SecondEdition wrote:Minotaur029 wrote:
Giuliani is a social liberal. This does NOT play well with the Republican base. This "the Democrats will cause another 9/11" talk has been done before...Bush, Cheney. Americans have largely wised up to such bullshit. Remember what Germ War was saying about the short American attention span? 9/11 was practically 6 years ago now...that's like 100 years in America.
Mino - your point about Giulani being a social liberal is correct. Which is a reason why I wouldn't be totally gutted if he won. I'd still be gutted, but I'd at least feel like someone with a brain was being elected instead of a religious protofascist with a lower functioning IQ than that of a rotten avocado.
Giuliani is to be feared like Bush should be feared. Romney too. Romney favors the EXPANSION of Guantanamo. Giuliani is still playing the "Democrats will cause 9/11...AGAIN!! The Muslims WANT TO KILL YOUR BABIES" card. They are more of the same fear-mongering despots. Luckily, McCain appears to be fucked...but it's possible that he could come back (sincerely doubt it...but he's the establishment candidate...the "machine" candidate).
Maiolo wrote:Yeah, it sure would suck to relive the greatest economic expansion in our history, low unemployment, an expanding middle class, government programs that work, good feelings, a surplus, rather than the largest deficit we've ever seen, accrued in the shortest period of time, and the biggest national scandal being the President having been fellated by a chubby, strange woman.
I don't know how I could get out of bed in the morning if we got another Bill Clinton.
Hillary Clinton is NOT Bill Clinton. Another Clinton would be a bad thing for this country. Power is too fucking consolidated. They have too much experience as politicians and leaders of the "free world"...ducking questions..."knowing" all the answers...H-dawg will just end up sharing many Bush-like traits. She would certainly be preferable to Bush...but I have extreme misgivings about what would almost certainly become a 28 year Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton dynasty (lets not forget that Jeb and George P. are waiting in the wings, either). We need a leader with a little more openness. I guess that Al Gore has experience in the White House, but I think he would be different (I think the guy has some convictions). Edwards and Obama also would represent change. We need a leader with a little less "experience" despite the fact that it's gonna take a real fucking
leader to get us off the "end of empire" track that Bush has set us on.
Tommy, sorry...but you really don't understand American politics. In a sick, twisted way...Bush's two elections make sense (even if the second election was legitimate). If the evangelicals can get behind somebody...watch out. Karl Rove predicted
perfectly the amount of votes that were missing in 2000 after the Gore camp leaked Bush's DUI two days before the election. Gore won by: 550,000 popular votes in 2000. Evangelicals that Rove said were missing in 2000?: 4 million. In 2004...Bush won by: 3.5 million votes. Get the picture?
Mormons are laughed at (Romney). Gays are
hated (Giuliani). Thompson is a lightweight, McCain somehow got fucked (serves him right for being such a little bitch in the guise of NOT being a bitch for so many years). The evangelicals have no one to
truly rally around. No one is there that really "believes" in his faith like Bush. Sick stuff, eh?