luckydog71 said:
Early front runners have a difficult time maintaining their popularity over the long haul. Hillary may do it but it will be tough. Obama will start to take away her African American support, even though he is not an African American, he is black and that will give him a lot of notoriety.
Ok, LD explain that one. Yah Obama is of mixed race, but how can you say he's black but not Afro-American?
luckydog71 said:
There is one force that would be nearly unstoppable a Clinton/Obama or Obama/Clinton ticket. I do not see any GOP combination that could beat them together. Even the ticket of McCain/Giuliani in my opinion would lose.
Though not impossible, it would be highly unlikely. I can't see either one being able to tolerate the other because their strong personalities. One would need to really suck it up and remain largely in the background. The tradition in the US has been whenever there has been a strong VP the president has been a weak idiot.
luckydog71 said:
I think (actually it is wishful thinking) that the raise on the DEM presidential ticket will make the DEMS hold on Congress a 1 term event. America could survive a very liberal president as long as there is a conservative congress.
What is very liberal? After reading your posts on politics for some time I get the impression from you that ANYTHING which doesn't neatly conform to your Fox News inspired view of what is right and left you see as "very liberal". I put to you that the US has NEVER had a "very liberal" president and at best has had moderate liberals such as FDR, LBJ, and Carter for example.
luckydog71 said:
A government run by Clinton/Pelosi/Reid is a very scary thought.
Like Bush/Cheney hasn't been?
luckydog71 said:
On your other points
-and sending the US into a recession in his final years
- after prodding from Newt. This tax break created the boom
- and leaving the US incapable of defending itself.
How?
luckydog71 said:
-criminals in the country have more assualt weapons than ever before. Did you see that gun battle in LA a few years back? I am an advocate of people not owning guns. I am an opponent of government enforced gun control.
-thought that was JFK
Your knowledge of your own country's space program is weak at best. A number of presidents from both parties can be creditted in one way or another. It was Eisenhower that got the ball rolling with early testing and the creation of NASA. It was JFK that made the pledge to go to the moon. It was LBJ that carried out that pledge. It was Nixon that sustained that pledge and helped NASA to move on the next phase, that being Skylab. It was Ford and Carter that helped the following stage, that being the shuttle program. It was under Reagan that the shuttle program finally took off. It was under Bush 1 that the space station finally took shape, It was under Clinton which continued the space station and pursued further exploration of space. Even the dimwit in the Oval Office now has put the wheels in motion for the return to the moon.
luckydog71 said:
-this one is a joke, right? The terrorists got a foot hold under Carter. They discovered the unwillingness of DEM presidents to fight back. They hibernated during Reagan and then but their entire infrastructure in place during the 8 Clinton years.
I am very interested to see you're explanation on that. I get the sense there will be a fair bit of historical revisionism to have a square peg fit neatly in the round hole.
luckydog71 said:
-another joke right? Gore had 8 years to reduce global warming. He did nothing. In fact it was worse when he left office.
And what has the Bush 2 administration done? And LD that's your cherished dimwit president's administration and not any of the actions take by the states, cities, or counties.
luckydog71 said:
-Do you really want the rest of the world to have the type of health care provided to Canadians. That is just plain mean, bordering on hate speach.
The US health care system is bloated and ends up costing more. The US health care companies have enormous bureaucracies and in the end chew up the equivalent of 15% of the US GDP. In Canada the health care system is the equivalent of around 9% of the Canadian GDP.
It is amazing that there are still the weakminded in the world's richest and most powerful country that incapable of acknowledging the proven benefits of universal health care. Their gullability is a shining example of the sinister motives of Republicans and their allies in the health care industry. I pity you.
