew more venom from the Republicans than the mention of his name. There are people who still have that venom, and I have talked with them. Men in their 80's still believe that FDR was a socialist who tried to turn our country into a liberal nightmare. However, it never mattered, because no matter WHAT they said, FDR still won, which is an excallent parallel to Clinton.

 

FDR's infidelity was discreetly handled... Of course, those were the days when the media actually focused on important issues.

[ExiledInIllinois]

Honestly, I would have had a VERY hard time believing that if you were able to vote in the FDR era that you would have voted for FDR. He was the Clinton of the era- NOBODY drew more venom from the Republicans than the mention of his name. There are people who still have that venom, and I have talked with them. Men in their 80's still believe that FDR was a socialist who tried to turn our country into a liberal nightmare. However, it never mattered, because no matter WHAT they said, FDR still won, which is an excallent parallel to Clinton.

 

165973[/snapback]

 

 

Food lines have a great deal to do with FDR's popularity. He took the nation's agenda the same way the Republicans do with anti-tax stances... It was/is popular.

 

My grandfather would have been one of those guys... He worked on the railroad and his pay was cut in half... Till the day he died, he refered to FDR as a crippled bastard... He wasn't a Republican either... Maybe inside, deep down he knew it was the best for all? As much as he was pissed about himself, he looked past that.

[Rich in Ohio]

When I think about it, I know quite a few republicans that would have voted for the democrat candidate, if they thought he was a viable candidate- they were not really pro-Bush.

 

Last time the Democrats got a guy in office, it was a man from a red state, who garnered a conservative base.

 

That being said, I think what the election was is the conservatives overcoming the vocal minority, which is the liberals.

 

Anyone agree or disagree- I expect some very interesting opinions.

165830[/snapback]

 

 

Umm, exactly what part of the conservative base did clinton get????? The reason Bush 41 lost was a little elf by the name of ross perot. Then he defeated the cardboard figure that we all know and love by the name of Bob Dole.

 

In either case I think that you could perhaps counr the number of conservatives who voted for that assclown nationwide on one hand. Please reconsider your silly post.

[John Adams]

He is the best Republican President since Ronald Reagan. 

165869[/snapback]

 

He's better than all the Republican presidents since Reagan?

 

You really do think highly of the guy.

[jimshiz]

He's better than all the Republican presidents since Reagan?

 

You really do think highly of the guy.

166882[/snapback]

 

Sorry - I'll re-phrase - he is one of the best Republican Presidents along with Ronald Reagan. He was certainly better than his father - George H. W. Bush (41). He was better than Nixon and all but Carter was probably better than Ford. I don't know much about Ike. But, I think I would have liked him.

 

I may as well list all the Presidents since I've been alive from best to worst:

 

Ronald Reagan

George W. Bush (43)

Richard Nixon

George H.W. Bush (41)

John F. Kennedy

Bill Clinton

Lyndon Johnson

Gerald Ford

Jimmy Carter

 

This could change if I thought about it more, but the top two are certainties for me.

[Guest RabidBillsFanVT]

My order would be:

 

Richard Nixon

Bill Clinton

Ronald Reagan

George W. Bush (43)

John F. Kennedy

George H.W. Bush (41)

Gerald Ford

Lyndon Johnson

Jimmy Carter

 

Nixon would be the best, but he just got caught.

 

Clinton will be high for Dems, not for Repubs, obviously...

 

Lyndon Johnson was abysmal... he needed to get out.

 

Kennedy always overrated, GHWB definitely the worst Republican president other than Ford.

 

THE ONLY REASON why GWB is high is because all the Presidents below him REALLY suck worse.

[Thurman's Helmet]

When I think about it, I know quite a few republicans that would have voted for the democrat candidate, if they thought he was a viable candidate- they were not really pro-Bush.

 

Last time the Democrats got a guy in office, it was a man from a red state, who garnered a conservative base.

 

That being said, I think what the election was is the conservatives overcoming the vocal minority, which is the liberals.

 

Anyone agree or disagree- I expect some very interesting opinions.

165830[/snapback]

 

 

Perhaps Kerry would have won if only you had received your absentee ballot in time.

[DC Tom]

My order would be:

 

Richard Nixon

Bill Clinton

Ronald Reagan

George W. Bush (43)

John F. Kennedy

George H.W. Bush (41)

Gerald Ford

Lyndon Johnson

Jimmy Carter

 

Nixon would be the best, but he just got caught.

 

Clinton will be high for Dems, not for Repubs, obviously...

 

Lyndon Johnson was abysmal... he needed to get out.

 

Kennedy always overrated, GHWB definitely the worst Republican president other than Ford.

 

THE ONLY REASON why GWB is high is because all the Presidents below him REALLY suck worse.

167287[/snapback]

 

What's your reasoning on ranking George Sr. below George Jr.? My personal feeling is that Jr's far worse than daddy.

 

(Of course...I predominantly look at foreign policy, which means I'd rank George Sr. high, and George Jr. near the bottom, just above Clinton but just below a can of Spam...)

[jimshiz]

What's your reasoning on ranking George Sr. below George Jr.?  My personal feeling is that Jr's far worse than daddy. 

 

(Of course...I predominantly look at foreign policy, which means I'd rank George Sr. high, and George Jr. near the bottom, just above Clinton but just below a can of Spam...)

168076[/snapback]

 

I ranked GWB Jr. above GHWB Sr. as well...

 

And regardless of what some people say, going to war against Iraq was/is the right thing to do. Going to war against Syria and Yemen would also be understandable. But, I'm just a neocon...

[Adam]

Perhaps Kerry would have won if only you had received your absentee ballot in time.

168031[/snapback]

 

Well, you obviously lead everyone but me in sarcasm. No, Kerry would not have won. Does that mean that it doesn't matter if someone is allowed to vote or not?

 

Thats as ridiculous as the democrats blaming Nader for costing them elections.

 

Provisions were made to allow astronauts to vote from space- my vote is as important as any of their, or the troops. No one vote is more important than any other.

[Adam]

Umm, exactly what part of the conservative base did clinton get????? The reason Bush 41 lost was a little elf by the name of ross perot. Then he defeated the cardboard figure that we all know and love by the name of Bob Dole.

 

In either case I think that you could perhaps counr the number of conservatives who voted for that assclown nationwide on one hand. Please reconsider your silly post.

166734[/snapback]

 

I may be mistaken, but didnt he run his election to appeal to a conservative base? I figure that would be the only way for a democrat to get back in office.

[DC Tom]

I ranked GWB Jr. above GHWB Sr. as well...

 

168109[/snapback]

 

Fine...but why?

[RuntheDamnBall]

I ranked GWB Jr. above GHWB Sr. as well...

 

And regardless of what some people say, going to war against Iraq was/is the right thing to do.  Going to war against Syria and Yemen would also be understandable.  But, I'm just a neocon...

168109[/snapback]

Alright, go fight those wars then.

 

Not that we're overextended and facing a morale disaster as it is.

[RkFast]

How the hell were we able to fight a World War on TWO fronts against elite militaries , but now we are "overextended" fighting a bunch of terrorists with hand-made weapons?

[/dev/null]

of the presidents during my lifetime

 

1. Reagan

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

2 Clinton

3 GW Bush

4 Bush

5 Carter

[JimBob2232]

I voted for Bush. IMO he is wrong on many issues, but I agree with his stance on terrorism, taxes and social security. Because I found myself not agreeing with kerry on any issue, Bush got my vote.

 

Now if we had a good moderate democrat in the mix, I certainally would have considered him. My political Hero is Zell Miller. I know he is a democrat by title only, but I would vote for him over any other political candidate on this planet.

 

I also could have considered Lieberman. Henry Ford Jr is another guy I respect. Living in Virginia I could have even considered Gov. Mark Warner (dont go there those who hate him), and I am sure there are others I am leaving out.

 

My point is, though I am a conservative republican, A good strong pro-america democratic nominee could win my vote. But the Al Gores, John Kerrys and Howard Deans of the world stand no chance with me.

 

Here is to a McCain/JC Watts ticket in 2008.

[Daryl Manonica]

Does that mean that it doesn't matter if someone is allowed to vote or not?

 

 

 

Let's watch the terminology there. Every is "allowed" to vote. Show up at your assigned polling station with ID in hand and there is no problem 99.9999% of the time.

 

If you want/need an absentee ballot, you are accepting that the risk of error goes up. Your problem was administrative, no one was attempting to limit your right to vote.

[jimshiz]

I said:

<<I ranked GWB Jr. above GHWB Sr. as well...>>

Fine...but why?

168608[/snapback]

 

Quick answers:

 

GHWB did that stupid "raise taxes" deal. And I don't think he took serious how some would hold him to do exactly as he said. There are many things that I did like about GHWB though. And I am not one of those who say he should have gone after Saddam Hussein or Baghdad in 1991 because I understood the limitations of the U.N. resolutions and what getting the Iraqis out of Kuwait left for us to do - not much.

 

For GWB, I like the "cowboy attitude" that so many others knock. I loved the "Bring 'em on" statement that most people used as a big negative against GWB. I don't even think he came close to lying about WMDs as others do. My impression is that he does exactly what he says he's going to do. Now, of course there are times when that does not exactly happen. And I know spending is "out of control". There is waste on the social spending as well as the intelligence & military spending. I essentially agree with him on taxes, war on terror, religious issues, and abortion. I did not vote against Kerry to only be stuck with my vote for GWB; but voting against Kerry was a plus to me.

 

So, it is just my impression that I like GWB "better" than GHWB.

[DC Tom]

How the hell were we able to fight a World War on TWO fronts against elite militaries , but now we are "overextended" fighting a bunch of terrorists with hand-made weapons?

168807[/snapback]

 

Give me a break. In WWII we had 15 million men in arms, with virtually everyone else working in their support (how many Fords or Chryslers were made between '41 and '45? How many airliners were purchased by civil avation companies like Pan Am? How many new radio sets were built? How much shipping was contracted for construction or use outside of military maritime programs?)

 

When you can't go out and buy a brand new Ford Focus or fly in a 767 any younger than three years old, then comparing the level of national economic commitment to the military might - might - be valid enough to compare how "overstretched" we are now to what we were then.

[DC Tom]

Quick answers:

 

GHWB did that stupid "raise taxes" deal.  And I don't think he took serious how some would hold him to do exactly as he said.  There are many things that I did like about GHWB though.  And I am not one of those who say he should have gone after Saddam Hussein or Baghdad in 1991 because I understood the limitations of the U.N. resolutions and what getting the Iraqis out of Kuwait left for us to do - not much.

 

For GWB, I like the "cowboy attitude" that so many others knock.  I loved the "Bring 'em on" statement that most people used as a big negative against GWB.  I don't even think he came close to lying about WMDs as others do.  My impression is that he does exactly what he says he's going to do.  Now, of course there are times when that does not exactly happen.  And I know spending is "out of control".  There is waste on the social spending as well as the intelligence & military spending.  I essentially agree with him on taxes, war on terror, religious issues, and abortion.  I did not vote against Kerry to only be stuck with my vote for GWB; but voting against Kerry was a plus to me.

 

So, it is just my impression that I like GWB "better" than GHWB.

169407[/snapback]

 

Fair 'nough. I disagree...but I wasn't looking to argue with you, just wanted to know your reasons.

[Alaska Darin]

Give me a break.  In WWII we had 15 million men in arms, with virtually everyone else working in their support (how many Fords or Chryslers were made between '41 and '45?  How many airliners were purchased by civil avation companies like Pan Am?  How many new radio sets were built?  How much shipping was contracted for construction or use outside of military maritime programs?)

 

When you can't go out and buy a brand new Ford Focus or fly in a 767 any younger than three years old, then comparing the level of national economic commitment to the military might - might - be valid enough to compare how "overstretched" we are now to what we were then.

169710[/snapback]

Hotpockets!

 

Flightsuit!

[Bill from NYC]

When I think about it, I know quite a few republicans that would have voted for the democrat candidate, if they thought he was a viable candidate- they were not really pro-Bush.

 

Last time the Democrats got a guy in office, it was a man from a red state, who garnered a conservative base.

 

That being said, I think what the election was is the conservatives overcoming the vocal minority, which is the liberals.

 

Anyone agree or disagree- I expect some very interesting opinions.

165830[/snapback]

 

I am not sure exactly what you mean, but I will offer my $.02.

 

The dems are in a sad state of affairs. Look at the 9 idiots they lined up in the primary, and then find me one attractive candidate in the bunch. Around the country, they lost congressional seats, senate seats and governorships. Do you think this was an accident.

In the dem party, for every Mickey, who is sane, pragamatic and wants to make sense, there is a budsload of rule making, life controlling nut jobs that care more about whales, seals, smoking in bars and not eating meat than they do about issues that matter.

The dems have a base of African-American voters, this I admit. Thier Hispanic base is sketchy, and the traditional Jewish base seems to be at long last shrinking.

Almost all union bosses vote for dems, who take their votes for granted and give them NAFTA in return. Oh, did I fail to mention the Hollywood elitists such as wife beating Sean Penn, and Chelsea Clinton's pal Madonna?

 

I am thinking African-Americans cast almost the same number of votes for Kerry as did Whites. Where are the AA senators and congressman? Answer: Few exist, because white liberals want to lead them by the nose and again, take their support for granted. Republicans, according to Dick Morris, devote little resources to getting AA votes because of the near certain futility. This is a state of affairs that concerns me.

 

The dems will continue to flounder as long as their party is viewed by voters, or is in fact energized and controlled by the nut jobs who were demonstrating at the convention and draining us of our police resources, this in a time of terrorist threat.

Also, dems lose the presidency when they tell the truth. I point to Mondale, Dukakis and McGovern as examples. In this election, they put forth another tactic....a candidate who stood for absolutely nothing.

Ques: Senator Kerry, are you for or against gay marriage?

Ans: Yes.

It wasn't going to fly.

[UConn James]

Almost all union bosses vote for dems, who take their votes for granted and give them NAFTA in return.

170834[/snapback]

 

The only point I want to make among the detritus.... Repubs spoon out a lie and people too lazy to pay attention or research things gobble it up.

 

It's amazing how many times I need to point this out.

 

This was one of the issues where Clinton broke from the Dems; yeah, some voted for it to go along w/ the Pres, or for their own reasons. Many didn't. NAFTA was essentially the reason Perot ran, to give conservatives who didn't want to sell out their country another choice.

 

Washington Watch Archives

 

This strategy of picking a course first and then finding allies is the pattern emerging from the Clinton White House's first year's legislative agenda.  Unwilling to simply follow the course of least resistance within the Democratic party, the President begins by defining an issue and taking support where he finds it -- even if that means that the majority of his support comes from Republicans (as was the case with NAFTA)

[Adam]

Let's watch the terminology there.  Every is "allowed" to vote.  Show up at your assigned polling station with ID in hand and there is no problem 99.9999% of the time.

 

If you want/need an absentee ballot, you are accepting that the risk of error goes up.  Your problem was administrative, no one was attempting to limit your right to vote.

169400[/snapback]

 

Well, I just dont have the $$$$ to get back down there at this point in time. I'm stuck where I am.

 

As far as the being allowed to vote goes- someone working for the board of elections told me that my ballot, and many others were not sent out, although they were recorded as being sent out.

 

No matter who won, that is wrong if it is true.