It doesn’t matter which party you affiliate with, but does anybody like their party’s candidate. I’ve read a lot on this board, and talked to people IRL, and nobody really likes either Bush or Gore, but consider their candidate the lesser of two evils.
So, does anybody really like Bush or Gore?
I’m just saddened that the first election I get to vote in is dominated by these two. That’s all I’ll say.
I actually have a theory about why the candidates this year are lacking any sort of presidential material… are you familiar with the fact that all presidents elected in a year ending with zero (except Reagan) for the past… oh, while… died while in office? Perhaps, for this election, nobody with brains was willing to take the risk of assassination, leaving us with the bottomfeeders.
Their mothers are apparently fond of them. Other than that, no.
Apparently SDMB is too small a population to find someone who likes them. Maybe I should have asked if anyone knows someone who likes them.
Sure!
Actually, I like them both.
They seem like nice guys.
That doesn’t mean I want them to be President, however.
what can I say but…
I am a total Bush mark.
It seems to me that some people think it is unsophisticated to express support for the major candidates on the SDMB.
Millions of people have voted for these two men, so somebody else must like them.
I’m as unsophisticated as the next guy and I have heard neither candidate give a compelling reason they should be president. Gore’s main reason seems to be that things didn’t get as screwed up as they could during the Clinton administration. Bush’s is that it’s time to redress the wrong done to his father when we didn’t reelect him.
Bob Dole’s reason was “I’ve put in my time as a good soldier and it’s my turn.” Clinton’s was “I want to be president.” That was a reason I could accept, so I voted for him twice and would again.
SPOOFE—It’s not quite true that every president elected in a year ending in zero died in office. Besides Reagan, who survived John Hinckley’s bullet, there were also Thomas Jefferson (elected 1800, left office 1809, died 1826) and James Monroe (elected 1816, reëlected 1820, left office 1825, died 1831.) After that, the doomed presidents took office:
Benjamin Harrison (1840-1841)
Abraham Lincoln (1860-1865)
James Garfield (1880-1881)
William McKinley (1896-1901)
Warren G. Harding (1920-1923)
Franklin D. Roosevelt (1932-1945)
John F. Kennedy (1960-1963)
Reagan, Monroe and Jefferson are the only presidents who are outside that pattern (and, incidentally, that’s one of the very few times Reagan can ever be compared to Jefferson.)
Anyway, I’m not thrilled about the current choices, and I empathize with you about what you’re facing for your first election. For my first, I had to choose between Bush and Dukakis—yecch! I wish Harry Truman could run again. I’d vote for him.
“Does ANYBODY like Bush or Gore?”
No sir, I don’t like 'em.
But then again, I’m not American. I am spared having to vote Gore (who I dislike mostly because of his backwards stance on the drug war) having to vote Gore just cause I don’t like Bush even more.
Hmmm . . . Who to vote for—Goofus or Gallant?
Any chance that Snoopy, Pat Paulsen or Alfred E. Newman are running this year?
Where did you get these reasons the candidates want to run for president?
IIRC, Bush wants to restore honor to the white house and Gore wants to protect people from the powerful.
Did I miss that part of the debates where they discussed their reason for running?
Any American on this board who doesn’t like the ‘two’ choices, should just suck it up and research the other candidates. Personally, I’m voting for Nader, and I think everyone should, but if Bush and Gore aren’t conservative enough for you, you could vote for Buchanan, or there’s always Harry Browne . . . Stop believing the media lie that there are only two ‘valid’ candidates.
Okay, preaching over. Oh, and, of course, no, I don’t like either of them. They both are very scary.
I am rather indifferent on Gore. I think he is just about as interesting as watching paint dry on growing grass, but that doesn’t mean he would make a bad president. Bush, on the other hand can barely construct a coherent sentence. I would like my president to be able to pronounce subliminal.
Well, you can always write in Mickey Mouse on the ballot. Sooner or later he might win.
Bush is a Republican. If he got elected, all his cabinet and appointments would be Republican, plus probably many Judges.
That’s enough for me. How you debate is NOTHING compared to what people you drag in on your coattails.
Almost forgot, since I live in an area where Republicans are not on the ballot:** Being a Republican in office is a BAD THING**
I’m voting for Gore, stiff or not.
I don’t want to vote for Bush, because he’s a dumbass. In one sense I suspect he’s really a sock puppet, like Lurleen Wallace.
Al Gore, on the other hand, well… somewhere, a Gerry Anderson production is missing a cast member.
ddibb-
as to the cabinet/judge question, Michael Moore has written a really great piece on the subject, called “I’m not falling for that one again.” Check it out: http://www.michaelmoore.com/2000_07_18.html
He’s got some other great pieces on the site as well.
And if you’re in a state where ‘republicans aren’t on the ballot’(?), then you’re that much safer to vote for the candidate in whom you believe.
Sorry if I’m straying from the op, but I do believe this is important.
One day in the not-so-distant future…
At a meeting of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to discuss U.S. participation in a military escalation in a country far, far away…
“Mr. President we have to act now. The XXX is closing in on our allies position and we need to do something about it. Our national security is at stake!”
“Yes, I’d like some A-1 on mine please. Oh Oh, national security, yes well that is a bad thing. Umm… let’s see, I had this typed up through dictation, just a second.”
Shuffles through papers.
“Oh yeah, here it is. Use our blister missiles.”
And thus, President Bush’s inability to pronounce ballistic began the first known use of biological weapons by the United States since World War II.
SCENARIO II:
At a meeting of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to discuss U.S. participation in a military escalation in a country far, far away…
“Mr. President we have to act now. The XXX is closing in on our allies position and we need to do something about it. Our national security is at stake!”
“I invented national security, don’t tell me what is at stake! Now what will this mean to the environment? Will it influence global warming?”
I think scenario II would be more like:
“Ah, yes, national security. Let me introduce you to Elmer Bumpus, a hard-working middle-class American whose life is greatly influenced by national security. Look at his sad eyes, his proud demeanor. Don’t you think I know how important national security is? Now, why don’t you get a focus group together to tell me what to do.”
I despise pornography and violence, and don’t
understand why anyone would support either one.
Oh, you meant the presidential candidates. Don’t
support either one, either.