Anyone want to guess presidential candidates

[electronjohn]

I have to place my bet with homeboy Tim Pawlenty. He's young, personable...and enough of an anti-tax freak to keep the teabaggers happy. And, as others have indicated, Palin would have no part of second fiddle. She wants it all or nothin'.

Speaking of teabaggers: just when I thought my area was immune to this terrible virus...up pops a teaparty organization. Ish. I know some of the people involved and they haven't had an original thought in years. They're having a big rally on...you guessed it...September 11. I'm thinking of going in my New Left Media guise.

[BlueStreak]

Sounds like big fun.

[noonereal]

Originally Posted by electronjohn

I have to place my bet with homeboy Tim Pawlenty. He's young, personable...and enough of an anti-tax freak to keep the teabaggers happy. And, as others have indicated, Palin would have no part of second fiddle. She wants it all or nothin'.

Speaking of teabaggers: just when I thought my area was immune to this terrible virus...up pops a teaparty organization. Ish. I know some of the people involved and they haven't had an original thought in years. They're having a big rally on...you guessed it...September 11. I'm thinking of going in my New Left Media guise.

The right is desperat to grab moral high ground as their policies are pretty low life. IMHO of course.

On a serious note they should leave 911 alone.

[electronjohn]

I'm sure they're going to use the "coincidence" of their chosen date for some sort of jingoistic BS.

I'd really, really love to debate one of these loons some day. A little prep work on my part and they're toast. Then again...it would probably be a herculean task to disprove some of their so-called beliefs.

[Zeke]

Pawlenty over the robotic guy from Louisiana...

Palin will take the second seat or a rail out of town: which is MORE threatening to her ego?

[piece-itpete]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

Pete, I enjoyed your objective analysis of the political prospects. They are probably more accurate than I could come up with (but I certainly like your prediction for Congress). I figured you to be too intelligent to see Palin/Beck as a possibility.

I've done enough beating on you that it's only fair to give credit where credit is due.

Re your comments on the tea partiers - do you think they are anti-Washington enough to sit on their hands where they lost primaries to an establishment candidate - like in Arizona?

REgards,

D-Ray

Thanks D

The tea party is so fired up I'm afraid they'll lose sight of the fact that in order to govern you have to win the election!

And my apologies to folks who like her, but as far as I'm concerned Palin is a disaster, and it's McCains' fault she's on the loose.

If I had any advice to the partiers, I'd say at least go with Buchanan - he knows a lot she doesn't.

Originally Posted by noonereal

I see this thread fell into the shitter.

Is there any that don't? lolol.

(Should that be, Are there any that don't? Or doesn't? Or is? I'm confused)

Originally Posted by d-ray657

One can't judge leadership and judgment on the basis of popularity. A couple of immensely popular figures in the political arena would be woeful leaders, and worse administrators. As Time pointed out, Obama paid a huge price for sticking with it and getting health care reform, something that was sorely needed, and at which others had failed. That should show him to be true to his statement that he would rather be a one term president and do big things than be a two term president and do a lot of small things.

We might have to wait a few years and look in the rear-view mirror to determine the ultimate impact of the stimulus package. He was aware that some of the things he included in the reform package would not pay short term dividends, but they were necessary for building for the future. We will never know with complete accuracy whether it prevented this sticky recession from becoming a full-fledged depression, but economists have opined that unemployment would have been half again as high, and the deficit would have nearly doubled - that's right fewer government expenditures would have cost the government more money.

Regards,

D-Ray

I have huge problems with these polls and history shows their weaknesses. I admire Truman, he was thought to be crap when he got out of office but look what happened - he did what he thought was right without moistening his finger to the wind, and he was often correct to do so.

Judging a sitting President against history is a fools game, in my (granted, not so humble ) opinion.

Pete