This subject has come up at the tailend of the thread that has to do with Bush selling our ports to the United Arab Emirates. Two moderate Democrats with possible 2008 presidency aspirations are Bill Richardson (Gov of New Mexico) and Evan Bayh (Senator from otherwise very Republican Indiana). I think Richardson could be a particularly effective candidate given he is a governor from a western state and has a reputation as being a very capable fiscal conservative.
Joined: 25 Jan 2003 Posts: 2137 Location: The Lords personal toilet, otherwise known as Battle Creek, MI. 765 eGriz Bucks
Doesn't Richardson want the legalization of marijuana?
"Well, why not 112%? Why not 500 percent or 1,300 percent or 38 billion percent? I mean if he can crank it up beyond 100%, why not? What's stopping him exactly?" ----Floyd Landis to Outside Magazine on athletes saying they gave 110%
Doesn't Richardson want the legalization of marijuana?
He supports the legalization of marijuana for medical uses. 63% of Montanans voted the same way on the recent State Initiative (I-148) that passed here. It is now state law in Montana.
Wasn't that law repealed by a national bill that outlawed medical marijuana?
The Governor from Virginia is also a good moderate Democrat, I think his last name is Kaine?
There's been a lot of buzz about Los Angeles mayor, Villagarosa, but I really don't konw much about him, if he's considered to me moderate or more liberal.
Wasn't that law repealed by a national bill that outlawed medical marijuana?
The Governor from Virginia is also a good moderate Democrat, I think his last name is Kaine?
There's been a lot of buzz about Los Angeles mayor, Villagarosa, but I really don't konw much about him, if he's considered to me moderate or more liberal.
The Montana initiative was not repealed and according to Montana law, it's use is legal. However, Federal law does not allow for the use of medical marijuana and the Supreme Court has ruled that the feds aren't prohibited from enforcing fed law in states allowing med marijuana use. From what I understand, the Feds aren't real interested in prosecuting med marijuana users in states that have such a law, at least not in Montana. Kaine was just elected Governor in a Republican state and his victory was considered an upset. Bush campaigned hard for his opponent in the final days before the election. He is a moderate but certainly has not been around long enough to be considered a potential presidential candidate.
The way I see it going is Hillary is going to be the democrat. America won't put her in as president (I don't think/hope /pray) so what we will get is another Bush type that people vote for not so much because they like them, but because they don't want Hillary.
I have been told by a large amount of republicans, they didn't like Bush, they wished they had someone else. If the dems grasp hold of The border issue and this insane port issue they could take the White house easy. I am a republican, If a moderate dem ran on secure the border and secure security of our ports etc. someone like Liberman. I would vote for them over someone like Bush.
If we don't secure are border it won't mater who we have in the White house. That's number one on my list. I doubt the dems have enough sense to take advantage of this and will run Hillary and lose.
Bush is no conservative when it comes to tax-and-spend issues.
Like Reagan, Bush is jacking up federal spending (largely through ballooning military expenditures) while, at the same time, pandering to parts of the public with phony tax cuts.
Increasing spending while reducing revenue into the "checkbook" is a recipe for disaster.
You would think we'd have learned by now.
I thought Reagan was the wildest, most liberal spender in history, because he never once submitted a balanced budget to Congress, and Congress actually LOWERED total spending below what Reagan proposed in 6 of his 8 years in office.
Bush is going to break Ronnie's record.
I hope McCain runs. Bush's campaign attack dogs treated him terribly in 2000.
Bush is no conservative when it comes to tax-and-spend issues.
Like Reagan, Bush is jacking up federal spending (largely through ballooning military expenditures) while, at the same time, pandering to parts of the public with phony tax cuts.
Increasing spending while reducing revenue into the "checkbook" is a recipe for disaster.
You would think we'd have learned by now.
I thought Reagan was the wildest, most liberal spender in history, because he never once submitted a balanced budget to Congress, and Congress actually LOWERED total spending below what Reagan proposed in 6 of his 8 years in office.
Bush is going to break Ronnie's record.
I hope McCain runs. Bush's campaign attack dogs treated him terribly in 2000.
Fat, Drunk and Bobcat is no way to go through life son!
Dean Wormer- Animal House
Bush is no conservative when it comes to tax-and-spend issues.
Like Reagan, Bush is jacking up federal spending (largely through ballooning military expenditures) while, at the same time, pandering to parts of the public with phony tax cuts.
Increasing spending while reducing revenue into the "checkbook" is a recipe for disaster.
You would think we'd have learned by now.
I thought Reagan was the wildest, most liberal spender in history, because he never once submitted a balanced budget to Congress, and Congress actually LOWERED total spending below what Reagan proposed in 6 of his 8 years in office.
Bush is going to break Ronnie's record.
I hope McCain runs. Bush's campaign attack dogs treated him terribly in 2000.
I agree with you...Bush is no concervative at all.
but name me one presidental election where the candidates were not nasty towards each other. "mud slinging" is not a new development and will continue. I am sure McCain is a big boy and it did not upset this great man at all that his name was driven in the mud if he paid attention to the previous elections. BTW this is why americas top tallent does not run for president
class 1996
Progressives look at reality through the lens of Liberalism
but name me one presidental election where the candidates were not nasty towards each other.
There's nasty words, then there's "swiftboating", or in the case of McCain v. Bush, Karl Rove fabricating a story that McCain had a black child out of wed-lock, which was enough to turn the tables in antebellum South Carolina. It's all wrong.
As for Richardson:
He has great managerial and diplomatic experience with is work as Secretary of Energy and US Ambassador to the UN.
And while obviously very intelligent, he has down-to-earth appeal similar to Bush.
Psht, don't let the name fool ya, he's also Hispanic and could win back some of the gains made by Bush in that voting block. I don't know his position on immigration.
He's a Democratic governor from a pink-red state, with cross-over and swing voter appeal.
But if he were to claim the nomination he would of course quickly convert into an america hating, baby killing, draft dodging, pot smoking, liberal-commi-pinko hell bent on hugging terrorists while raising taxes.
but name me one presidental election where the candidates were not nasty towards each other.
There's nasty words, then there's "swiftboating", or in the case of McCain v. Bush, Karl Rove fabricating a story that McCain had a black child out of wed-lock, which was enough to turn the tables in antebellum South Carolina. It's all wrong.
As for Richardson:
He has great managerial and diplomatic experience with is work as Secretary of Energy and US Ambassador to the UN.
And while obviously very intelligent, he has down-to-earth appeal similar to Bush.
Psht, don't let the name fool ya, he's also Hispanic and could win back some of the gains made by Bush in that voting block. I don't know his position on immigration.
He's a Democratic governor from a pink-red state, with cross-over and swing voter appeal.
But if he were to claim the nomination he would of course quickly convert into an america hating, baby killing, draft dodging, pot smoking, liberal-commi-pinko hell bent on hugging terrorists while raising taxes.
I think he's a more likely Veep candidate.
That's an outrageous comment about McCain... I've never heard it. Funny thing is that there's supposed evidence that it's true of Bill Clinton... and it's even referenced in the book Primary Colors written by a democrat.
Now... what I had heard about Richardson and why he hasn't "cracked" the serious national scene is that there are women issues similar to Clinton. Talk is that since the dem's were so sensitive to the Clinton baggage, they wouldn't tap Richardson for anything other than ambassador-type positions. Anyone else hear this?
That campaign was talked about a lot during the 2000 primaries. It had an untraceable source and I don't believe it was ever pointed directly at Rove, it just seems like smear tactics that are right up his alley.
Joined: 05 Nov 2002 Posts: 1549 Location: Corner of No and Where 615 eGriz Bucks
Richardson would also be positioned well to speak on the border issue. Being the governor of a border state and hispanic to boot, be might be our best bet to actually get something done with that fiasco. A McCain/Richardson contest would place the border issues front and center - something that we desparately need. It's a nasty situation - US businesses need the cheap labor but we've got to find a way to get it without having a sieve for a border.
Unfortunately, most of the support that Richardson needs from the Clinton machine is being siphoned away by Hillary. She's killing the Democrats in more way than one.
-------------------------------------------------------
The best way to predict the future is to create it.
-----Peter Drucker
Joined: 05 Nov 2002 Posts: 1549 Location: Corner of No and Where 615 eGriz Bucks
Re/MaxGriz wrote:
The Governor from Virginia is also a good moderate Democrat, I think his last name is Kaine?
Kaine is a non-starter. Did you see his "Democratic Rebuttal" after the State of the Union speach? Good god - Mr. Rogers had more enthusiasm and charisma. I think the guy that you are thinking of is his predecessor, Marc Warner. He would be a pretty good candidate - former business executive, former Senator, former Governor with good cross-over appeal.
-------------------------------------------------------
The best way to predict the future is to create it.
-----Peter Drucker
but name me one presidental election where the candidates were not nasty towards each other.
There's nasty words, then there's "swiftboating", ..snip..
dude get a life man, i did plenty of reaserch on their complaints on the fake JFK and to be honest with you, when the vast majority of your former comrads in arms rise up, and have risen up, since you first ran for political office, *yes Kalm that is true* that has to be a sign, right?
[quote]
and yes presidential elections have historically been nasty.
class 1996
Progressives look at reality through the lens of Liberalism
but name me one presidental election where the candidates were not nasty towards each other.
There's nasty words, then there's "swiftboating", ..snip..
dude get a life man, i did plenty of reaserch on their complaints on the fake JFK and to be honest with you, when the vast majority of your former comrads in arms rise up, and have risen up, since you first ran for political office, *yes Kalm that is true* that has to be a sign, right?
Quote:
and yes presidential elections have historically been nasty.
Vast majority????? Also, if you deny there were atrocities committed by Americans in Nam then you need to do a little more reading. It was a nasty war with atrocities committed by both sides. The VC and NVA were routinely brutal when dealing with civilians as well as opposing troops. What makes it even worse is the question of what was accomplished?
but name me one presidental election where the candidates were not nasty towards each other.
There's nasty words, then there's "swiftboating", ..snip..
dude get a life man, i did plenty of reaserch on their complaints on the fake JFK and to be honest with you, when the vast majority of your former comrads in arms rise up, and have risen up, since you first ran for political office, *yes Kalm that is true* that has to be a sign, right?
Quote:
and yes presidential elections have historically been nasty.
Vast majority????? Also, if you deny there were atrocities committed by Americans in Nam then you need to do a little more reading. It was a nasty war with atrocities committed by both sides. The VC and NVA were routinely brutal when dealing with civilians as well as opposing troops. What makes it even worse is the question of what was accomplished?
i was not saying that there was not attrocities in 'nam, there is in any war. in the civil war there was thousands of confederate soldigers killed becuase the union prision system was bad at best.
look you are taking a look at the swift boat veterans for truth judging them from their experience in nam. yes they will be prideful in their service, just ask savage paw about what he did in the armed service and i bet you he will say basically the same thing. i am not saying that did not happen, all i am saying is that, for some reason or another, disagreed with JFK leading anything other then a small towns goverment
class 1996
Progressives look at reality through the lens of Liberalism
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
It is now state law in Montana.
class 1996
