Sarah Palin dominated
Created on: September 11th, 2008
Sponsorships:
| user | amount | user | amount |
|---|---|---|---|
| No one has sponsored this site ( ._.) | |||
| Sponsor this site! | Total: $0.00 | Active: $0.00 | |
Vote metrics:
| rating | total votes | favorites | comments |
|---|---|---|---|
| (3.48) | 128 | 0 | 92 |
View metrics:
| today | yesterday | this week | this month | all time |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 10,205 |
Inbound links:
There is no single meaning of the Bush doctrine. In fact, there have been four distinct meanings, each one succeeding another over the eight years of this administration -- and the one Charlie Gibson cited is not the one in common usage today. It is utterly different. 1. Originally coined for Bush administration policies of unilaterally withdrawing from the ABM treaty and rejecting the Kyoto protocol. 2nd use of this term came after 9/11 which was Bush's "You are either with us or you are against us".
After Iraq, the Bush Doctorine came to mean "Preemtive War" and this is what Gibson THOUGHT it meant. The Bush Doctorine has currently come to mean "the fundamental mission of American foreign policy is to spread democracy throughout the world." which came out of Bush's second inaugural address. So pretty much Gibson goofed, & Palin actually had it right.
although that equation would debunk Bobdole23's comment at first glance, fuzzhammer, you did not take into account the fact that more people voted for Al Gore than they did for George W Bush. Therefore, Al Gore (baptist) = won election. George W Bush (methodist) = lost election, but decided to take the presidency anyway. So that could basically come down to methodist = tyranic f*ckheads and baptist = too pussy to push back?
Bush won a majority of the popular vote in 2004 merely because no major third party had a candidate in the election. Winning with 49% or 50.01% is incosequential. He won with only a 2.5% edge, making his victory the closest incumbent presidential victory in the history of the US (Wilson won reelection in 1916 by 3.2%). He then claimed a sweeping mandate, then got to sit back and watch his policy proposals (ie. social security privatization) get roundly rejected by the public.
derpallardie: "Winning with 49% or 50.01% is incosequential." Actually it's the basis of the entire electoral process, so you couldn't be more wrong if you tried. (Vicariously, it's also the reason there will only ever be two major political parties in America.) Maybe you shouldn't sleep through your American Government class next time. Unless you have 50% + 1 vote, you don't win jack sh*t. So Al Gore didn't win the popular vote, or more importantly, the electoral vote in 2000. Get over it.
the8ball: Unless you have 50% + 1 vote, you don't win jack sh*t.
By this logic W was not elected in 2000. Clinton was not elected in 92 or 96. Nixon was not elected in 68. I can go on. '50% +1 vote' is meaningless given third parties run for office. Example: New Mexico, 2000. Bush and Gore both won 48% of the vote, with the edge in total votes going to Gore. 4% of the vote was for other candidates. Gore, having the most votes, won New Mexico's 5 electoral votes.
the8ball: So are Obama's credentials, but the stupid Democrats put him FIRST on the ticket. Methinks they should've rethought that one.
Nice straw man.
Obama has identical experience to that of Lincoln in 1860. Given the competition, though, not voting with Bush 95% of the time might be the only credential he needs.
derpallardie: Well I see you have your "Obama For Dummies" book handy. Lincoln wasn't black or a Socialist, so Obama's credentials are hardly "identical" to his. And you got your propaganda quote wrong, McCain claimed to vote with Bush 90% of the time, not 95%. Which is funny, since presidents DON'T VOTE in the legislature.
Lincoln actually had less experience in national politics than Obama at the time of his election (one two-year term in the House and a losing U.S. Senate race) but more importantly, they both demonstrated courage and mental acuity, and therefore the readiness for the job of President, by opposing popular but boneheaded policies.
hey here's an idea, lets ban and burn books, then when were done with that let's regulate the internet, so no more YTMND. raped by brian peppers and now you have his baby, oh but abortion is illegal, so your life sucks now. oh and let's drill more offshore, because it sounds real nice, but it won't have an impact for at least 10 years.
Bold
Italic
Underline
Code
User Link
Site Link