Replies

Nothing against Rich people, especially ones who got their on their own like most Republican presidents have been other than the Bushes, but you seem to have more faith in Bush than Reagan and Bush isn't half the man Reagan was. Bush is at best a compromise candidate and only won the last election due to the democrats putting up an even more compromised candidate. Lets not fool ourselves into believing our victory was driven by anything more than the Democrats inability to choose a good candidate. Our ability to win the next election rides on our ability to put forth an actual candidate rather than a name with some political clout or we are going to lose and lose big even against Hillary. The reality is Hillary is going to win the Blue states they are solid more solid than the South. She only needs to get Florida or Ohio to side with her and she has the election. If we put another Bush forward we don't stand a chance

Clinton was a self made man and regardless of how you feel about him that is a positive in my book regardless of his other failings. Carter was not selfmade in anyway shape or form.

The reality is Hillary is going to win the Blue states they are solid more solid than the South.

The Upper Midwest and Great Lakes remain battleground areas, as well as the Southwest.

Kerry won Wisconsin (barely, and yes there was indeed fraud and criminal sabotage of GOP GOTV efforts), Minnesota, Michigan, and Pennsylvania by less than 4% each.

Clinton was a self made man and regardless of how you feel about him that is a positive in my book regardless of his other failings

Please see my post 44, Sentis. As a matter of fact, I almost wrote that about Clinton as well.

I admire and respect the President, but the reality is that he got where he is today because of money and powerful connections. Neither Clinton or Reagan had those to help them when they started their careers.

I have nothing against rich people, either, just pointing out a fact.

Bush is at best a compromise candidate and only won the last election due to the democrats putting up an even more compromised candidate. Lets not fool ourselves into believing our victory was driven by anything more than the Democrats inability to choose a good candidate.

I agree with a lot of that. But the Demos have deep problems. I'd say the problem is that there is only one credible pro-America PARTY. It's not as if a good party accidentally nominated a bad candidate. Their party is seriously flawed. But in general, I agee. GWB benefitted from a lack of real competition. Then again, Reagan got to run against Carter and Mondale. Not exactly hall of famers.