Obama and Romney Hit Final Stretch Part 3

  • Thread starter Thread starter qui_est_ce
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
epan said:
She would chew him up and spit him out in a debate. She lacks the charisma of her husband, but her intellect rivals his, and she has the experience and connections to do the job.

Many voters don’t stop to consider that being an effective statesman has a lot to do with connections with people. Mr Clinton excelled in forming new relationships. Mrs Clinton has them in place now. This is why queen Elizabeth is seen as so valuable to British statecraft. She has known, and knows every important leader in the world. She quietly goes about her job of keeping in touch with them to advance British interests, as prime ministers come and go.

This is one reason for keeping an incumbent president in office for a second term, unless there is a reason not to.
Click to expand...
Hillary is retiring after this year, no matter who is elected president. The new SOS will bring a new personality to the office, as all before them have done.
 
estesbob said:
I do He will go down in History as a good, almost great President. The assertion his party is ashamed of him is another sympton of BDS. Bush made it clear whenheleft the Presidency he was done wtith politics -including conventions. I voted for him 4 timesand would do so again if I had the opportunity
Click to expand...
I disagree, obviously. And so do most historians that I know of. He was rated in academic circles as the worst president in modern times, pretty consistently.

I’m sure he would appreciate your support, since his own party practically disavows him.

But let’s not get into the bush presidency again, unless you just feel a need to get a last word in.
 
NEWSDAY Endorses Romney!
Had Barack Obama done the job of president with the same passion and vision he displayed in seeking it, he would likely deserve another term. He did not.
Against this we must weigh Mitt Romney, an imperfect candidate but one who has a special track record too. From his creation of a vast personal fortune to his successful stewardship of the threatened Salt Lake City Olympics to his governing of Massachusetts, Romney’s life is a tale of success after success, many of them achieved in difficult circumstances.
Romney’s potential to put America back to work earns him our endorsement.
Click to expand...
Obama’s failure to accelerate the improvement of the economy is the dominant reason Romney is the right choice, but it’s not the only one. There are also the broken promises. On the campaign trail in 2008, Obama promised to halve the annual budget deficit of the United States. Instead, the shortfall has remained over $1 trillion per year, and the national debt has increased about 45 percent.
. . .
Click to expand...
Nice to see some liberals realise they’ve been had.
 
epan said:
She would chew him up and spit him out in a debate. She lacks the charisma of her husband, but her intellect rivals his, and she has the experience and connections to do the job.

JB has charisma, and his family has the connections. He lacks the experience, and he does not rival her intellect.

It would be an interesting contest.

Many voters don’t stop to consider that being an effective statesman has a lot to do with connections with people. Mr Clinton excelled in forming new relationships. Mrs Clinton has them in place now. This is why queen Elizabeth is seen as so valuable to British statecraft. She has known, and knows every important leader in the world. She quietly goes about her job of keeping in touch with them to advance British interests, as prime ministers come and go.

This is one reason for keeping an incumbent president in office for a second term, unless there is a reason not to.
Click to expand...
I must disagree with your statement that Jeb Bush lacks experience and does not rival Hillary Clinton in intellect. It is Jeb Bush who should have run for President in the first place instead of his far less talented, albeit kind and compassionate, brother. JB has plenty of experience as Governor and is the type of Republican we need more of today. However, I think his time has passed, if he ever wanted to be President. Also, I think the country has had just about enough of both the Bushes and the Clintons, although if Bill were to enter the race right now, he might be elected!
 
meltzerboy said:
Or perhaps by Marco Rubio, a rising star in the Republican Party. But Jeb Bush running against Hillary Clinton would be more fun.
Click to expand...
A Clinton against a Bush. Call it the “Retro Election of 2016”. Or, as Yogi Berra would say, “its deja vu all over again”.
 
stinkcat_14 said:
I think that reasonable people can disagree as to whether Bush was a good president or not. For example, he did some things that were downright indefensible. For example, starting a war and not paying for it is about as immoral as you can get. It would be like grandparents taking a luxury cruise and sending the bill to their grandchildren. The grandchildren get stuck with the bill and receive no benefits.

Second, he further socialized medicine in this country by signing Medicare part D. Nobody can make a reasonable argument as to why it is the federal government’s responsibility to provide prescription drugs to people who have the ability to pay for it themselves.

Of course, he never cut spending either.

So tell me, what good was it that George Bush did?

And as you know, I am no supporter of Obama, so just because Obama is worse does not make Bush good.
Click to expand...
Not only did GWB start a war that was unpaid for, but he started an unjust war that we didn’t need to engage in in the first place. I don’t object to his Medicare part D, however. Who can afford prescription drugs nowadays, especially seniors who live on a fixed income? Spending is also not a plus for Bush, but he did have progressive ideas concerning immigration. Like any presidency, Bush’s was a mixed bag; however, I believe the negatives outweigh the positives. How historians will evaluate the Bush administration in years to come is anyone’s guess.
 
meltzerboy said:
I must disagree with your statement that Jeb Bush lacks experience and does not rival Hillary Clinton in intellect. It is Jeb Bush who should have run for President in the first place instead of his far less talented, albeit kind and compassionate, brother. JB has plenty of experience as Governor and is the type of Republican we need more of today. However, I think his time has passed, if he ever wanted to be President. Also, I think the country has had just about enough of both the Bushes and the Clintons, although if Bill were to enter the race right now, he might be elected!
Click to expand...
I’m fully in agreement with your post. If his name was anything other than Bush, however, he might be a viable candidate. His time has passed simply because he will be so far removed from office by 2016. He would have been a tremendous President. His outreach to Hispanics is much appreciated by this Republican.
 
epan said:
I disagree, obviously. And so do most historians that I know of. He was rated in academic circles as the worst president in modern times, pretty consistently.
Click to expand...
First off, academic historians are mostly liberal. They would then vote against any modern conservative.

Secondly, no historian should pass judgement on anyone who is not dead for at least a decade and whose presidency isn’t long past.

Thirdly, I have no idea when “in modern times” would have started. Industrial Revolution? (early 1800s?); 1880s? 1900? Pre WWII? Post WWII? Cold War era? Post Cold War era?
 
George Bush is not on the ballot.

Earth to CAF. Come in, CAF. Earth to CAF.
 
meltzerboy said:
Endorsements for Romney by the New York Daily News and the New York Post constitute all the more reason for voting for Obama! Who did the New York Times and the Washington Post endorse?
Click to expand...
The NYT is biased as all get out. They’re a mess and can’t be taken seriously any more.
 
meltzerboy said:
Not only did GWB start a war that was unpaid for, but he started an unjust war that we didn’t need to engage in in the first place. I don’t object to his Medicare part D, however. Who can afford prescription drugs nowadays, especially seniors who live on a fixed income? Spending is also not a plus for Bush, but he did have progressive ideas concerning immigration. Like any presidency, Bush’s was a mixed bag; however, I believe the negatives outweigh the positives. How historians will evaluate the Bush administration in years to come is anyone’s guess.
Click to expand...
I’m going to hate myself, but I find myself in agreement with you once more. 🙂 When Bush said we were going to Iraq, I was horrified (Republican or not). He had positive ideas for immigration reform with which I agree. When will Republicans realize we have to go for the Hispanic vote? We need outreach to Hispanics, not a perceived attitude of outright hostility.
 
As I see George Bush’s name coming up fairly regularly, I wondered,‘where is he now and why isn’t he helping the GOP campaign effort?’
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top