Posted on 09/14/2004 2:57:01 PM PDT by amercian god
Is this correct? The last time two different men served consecutive 8 year year terms to their completion was 1825. Madison 1809-1817 and Monroe 1817-1825.
However, the past doesn't equal the future. It doesn't matter how often two presidents serve 8 years back to back.
Truman did not win two elections as President.
yep.
That supports what he's saying. We just don't catch his point.
So, what... the last time a candidate named George ran against a candidate named John, George won.
You can look it up.
As a recent two term President said, "Well, there you go again."
Interesting that they have the dates correct and the remark.
Posted my last comment to wrong person.
boy, you guys are a little touchy. I was just pointing out a simple (and yes irrelevant) factoid. You people should have a drink and relax a little.
What's an 8 year year term?
It's not considered good form here at FR for someone's first post to be a vanity post. That's why you are under some suspicion of being a troll. If you are indeed one of us, may I be the first to say "Welcome to FR."
I am the Dark Lord of Kentothe, but that too is irrelevant.
But you stuck around to talk, so you may be okay. We're just a little skeptical of your motives. Do you mean to imply that since it's rare, Bush will lose?
The main thing to note is that neither Madison or Monroe owned or drove SUV's.
Mayhaps you could take the time to read the posting guidlines before your next vanity.
well i have never voted for a democrat in my life--first voted in 1988. It is just a comment on how rare it is for to have presidents who serve back to back two for year terms (to be more precise)By the way I dont know what a "vanity" post is, but it does sound like a compliment.
All "vanity" means is that it's your own opinion, you're not posting a news story. For instance, when I created a thread asking for help with my computer because my cat sat on the keyboard, that was a vanity. If I was posting an article from the Seattle Times (not that there's anything newsworthy there), it would not be a vanity.
Now you've done it!
but its not my opinion its a fact. Was just looking for an intelligent opinion on why its so rare. Or is this site void of any intelligent historical conversation on politics. Or do I have preface every post with "i hate John Kerry" because i can do that if that helps.
AS I GET BUSIER AND BUSIER,
ABSOLUTELY MEANINGLESS, UNINFORMATIVE TITLES SUCH AS
"INTERESTING"
ARE A REAL TIME CONSUMING HASSLE AND OFTEN ENOUGH
INFURIATING.
I'm about to make a policy of totally ignoring all of them.
They are inconsiderate and thoughtless.
Thoughtful would include some meaningful key words to clue in a potential reader about whether it would likely suit their interests or not.
GRRRRRR
Sigh.
You must real busy sitting at your computer. You should get out more get a hooker and bottle of single malt scotch and let go of that tension and anger. Dont worry, all is well.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.