wcw43921 Posted July 23, 2016 Report Share Posted July 23, 2016 *Waiting patiently for another Abraham Lincoln* Would anyone recognize another Lincoln if that person appeared today? "Confederates called Lincoln a "tyrant," a "fiend," and a "monster" for making war on civilians through the blockade, for authorizing the destruction of private property, for setting the likes of Ben Butler and William T. Sherman upon the Southern population, for suppressing civil liberties, for cruelly refusing to exchange prisoners, and, most of all, for emancipation, which they viewed as an incitement of slaves to rebellion and wholesale murder. In speeches, sermons, and songs, in books, magazines, newspapers, pamphlets, and broadsides, they also portrayed him as a simpleton, a buffoon, a drunkard, a libertine, a physical coward, and a pornographic story-teller." The Anti-Lincoln Tradition Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wcw43921 Posted July 23, 2016 Report Share Posted July 23, 2016 Chris Ladd, aka GOPLifer, resigns from the Republican Party Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starlord Posted July 23, 2016 Report Share Posted July 23, 2016 Would anyone recognize another Lincoln if that person appeared today? "Confederates called Lincoln a "tyrant," a "fiend," and a "monster" for making war on civilians through the blockade, for authorizing the destruction of private property, for setting the likes of Ben Butler and William T. Sherman upon the Southern population, for suppressing civil liberties, for cruelly refusing to exchange prisoners, and, most of all, for emancipation, which they viewed as an incitement of slaves to rebellion and wholesale murder. In speeches, sermons, and songs, in books, magazines, newspapers, pamphlets, and broadsides, they also portrayed him as a simpleton, a buffoon, a drunkard, a libertine, a physical coward, and a pornographic story-teller." The Anti-Lincoln Tradition Blah, blah, blah...he was brilliant and you know it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Man Posted July 23, 2016 Report Share Posted July 23, 2016 He was, but it wasn't obviously apparent at the time. One wonders what he might have accomplished had he not been dealt such a crummy hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hermit Posted July 23, 2016 Report Share Posted July 23, 2016 He was, but it wasn't obviously apparent at the time. One wonders what he might have accomplished had he not been dealt such a crummy hand. For one thing, he might have saved the South... ironic to say but he wanted reconciliation where most of Congress wanted revenge However, Lincoln isn't the guy I'd want reborn and running... give me Theodore "Trustbuster" Roosevelt for our problems now Doc Shadow, Ternaugh, Netzilla and 1 other 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badger Posted July 23, 2016 Report Share Posted July 23, 2016 That is the exact message my wife, a woman of colour, took away from his speech. She called it a rant, just like every other public appearance he's put in, and if it was written by a campaign speechwriter they should be fired (and for the sake of their career she hopes they used a pseudonym). She just kept asking 'How? How will you save us, Mr Trump?" the entire way through - and found no answer. How? It wasn't the first time I asked that while watching a political speech, to be fair. (in fact, it is a minor accomplishment if a politician doesn't say something that totally contradicts something they said 5 minutes previously in the speech) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badger Posted July 23, 2016 Report Share Posted July 23, 2016 aside from all other consoderations CLINTON KAINE has a nice ring to it Being from Virginia, I am a little disappointed. Having watched his political career up close, he has kind of become the political white whale to my Cpt. Ahab. Still not planning on voting, but in my brain, logic will have to war a bit against irrational emotion. As for the real world, I do think it was probably overall a smart decision. Since it is a swing state. And his governorship was considered favorable in the DC suburbs to the North and the capital of Richmond and thereabouts. Which might stir up an area that tends to vote more liberal. In the south/west parts of the state, he isn't quite as favorably thought of. Though, most of these parts are already pretty firmly pro-Trump (or more accurately anti-Clinton, to be honest), so few votes were to be had. And even if not the former areas have much more potential voters than the latter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badger Posted July 23, 2016 Report Share Posted July 23, 2016 *Waiting patiently for another Abraham Lincoln* Ehh, I'm waiting for another Washington or Teddy Roosevelt. gewing 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Man Posted July 23, 2016 Report Share Posted July 23, 2016 However, Lincoln isn't the guy I'd want reborn and running... give me Theodore "Trustbuster" Roosevelt for our problems now Word. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badger Posted July 23, 2016 Report Share Posted July 23, 2016 I'm only going to say this once and then I'll shut up. A vote for Jill Stein, or any vote for a third party, is a vote for Donald Trump. Trump knows he's not going to get the vote of Sanders supporters. And he doesn't want them. All he wants is for Hillary not to get them. If that happens, either by the votes going to a third party candidate or the voters just staying home on election day, he knows, he doesn't think, HE KNOWS, he'll win! So unless you want to see Trump as President, do what I'm going to do. Hold your nose and vote Clinton. No matter how bad she may be, I'm not afraid of her having the nuclear launch codes. That should be reason enough but if you need another try this one on for size … I really don't buy that argument anymore. Admittedly, this might be because I really don't consider Trump and Clinton any different true. (so if I did vote for Stein, would that really be a vote for Trump? or would my "wasted" vote be a vote for Clinton?) Additionally, I wouldn't vote for Stein (or Johnson), either. I plan on voting in every race, except Presidency (unless something drastic happens). Which I am aware will be considered a cop out. But, I am following what I think is the right thing for me. Which is really what I really think people should do (whoever/however they vote). I am not even saying voting for the lesser evil is wrong. It does follow the right thing to do line. I guess I am just fed up with the line of thinking (and I don't mean to attack anyone because of it). It is not going to get better. The 2020 election will make us miss Clinton vs. Trump. The status quo will never change with the way we are going. I don't even believe what I am doing will matter. I can only say avoiding having to live with me, would prove difficult. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted July 23, 2016 Report Share Posted July 23, 2016 Would anyone recognize another Lincoln if that person appeared today? "Confederates called Lincoln a "tyrant," a "fiend," and a "monster" for making war on civilians through the blockade, for authorizing the destruction of private property, for setting the likes of Ben Butler and William T. Sherman upon the Southern population, for suppressing civil liberties, for cruelly refusing to exchange prisoners, and, most of all, for emancipation, which they viewed as an incitement of slaves to rebellion and wholesale murder. In speeches, sermons, and songs, in books, magazines, newspapers, pamphlets, and broadsides, they also portrayed him as a simpleton, a buffoon, a drunkard, a libertine, a physical coward, and a pornographic story-teller." The Anti-Lincoln Tradition I think this is something that people voting based on the perceived character of the candidates may not give proper consideration to. The Presidents who are remembered today as being the most effective, with the strongest legacies, were in their day far from universally loved or admired, or even trusted. They didn't always follow the rules. They didn't always tell the public the truth of what they were doing. They sometimes made back-room deals, used strong-arm tactics, even dirty tricks, to advance their agendas. Some of their decisions are questionable as to their rightness, in principle and even practically. And they certainly made mistakes along the way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starlord Posted July 23, 2016 Report Share Posted July 23, 2016 Ehh, I'm waiting for another Washington or Teddy Roosevelt. A slaveowner probably wouldn't go over well right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pariah Posted July 23, 2016 Report Share Posted July 23, 2016 I'm only going to say this once and then I'll shut up. A vote for Jill Stein, or any vote for a third party, is a vote for Donald Trump. Oddly enough, the rhetoric I hear more of is "A vote for Gary Johnson, or any vote for a third party, is a vote for Hillary Clinton." I understand, and can appreciate, both points of view. But if we continue to behave as if there are only two options, then only two options is all we're ever gonna get. Something has to change. This election is the best opportunity yet to make it happen. 薔薇語 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megaplayboy Posted July 23, 2016 Report Share Posted July 23, 2016 I'm a little bit confused. Who were the likable, competent, highly appealing candidates in 1988, 2000 and 2004, again? This is not an unprecedented situation. Shadow Hawk 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Posted July 23, 2016 Report Share Posted July 23, 2016 Well, third party candidates being spoilers IS conventional wisdom. And conventional wisdom seems to have been locked in its room like the crazy relative nobody listens to in a horror novel this election. However, the best I'd really expect of the third party candidates is that they move the needle enough that the mainstream press actually have to acknowledge their existence. Of course I also expected Donald Trump to have faded back into the world of 'reality TV' by the time New Hampshire rolled around... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranxerox Posted July 23, 2016 Report Share Posted July 23, 2016 I'm a little bit confused. Who were the likable, competent, highly appealing candidates in 1988, 2000 and 2004, again? This is not an unprecedented situation. George H Bush was competent and, in a WASPish sort of way, likable. Adding highly appealing to the list is setting the bar too high, IMHO. Lord Liaden and Iuz the Evil 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iuz the Evil Posted July 23, 2016 Report Share Posted July 23, 2016 George H Bush was competent and, in a WASPish sort of way, likable. Adding highly appealing to the list is setting the bar too high, IMHO. Yeah, I voted for him. Think that's the last time I voted for a GOP presidential candidate. He was okay, too worried about being in Reagan's shadow in my opinion but as you say capable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megaplayboy Posted July 23, 2016 Report Share Posted July 23, 2016 He was stiff compared to Reagan, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iuz the Evil Posted July 23, 2016 Report Share Posted July 23, 2016 He was stiff compared to Reagan, though. Yeah, while in retrospect I'm not a fan of Reagan, at the time he cast a really long shadow. Hard for anyone to be next at bat in that scenario. I always prefer to follow someone who did a bad job and was unpopular, much easier to shine. While Reagan may have been a mixed bag in deliverables, he was incredibly, undeniably popular. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megaplayboy Posted July 23, 2016 Report Share Posted July 23, 2016 Kaine came across as pretty likable in his debut today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
death tribble Posted July 23, 2016 Report Share Posted July 23, 2016 Kaine came across as pretty likeable in his debut today. Yeah. It was against the Undertaker and it cost the former the match against Sean Micheals. Pariah and Old Man 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted July 24, 2016 Report Share Posted July 24, 2016 George H.W. Bush was, on paper, one of the most qualified candidates for President that the United States ever had. Decorated combat officer. Successful oil tycoon. Congressman. Director of the CIA. Ambassador to the United Nations. Vice-President. It's hard to imagine a more impressive or relevant resume for the job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megaplayboy Posted July 24, 2016 Report Share Posted July 24, 2016 George H.W. Bush was, on paper, one of the most qualified candidates for President that the United States ever had. Decorated combat officer. Successful oil tycoon. Congressman. Director of the CIA. Ambassador to the United Nations. Vice-President. It's hard to imagine a more impressive or relevant resume for the job. There's no question he was qualified. Charisma-wise, however, he must have been quite a letdown for Republicans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ternaugh Posted July 24, 2016 Report Share Posted July 24, 2016 There's no question he was qualified. Charisma-wise, however, he must have been quite a letdown for Republicans. I voted for him in 1988, mainly because he wasn't Michael Dukakis. gewing 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranxerox Posted July 24, 2016 Report Share Posted July 24, 2016 Yeah, I voted for him. Think that's the last time I voted for a GOP presidential candidate. He was okay, too worried about being in Reagan's shadow in my opinion but as you say capable. I voted for him in 1988, mainly because he wasn't Michael Dukakis. I never actually voted for Bush Sr. Back in the 80s and early 90s, I was further left relative the the general population than I am today and would not have voted for a Republican. I just brought up George H to give credit where credit was due, Earlier in this thread, or maybe its predecessor, I compared Hillary to Bob Dole for the same reason. I never voted for Bob Dole, but still I consider him to be a man of intelligence and character Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.