2
   

It's kerry and Edwards

 
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Jul, 2004 06:48 pm
Well thank you darlin. I take from that that you consider me above "cheap and easy"... And I'm not going to let the fact that I'm not diminish the compliment in any way. Cool

Honestly though, I think Gephardt is an anchor and Vilsack is a... who the hell is Vilsack? (the question is the answer... or is the answer the question?) Confused

If Edwards wasn't viable, I think he'd a been a damn fool not to call the General. But what do I know?
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Jul, 2004 06:56 pm
The General would've been interesting, to be sure.

I'm SO glad he didn't go with Vilsack, for that reason. ("Who??") And Gephardt -- blech. Boring and Boringer.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Jul, 2004 07:14 pm
I just had a thought so terrifying that if McG gets wind of it, he's liable to not sleep through Bush's entire second term... In 2008 Bush is done, his brother makes him look like an honest to goodness genius, Cheney couldn't get elected President of a Condo and both Hillary and the General will have suffered no defeats in campaigns for the white house. THAT is scary.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Jul, 2004 08:01 pm
OCCOM BILL wrote:
I just had a thought so terrifying that if McG gets wind of it, he's liable to not sleep through Bush's entire second term... In 2008 Bush is done, his brother makes him look like an honest to goodness genius, Cheney couldn't get elected President of a Condo and both Hillary and the General will have suffered no defeats in campaigns for the white house. THAT is scary.


Bill, I have already scoped out Toronto and Cornwall. Computers everywhere need fixed...
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Jul, 2004 08:08 pm
All kidding aside: I will live in Costa Rica before there is another President Clinton.
0 Replies
 
joe harris
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Jul, 2004 08:30 pm
Joe Harris: I still believe that the democratic tickrt should be turned around.Edwards for President, Kerry for Vice President. To me Kerry is a dead head , no push at all.
0 Replies
 
blueveinedthrobber
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Jul, 2004 08:54 pm
Canada and Costa Rica...welcome your two new favorite (?) sons
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Jul, 2004 08:55 pm
How many computers do you guys have?

Go find Squinney! She's home!
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Jul, 2004 09:02 pm
Casino still says 8 to 5 BPB- and they're just getting the monster trial started. I also just read a piece about Iraqis being ticked off and going after their enemy, Zarqawi. Good Luck.
0 Replies
 
blueveinedthrobber
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Jul, 2004 09:21 pm
sozobe wrote:
How many computers do you guys have?

Go find Squinney! She's home!


she's in the shower..annointing herself with precious oils......g'night... :wink:
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Jul, 2004 09:22 pm
OCCOM BILL wrote:
I'll be happy to post some thoughts on what I think would be an improvement, but perhaps we should start another thread... I'll even post some strong opinions this time! :wink:

By all means, start a new thread. Just do it in the Legal or Philosophy forums -- too many weirdos hang out in the Politics Forum.
0 Replies
 
blueveinedthrobber
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Jul, 2004 09:22 pm
ps sozobe.....4...
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Jul, 2004 09:26 pm
4! Wow. Can I have one?

G'night!
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Jul, 2004 08:02 am
http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/040706/lester.gif
0 Replies
 
Brand X
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Jul, 2004 08:16 am
HAHAHAHA! That about sums up the Edwards choice.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Jul, 2004 08:23 am
Fake?
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Jul, 2004 08:34 am
Edwards was an extremely poor choice for VP. Has anyone read the WSJ today? Seems the Journal isn't a fan of Edwards, either.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Jul, 2004 08:50 am
Miller wrote:
Edwards was an extremely poor choice for VP. Has anyone read the WSJ today? Seems the Journal isn't a fan of Edwards, either.

And you were expecting the Wall Street Journal to act otherwise?
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Jul, 2004 09:00 am
Soz and OB
Soz and OB, you two have got it all wrong and so does most of the Media. As I understand it, Florida's senator Graham actually was Kerry's first choice. But Graham has never run a national campaign, only in Florida where he is very popular. While Kerry would like to lock up Florida with Graham, he needed a VP candidate who has a national reputation. Edwards has it, Graham doesn't. Vilsack had the same problem and would not add enough strength to the ticket.

Clark, whom I voted for in the primaries, is respected and experienced in foreign policy, but he was such an inexperienced campaigner that he did not run an effective campaign.

Gephart, even with a national reputation, as VP candidate represents the past; Edwards represents the future. So Gephart didn't make the cut.

An interesting dilemma is developing. In order to allow Kerry to continue to pontificate and Edwards to continue his positive cheerful campaign style, the democrats will have to use surrogate attack dogs to shred the record and performance of the Republications.

Not only must the Democrats win the presidency, they must also win the house and the senate, or at least one, if they want to make changes the public seems to want. And remember, Bush will have left the US Treasury nearly bankrupt and in debt for decades for the Democrats to deal with. There won't be much money to pay for anything the Democrats want. Even rescinding Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy won't fix the problem, it is so massive. And it will take years to rectify the Bush administration's damage to the creation and retention of jobs and access to health care for everyone, even if the economy improves. The problem is that the only economy that is improving is that favoring the investment class corporation economy, not the working class people's economy.

An interesting factual aside, historic statistics demonstrate that since World War II, the stock market and economy performs better during Democrat administrations rather than Republican. Most people don't know this because they believe the Republican rhetoric that they manage the country better. That myth is a crock! Wealth spread over larger a percentage of the population produces a healthier economic than if the wealth is in the hands of the elite few.

The war in Iraq situation will not improve until Bush is out of office. Other world leaders will not provide troop or financial assistance to Bush because they don't respect or trust him. Once Kerry is in the Oval Office, you will see a change in that attitude, which will help to resolve many of the issues in Iraq. Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld et al are an inpediment, not a solution to resolving the Iraq issues.

This is an important election with issues that should rise above partisan politics for the good of the nation---even the world.

BBB
0 Replies
 
blueveinedthrobber
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Jul, 2004 09:04 am
Miller wrote:
Edwards was an extremely poor choice for VP. Has anyone read the WSJ today? Seems the Journal isn't a fan of Edwards, either.


I should think they don't like Edwards. Edwards will represent a section of the American public that goes to work everyday, not that reads the WSJ in an office. Believe it or not, the REAL majority of the country doesn't read the WSJ.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 06/18/2021 at 05:53:20