Why is there a tradition in American politics... (McCain, Clinton, Obama)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
george bush senior didn't get reelected because he said he wouldn't raise taxes, and he did. americans don't like being lied to, and manipulated into voting someone into office. unless that politician has a black dad. then they can do and say what they want, and get reelected.
george bush senior didn't get reelected because he said he wouldn't raise taxes, and he did. americans don't like being lied to, and manipulated into voting someone into office. unless that politician has a black dad. then they can do and say what they want, and get reelected.
It's not about not being re-elected, plenty of presidents have not been re-elected.
It's about the fact that the parties put up the president for re-election in the first place, despite having poor performance in their first term.
It's not about not being re-elected, plenty of presidents have not been re-elected.
It's about the fact that the parties put up the president for re-election in the first place, despite having poor performance in their first term.
the republicans ran the guy, who lost to the guy, who lost to obama. I found that amusing. I don't think we'll ever see a case again where an incumbent does not win their party's nomination.
the republicans ran the guy, who lost to the guy, who lost to obama. I found that amusing. I don't think we'll ever see a case again where an incumbent does not win their party's nomination.
What I find amusing is that more than a decade ago...
A guy named John McCain lost in the primaries against George W. Bush, a man who brought so much disappointment to the republican party that it made John McCain lose an election in which he won the primaries 8 years later.
What I find amusing is that more than a decade ago...
A guy named John McCain lost in the primaries against George W. Bush, a man who brought so much disappointment to the republican party that it made John McCain lose an election in which he won the primaries 8 years later.
I don't find that amusing, because we got obama instead. although the mere thought of having to look at sarah palin's face for 4-8 years is disturbing to me. thank god we have liberal media outlets, and fo news that made sure she didn't go away after the election.
What I find amusing is that more than a decade ago...
A guy named John McCain lost in the primaries against George W. Bush, a man who brought so much disappointment to the republican party that it made John McCain lose an election in which he won the primaries 8 years later.
I am also getting sick of the same damn families. there is a real possibility that we could have a bush running against a clinton in 2016. that's just depressing.
Because rarely is there anyone with a viable chance of challenging the incumbent president from within the party. The president simply enjoys to many fundraising advantages over any challenger. Right-wing pundits tried to tout Hillary as a possible challenger in 2012, but that was patently ridiculous. She would have never been able to approach the fundraising ability of the Obama campaign. The last time I recall it happening was with Paddy Buchanan in 1992, and his challenge evaporated as a serious one quite quickly.
I don't find that amusing, because we got obama instead. although the mere thought of having to look at sarah palin's face for 4-8 years is disturbing to me. thank god we have liberal media outlets, and fo news that made sure she didn't go away after the election.
Which is precisely my point. If a president is incompetent (even though he's electable due to people voting the party line) sometimes it would be best to cut losses and put up another guy to avoid a losing streak for multiple elections.
I am also getting sick of the same damn families. there is a real possibility that we could have a bush running against a clinton in 2016. that's just depressing.
The failed Bush legacy versus the party that brought disappointment...
I say the 2016 election will the best chance for a third party to win yet, even more than the 2000 election in which the votes that defected to Ralph Nader led to the Supreme Court decision to put Bush into office.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
