John. Kerry. Not. Running. In. 2008. Stop.

[JollyRoger]

Lets face it...the economy is booming. Unemployment is way down and things are going very well for the economy.

Most of the Conservatives I talk to regarding immigration and affirmative action say that the ecomony is in poor shape because of those policies and it is difficult for white men to find jobs because either the illegals are taking them or affirmative action is sucking up the few jobs available. Are they lying? Or are you?

 

[nc-1701]

I gree he isn't the worst, but he is still bottom tier.

Gore, Hillary, Obama, etc. Could all completely obliterate him in an election right now. He might be able to beat Dan Qayle though

 

[Commie #4522]

I don't think you're underestimating Bush, but I do think you're giving Gore too much credit . . .

Are you sure he's not just misunderestimating him?

 

[brennan]

How is losing the electoral college a technicality? The electoral college is the Constitutionally-approved means for choosing the winner of our Presidential elections. The overall popular vote means nothing. If it did, candidates would use their time and resources very differently, and would spend more time in states that they know they are going to lose. That Gore won the popular vore in 2000 is completely irrelevant. Bush could have won the popular vote as well if that was what actually mattered.

Long live the USA! The world's greatest Democracy: where you can get less votes than the (1) other guy, and still win, and everyone thinks that's groovy!

 

[MobBoss]

No need to be uncivil now. I clearly understood what you said but was questioning the accuracy of your speculation.

If you clearly understood it, then why repeat what I said back to me several times?

Gore lost the election on a technicality. He received more votes than Bush in 2000 and based on Bush's sharp decline in popularity and loss of public confidence with all but the hard-core faithful like yourself, Gore would win by an even larger margin today. Do you have any facts or links to support your speculation of a Bush victory or is it just your wishful thinking?

Technicality my butt. Its not a technicality, its own our elections are run and have been run for a very long period of time.

By the way, tell me. Although Bush's popularity was lower, did he receive more votes in 2004 than he did in 2000? Why yes he did.

And my speculation is just the same as yours since we are dealing with 'might have beens', thus you thinking Gore would win today is wishful thinking as well. Bush already beat Gore once. That remains in voters minds.....and they typically dont vote for people who lost before.

And by the way, did you happen to see the results of the last election? Hardly a vote of confidence in the way things have been going now is it?

Sure, I saw the results. And here is a factoid for you. Ronald Regan lost more seats his mid-term election of his second term. And his popularity was huge. The dems were barely able to win back both houses, during a period when they should have won in massive numbers. If you look at the power them dems had in the senate in the 70s and 80s, they still have a ways to go to return to that yet.

 

[cubsfan6506]

Bush would win. I have no doubt about it at all.

IMO Bush fixed Florida.

 

[MobBoss]

IMO Bush fixed Florida.

Apparently you ignored all the 'investigations' into it after the fact that cleared up all that conspiracy talk.

Most of the Conservatives I talk to regarding immigration and affirmative action say that the ecomony is in poor shape because of those policies and it is difficult for white men to find jobs because either the illegals are taking them or affirmative action is sucking up the few jobs available. Are they lying? Or are you?

I would say they are lying. The leading economic indicators dont lie and the numbers are what they are.

Btw, illegals dont fill out unemployment, thus they dont impact those numbers. And by and large white men dont compete for the same jobs that illegals do.

 

[JollyRoger]

Sure, I saw the results. And here is a factoid for you. Ronald Regan lost more seats his mid-term election of his second term. And his popularity was huge. The dems were barely able to win back both houses, during a period when they should have won in massive numbers.

Speaking of factoids, when was the last time (before 2006, of course) that a sitting President's party did not knock off a single incumbant from the other party during a mid-term election?

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

This thread

 

[JollyRoger]

Lets face it...the economy is booming. Unemployment is way down and things are going very well for the economy. That alone makes him better than a very large number of presidents who let the economy fail on their watch.

Unemployement was lower under Carter than under Ford or under Reagan during Reagan's first term, so I am sure you don't put Carter down as one of the worst, right?

 

[nc-1701]

Apparently you ignored all the 'investigations' into it after the fact that cleared up all that conspiracy talk.

I have read interesting things about how this was 'fixed' all be it legally. Studies have shown that the person listed first on the ballot gets up to 9% more of the popular vote than does the second canidate. Many states use a randomized system to alance it out. I some states including Florida though the governor gets to choose who comes first so of course Bush was given an advantage by that.

I might point out this was entirely legal so I'm not charging anyone with anything I'm just saying it wasn't as fair as it might have been.

 

[MobBoss]

Speaking of factoids, when was the last time (before 2006, of course) that a sitting President's party did not knock off a single incumbant from the other party during a mid-term election?

I give up. When?

 

[VX250]

Good riddence to old trash.

 

[CIVPhilzilla]

Looks like the burden of losing the 08' election will fall to Hilary or Obama.

 

[.Shane.]

Iraq is officially the albatross around the Bush administration's neck now.

All the partisan slinging aside, its more than an albatross. Like it or not, love him or not, it defines him. There is no separating Bush from Iraq. In 100 years, heck, in 5 years, that's all he'll be known for. Do the math from there in terms of how he'll rank.

Had another that said "Proud NOT to be Union. I earn my pay raises".

Laughable. Ah the naivete of youth. Just wait till you're in the work force for a while and you'll find out just what a lie "merit raises" are.

 

[bhsup]

Shane, I'm 38 years old.

 

[MobBoss]

Unemployement was lower under Carter than under Ford or under Reagan during Reagan's first term, so I am sure you don't put Carter down as one of the worst, right?

If you are calling having an unemployment rate of over 7% a victory, then I just dont know what to say.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Now if we can just get the rest of the politicians to announce they aren't running for office we might start to get somewhere.

Something similar happened here, when the Liberal Party had its leadership race. A lot of the people who would normally have been expected to run took turns holding press conferences to say they would not be seeking the leadership.

 

[Atlas14]

John Kerry was the biggest joke of a presidential candidate. I won't be shedding any tears after hearing he isn't going to run for president.

 

[Atlas14]

Looks like the burden of losing the 08' election will fall to Hilary or Obama.

Hopefully Obama.