Gore's going to run for President again. Kerry, too.
Hate Bush? Then please write these guys each a letter and beg them to forget it. Hillary, also.
Comments (8)
I hate Bush as much as the next guy, but I think he's the one of this sorry bunch that actually can't run next time (unless something surprising happens).
So who then? Who, in either party, could become a candidate with that has a reasonable chance of becoming president, in '08? Looks to me like the extreme ends of the political spectrums have done a great job of damaging both parties in recent years. I'd be interested in hearing the ideas of those who watch these things closely.
what is really sad about the presidential election, is that it is almost impossible for candidates who are not millionaires to run and thus limiting our choices and creating apathy among the voters.
in addition to the enormous costs involved, you also have the electoral college that prevents any third party candidate from being elected and results in the voters throwing away their votes or again, choosing the lesser of two evils
to my understanding, the electoral College was in place because there was no other practical means of tallying votes at the time, however in this day of computers, I believe the electoral college is outdated, overdue for retirement, and a new system should be considered.
It's gonna take a constitutional amendment to dump the electoral college. Since that means getting three-fourths of the states to ratify it (that would be 38), you're gonna have to get 15 or 20 of those sparsely populated states with just a few electoral votes (hmmm, Oregon falls into that category) to effectively vote themselves off the island.
Besides, if Oregon didn't have seven electoral votes that might be critical in close presidential election (like the last two), there would be absolutely no reason for a candidate to even show up here. Not enough popular votes here to tip the scale one way or the other.
And as for Third Party candidates, if you're ever gonna get any traction, you gotta start small and grow your party locally, then regionally. That means doing more than going to party confabs to carp about the system.
Unfortunately, all of these third-party whack jobs are always running for president or governor and then squawking about how they can't get any money or exposure.
How about running for an office in the neighborhood association or school board or city council or even a seat in the legislature? Can't get elected there either? Well, maybe the problem lies not with the system but with the candidate.
Comments (8)
I hate Bush as much as the next guy, but I think he's the one of this sorry bunch that actually can't run next time (unless something surprising happens).
Posted by Allan L. | September 3, 2005 7:42 AM
I agree about Gore and Kerry, but Hillary would be a formidable opponent, once her own party recognizes this.
Posted by Steve | September 3, 2005 8:34 AM
Prediction: Hillary will run, and lose.
Posted by Allan L. | September 3, 2005 9:07 AM
So who then? Who, in either party, could become a candidate with that has a reasonable chance of becoming president, in '08? Looks to me like the extreme ends of the political spectrums have done a great job of damaging both parties in recent years. I'd be interested in hearing the ideas of those who watch these things closely.
Posted by Ronald M | September 3, 2005 4:37 PM
I think he's the one of this sorry bunch that actually can't run next time
His brother can. Or someone else who shares his "vision."
Posted by Jack Bog | September 3, 2005 6:01 PM
It's Rudy
If it's not George Allen.
Posted by Rube in the Stix | September 3, 2005 9:32 PM
what is really sad about the presidential election, is that it is almost impossible for candidates who are not millionaires to run and thus limiting our choices and creating apathy among the voters.
in addition to the enormous costs involved, you also have the electoral college that prevents any third party candidate from being elected and results in the voters throwing away their votes or again, choosing the lesser of two evils
to my understanding, the electoral College was in place because there was no other practical means of tallying votes at the time, however in this day of computers, I believe the electoral college is outdated, overdue for retirement, and a new system should be considered.
Posted by Robin | September 4, 2005 5:47 AM
Hey Robin,
It's gonna take a constitutional amendment to dump the electoral college. Since that means getting three-fourths of the states to ratify it (that would be 38), you're gonna have to get 15 or 20 of those sparsely populated states with just a few electoral votes (hmmm, Oregon falls into that category) to effectively vote themselves off the island.
Besides, if Oregon didn't have seven electoral votes that might be critical in close presidential election (like the last two), there would be absolutely no reason for a candidate to even show up here. Not enough popular votes here to tip the scale one way or the other.
And as for Third Party candidates, if you're ever gonna get any traction, you gotta start small and grow your party locally, then regionally. That means doing more than going to party confabs to carp about the system.
Unfortunately, all of these third-party whack jobs are always running for president or governor and then squawking about how they can't get any money or exposure.
How about running for an office in the neighborhood association or school board or city council or even a seat in the legislature? Can't get elected there either? Well, maybe the problem lies not with the system but with the candidate.
Posted by rube in the stix | September 4, 2005 9:44 PM