Bush/Cheney '08?

[190 Octane]

EDIT: Next post, sorry.

[190 Octane]

You are joking right?

Karl Marks was more moderate than Kerry.

If the majority of the population was either Democratic or Republican than we wouldn't have had both a Democrat and a Republican elected to two terms for the last two administrations. The Presidency is the most down the middle election there is.

The Republicans aren't near as popular as you think and if the Democrats had put up a strong foreign policy candidate instead of someone that wanted to kiss Europe's ass they'd have won this last election.

I agree with this latter point. Had someone like a Wes Clark won the Democratic nomination, I think it's very likely we'd have a different president right now.

The former point, however...that's just asinine.

[SWC Bonfire]

Karl Marx did not live under a socialist government, either.

[CosmicCowboy]

Rudy Gulliani will beat anyone he runs against and if the Republicans are smart they'll give him the nomination because he'll be able to pull in the most voters. Most voters are not strictly Democrats or Republicans...they are right down the middle. America doesn't want a strictly conservative or liberal candidate...they want balance. The party that is best able to offer up that sort of candidate will win the next presidency.

Bush won this election because he was more moderate than Comarade Kerry...as crazy as it sounds. He was the more moderate candidate and he was a hardass on foreign policy which is what most Americans want right now in this environment.

I like Guilianni quite a bit, and I think of most of America does, and I hope he has the balls to run. I hope the right realizes that he's their best shot at winning a 3 term of controlling the country.

I am not going to vote for another Bush again unless the opposing Democrat is another anti-American...it's too much like a monarchy. The Bush crede is too backwards thinking when it comes to environmental and scientiffic concerns. They are great with money and kicking the out of people...but we have to keep up the American ideal of technological advancement...and Bush is backwards on that issue. I was willing to ignore that given our current world environment...but I am not going to do it again. IOW...their stance on stem cell research is too ing stupid to keep ignoring as Europe and Asia pass us in technological and scientiffic achievement.

We have protected term limits for our leader and they have served this country well. Another term for a Bush is the same as cir venting that rule and it is too long for one POV to be in power of this country...the world environment changes and there is no philosophy that is always the correct one.

So I either hope Gulianni does get the nomination...or else I hope the Democrats are able to put up a decent candidate and not another anti-American...I still like Wesley Clark...he Guilianni are basically different sides of the same coin. McCain is a good choice too but I think Gulianni is a more powerful leader....aint no one going to with us with Guilianni in the White House...or Clark either.

Agreed...I don't think the Dems could field anyone including Hillary Clintom that could take a Guillianni/Rice ticket...

[whottt]

You mean Karl Marx?

Yeah...sorry, didn't mean to confuse you.




Is this going to hurt my grade?

[gtownspur]

sorry whott. But Carville, begala, morris and Clinton have all said that you cant win on a populist platform ala Michael Dukakis. Populism is just a tamer term for socialism.

[190 Octane]

"including Hillary Clinton..." I don't think Hillary Clinton could muster even 10% of the popular vote. I think her candidacy is more of wishful thinking on the part of Republicans.

Don't underestimate the extremes of Socialism by putting it in the same light as populism. To say populism is the same thing is a gross distortion. Socialism basically tries to put everyone on an even keel and works to keep any one person or en y from striving beyond that. Populism still allows for the successful to get rich, it just extends a helping hand to the poor - capitalism with a heart.

[Dre_7]

he lost the popular vote, dude, and i never offered an official 'proof'

So you are saying he stole the election, yet you have "never offered an official proof."

Ok

[Cant_Be_Faded]

So you are saying he stole the election, yet you have "never offered an official proof."

Ok

well u made it sound like this is some radical idea i came up with while i was stoned

many people believe this not just me

[cecil collins]

There will never be a "proof" accepted by the major networks, so you will probably never believe it. There are too many claims made on forums for all of them to have proof. Did you check the link the other guy provided. The state of Florida paid $4 million, without accepting bids to get a cheaper price, to DBT(Data Base Technologies) and they terribly(and conveniently for republicans)botched the voter rolls. They were essentially paid millions to do a terrible job, yet they were never investigated. They didn't even fulfill their contracts obligations. If you want "proof," go to gregpalast.com and you can watch a 13 minute video by clicking on Florida 2000.

[Nbadan]

Bush isn't a moderate. He's just more moderate than Kerry. Karl Marks was more moderate than Kerry.

By 'moderate' Whott means that W is closer to his conservative viewpoint than Kerry. Hey Whott, try reading Das Capital and then get back to us on Karl Marx.

[Nbadan]

I don't like the Idea of having Guiliani run for the house in 08' I just don't see it as plausable, and I think that America needs a straight line republican who can lead the country in the right direction, face it its gonna be another nail biter for the Reps if they have a moderate republican run again.

Giuliani is pro-choice and was mixed up in a nasty adultery induced divorce a few years back. He would never win the nomination. The Republicans are tied at the hip to their cons uency of pro-life moral minority. As much as they would like to run a moderate, they can't, or they'll lose.

[Nbadan]

A little on-line therapy for Liberals, Progressives and Moderates

[cecil collins]

That kicks ass. I like to sling him around and smash him through tight spaces. I do wonder, who do you think that Republicans would vote for if the nomination went to a moderate? I hope to that it would open the door for more parties, but that seems unlikely.

[AFE7FATMAN]

Open Mind
Sooooooooooooo much sheet on the horizan.
I would really like a choice for a change, instead the lesser of two evils.
All of the above carry a lot of baggage with them

[Ocotillo]

Every presidential election since 1980 has had a Bush or Clinton on the ticket. Hillary and Jeb notwithstanding, I hope both parties can bring some new blood to the table in '08.

[Ocotillo]

Aren't other people running besides the provided list? Hagel, Huckabee, whatshisname cracker from Mississippi? Oh yeah, Barbour.

Yeah, those people were in the article I read as well. I simply forgot them. Other than Hagel they will have to overcome the name recognition hurdle.

Regarding Rice. Do you see a sitting Secretary of State campaigning? Does that mean she will resign? I don't think she runs.

[jochhejaam]

"(name one other presidential election in the history of our Country where the winner actually lost the popular vote)", the determining state's electoral votes were turned in su iously late, they waited even longer to count more votes than ever allowed in history of the country, and the governor of this state was the eventual winner's brother

In the '92 election (you were probably being potty trained) Clinton garnered 45% of the popular vote.
That means an overwhelming majority (55%) of the American voters did not want him to lead the country.

(Ross Perot received 14% of the vote that year and he was regarded as a conservative. Who knows what the outcome would have been had he not entered the race).

[JoeChalupa]

Rudy is not "conservative" worthy in my opinion.
He had an affair, is pro-choice and has common sense so noway he gets the nomination.

I think a Clinton/Rice ticket is the key.

[jochhejaam]

Bill Frist, Condaleezza Rice, Colin Powell (unlikely), Laura Bush.

Bush/Rice?

[Dre_7]

well u made it sound like this is some radical idea i came up with while i was stoned

many people believe this not just me

Many people believe the moon landing was fake, too.

[Big Pimp_21]

Zell Miller/Kinky Freidman in '08

[Cant_Be_Faded]

In the '92 election (you were probably being potty trained) Clinton garnered 45% of the popular vote.
That means an overwhelming majority (55%) of the American voters did not want him to lead the country.

(Ross Perot received 14% of the vote that year and he was regarded as a conservative. Who knows what the outcome would have been had he not entered the race).

touche jochh, and no i was in 3rd grade

But you still didnt name an election that made all other qualifications

furthermore, i should have clarified, i change the first line to "name one other election where the winner had less total votes than the loser"

because of perot, clinton still had more total votes than bush

[Cant_Be_Faded]

Many people believe the moon landing was fake, too.

its ok because im not basing my 'bold statement' that hte election was stolen on any previous foundation of info

Its not about me loving Bush, being liberal, or anti-american

Its about the simple fact, that I see more of my fellow americans did NOT want bush in 2000.

Simple

Fact.

This is the heart of the statement i made. I feel the election was stolen because *see simple fact*

I feel its VERY ing coincidental, that Florida's votes were not tallied for the first time until wayyyyyyy after they expected (people forget this, and no i dont have an 'official proof' to satisify you, only my memory)

I feel its VERY ing coincidental, that Bush's brother was Governor of this state
I feel its VERY ing coincidental, that the votes missing or having a hard time finding their way to be counted, all came from southern florida, the areas with poorer families (who would be more inclined to vote liberal)
(again i have no exact proof for you, but I do remember this, they showed areas of cities and whether they were dominantly wealthy or poor)


Now you can start bashing me all you want, be as skeptical as you want

I am not liberal, nor am I conservative, i take every situation and analyze it according to what I think about it, not any basis of how i should think about it (in other words i am not a chickenhawk)

I see that more of my fellow americans DID NOT WANT BUSH TO BE IN OFFICE

I see a healthy list of coincidents

I read up on Bush's family history, and their dealings, how they work, are they underhanded? Or do they have a long history of being straightshooting honest business men?

I think, gee, how convenient. This election was ing stolen.

Again, this isn't my "official 100% republican approved proof"

its just how i see it

(btw another big coincidence was how someone earlier stated, that the private company was never investigated. never!)

[Cant_Be_Faded]

There will never be a "proof" accepted by the major networks, so you will probably never believe it. There are too many claims made on forums for all of them to have proof. Did you check the link the other guy provided. The state of Florida paid $4 million, without accepting bids to get a cheaper price, to DBT(Data Base Technologies) and they terribly(and conveniently for republicans)botched the voter rolls. They were essentially paid millions to do a terrible job, yet they were never investigated. They didn't even fulfill their contracts obligations. If you want "proof," go to gregpalast.com and you can watch a 13 minute video by clicking on Florida 2000.

Wow, what a convenient coincidence!