| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Nowhere Man
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
|
 Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 3:51 pm Post subject: Anyone but Bush? |
 |
|
Would you vote for a third Bush-term over any of the current candidates?
In other words, would anyone be better than Bush?
**Disclaimer: I think that's a fair enough statement. I don't think anyone with a mind more advanced than a tree squirrel would take it to mean that we should elect Charles Manson or, literally, anybody. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 4:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| would anyone be better than Bush |
Well, if my only alternatives were VeeP Cheyney and Donnie Rumsfeld, I'd go with Bush again on the premise of the devil you know... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pluto
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 4:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Enough with the Ron Paul and George Bush hypotheticals. Hillary Clinton's chances are getting better every day. She will most likely be the next President of the United States.
As far as another high spending, free wheeling republican going into the oWhite House, Giulliani seems to like his chances. I vote Republican about 95% of the time and I don't even want to see that- a Giulliani presidency. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Czarjorge
Joined: 01 May 2007
Location: I now have the same moustache, and it is glorious.
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 5:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| What a ridiculous question. If Bush could run again everyone would just vote for Bill again. Clinton would win any election he ran in. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ontheway
Joined: 24 Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere under the rainbow...
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2007 6:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Pluto wrote: |
Enough with the Ron Paul and George Bush hypotheticals. Hillary Clinton's chances are getting better every day. She will most likely be the next President of the United States.
As far as another high spending, free wheeling republican going into the oWhite House, Giulliani seems to like his chances. I vote Republican about 95% of the time and I don't even want to see that- a Giulliani presidency. |
Absolutely correct about Hillary's odds: Hillary Clinton is far ahead of everyone in terms of the odds favoring a Clinton victory.
For the Republicans, their best hope would be to quickly amend the Constitution and nominate Arnold Schwarztenegger. The institutional hurdles make that a near impossibility to carry out, but Arnold could pull off a victory.
The only other hope for the Republicans would be to nominate Ron Paul. He could defeat Hillary because he is honest, an outsider, he has clean hands in the Iraq fiasco, he appeals to all ages, he inspires hope ...
And, a recent poll matching up Ron Paul and Hillary showed him leading Hillary among 40 year olds and even among 30 year olds. This is highly significant in that the majority of Americans still has not heard of Ron Paul. Everyone already knows Hillary. Ron Paul truly inspires people in the same way as Ronald Reagan and John and Bobby Kennedy
Ron Paul is still a long shot for the nomination. Giuliani is still out in front of the pack. In terms of odds, Fred Thompson, Ron Paul and Huckabee follow. In looking at money, only Giulinani, Thompson, Paul and Romney have any real funds available for the primaries (and Romney now has to rely only on his own money).
McCain is already finished - dead man walking; Mitt Romney's funding, other than his own money, is drying up - his campaign actually has a net deficit already, in terms of spendable primary funds (along with McCain).
Problem for Giulinani: he is so mean, so unlikeable, despised by so many now, and his negatives continue to mount across the spectrum. He's no longer seen as the hero of 9/11, but as a churlish, ghoolish stooge campaigning on the bodies of those innocent victims and in complete disregard of the feelings of their families.
As for Bush, any Dave's poster could defeat him at this point. Even Bush's mother would choose a Joo/Big Bird ticket over Bush/Cheney in 2008. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2007 1:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
1. For the Republicans, their best hope would be to quickly amend the Constitution and nominate Arnold Schwarztenegger. The institutional hurdles make that a near impossibility to carry out, but Arnold could pull off a victory.
2. The only other hope for the Republicans would be to nominate Ron Paul. |
1. Ummm...You don't know much about the Constitution, do you? Congress has to pass an amendment before it's submitted to the States, and Congress is in the hands of the Democrats. Your 'best hope' is even more of a pipe dream than your second hope.
2. I also hope RP gets nominated, but for different reasons than yours. It would spell the end of the GOP as an organized entity. We'd return to the Era of Good Feeling (Monroe's administration) when there was only one party following the suicide of the Federalist Party.
When Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act in the mid-60's he knew he was handing the presidency over to the conservatives for the next generation. That was 40 years ago and that generation has come and is about to go...into the dustbin of history. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
write of weigh
Joined: 08 Sep 2007
Location: Mars
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2007 4:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
voted for bush first term
supported in the second term
no way in hell i wanna c a third term |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 28, 2007 1:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| write of weigh wrote: |
voted for bush first term
supported in the second term
no way in hell i wanna c a third term |
http://www.redicecreations.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1427
House Passes Thought Crime Prevention Bill
October 28th, 2007 � No Comments
The U.S. House of Representatives recently passed HR 1955 titled the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007. This bill is one of the most blatant attacks against the Constitution yet and actually defines thought crimes as homegrown terrorism
http://aftermathnews.wordpress.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
twg
Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Location: Getting some fresh air...
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 28, 2007 2:51 am Post subject: Re: Anyone but Bush? |
|
|
| Nowhere Man wrote: |
| In other words, would anyone be better than Bush? |
It depends if you're the CEO of Blackwater or not. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pligganease
Joined: 14 Sep 2004
Location: The deep south...
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 28, 2007 2:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| 2. I also hope RP gets nominated, but for different reasons than yours. It would spell the end of the GOP as an organized entity. We'd return to the Era of Good Feeling (Monroe's administration) when there was only one party following the suicide of the Federalist Party. |
I only hope Paul wins the Republican nomination because if he doesn't, he'll decide to run as an Independent. It will only mean Giuliani will be the next President. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 28, 2007 4:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
if he doesn't, he'll decide to run as an Independent. It will only mean Giuliani will be the next President.
|
The LRF (Loon Ratio Factor) is higher in the GOP than the Democratic Party. I'd say if RP ran, he'd split a small number of votes off of the Republican vote, not the Democratic vote total, much as Ross Perot did in '92, thus opening the door for my boy Bill. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ontheway
Joined: 24 Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere under the rainbow...
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 28, 2007 4:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Quote: |
1. For the Republicans, their best hope would be to quickly amend the Constitution and nominate Arnold Schwarztenegger. The institutional hurdles make that a near impossibility to carry out, but Arnold could pull off a victory.
2. The only other hope for the Republicans would be to nominate Ron Paul. |
1. Ummm...You don't know much about the Constitution, do you? Congress has to pass an amendment before it's submitted to the States, and Congress is in the hands of the Democrats. Your 'best hope' is even more of a pipe dream than your second hope. |
Read what I wrote again. It says:
"The institutional hurdles make that a near impossibility to carry out ... "
Now, if YOU could read and understood the constitution you would understand that what I meant is that the process involves an amendment being submitted by Congress to the states, which is very unlikely ...
or
The states petitioning congress to amend the Constitution, another method that is allowed, but even more difficult to arrange, especially in a short amount of time.
Both of these were covered under "institutional hurdles" which I assumed would be obvious to intelligent, educated individuals.
My mistake was that little problem with assuming. Ah, one of my favorite quotes: "Never assume. For when you assume ... " |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 28, 2007 4:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| My mistake was that little problem with assuming |
Yes, it was. You assumed you wouldn't look stupid when you said the minority party in Congress faced
| Quote: |
| The institutional hurdles make that a near impossibility to carry out, |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ontheway
Joined: 24 Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere under the rainbow...
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 28, 2007 5:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
It's a "near impossibility" because most of the Kleptocrats' votes are available to the highest bidder. For a the right sum, most of the D party will sell their votes and they could justify it under the guise of "fairness" and equal treatment for immigrants. Who would know that they don't really believe it. Actually, most of them have no real personal beliefs beyond avarice and ambition.
But, yes, it is a "near impossibility" and it's not the majority of Democrats that makes it a near impossibility. It's the fact that many ambitious Republicans (Guiliani and McCain, for example) would oppose such a change as it would dash their long-shot hopes for becomming President.
The personal lust for power of certain Rs, and the lack of time, makes it nearly impossible. The personal greed of the Ds improves the odds, but not enough for the Rs who might attempt such a change. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
