Bipartisan politics aside, can anyone remember an election more predictable and scripted than this current political pillowfight? Both of these candidates need Remedial Existence 101 as a breadth requirement. Gore is so proficient in talking out of both sides of his mouth that he could probably carry on two conversations at once. There is only two things that I wonder about when it comes to GW Bush, first: How does he get the toothbrush in past his shoe? Second; How, when he mentions “Compassionate Conservatism”, he means referring to the homeless as “Outdoorsmen.” Both of these gobblers need around the clock maintenance with a clue bat, or lacking that, a two by four. Gore parades around under the banner of civil rights while his loose cannon wife has placed the greatest restrictions on artistic expression in recent history. Gore’s running mate, who comes from one of the most persecuted faiths in history, squawks about morals as an exclusive property of the religious (Mind the fact that his faith has most often been put to the torch by other “faiths”). The utterly ridiculous turns of phrase that Shrub comes up with would be laughable if they weren’t coming from someone who thinks he’s qualified to lead the free world instead of, maybe, Dan Quayle. Bush’s choice of running mate so positively reeks of running back to daddy to get his shoelaces tied that it’s pathetic. Whatever happened to things like personal convictions (in the philosophical sense) and original thought? When an ex-wrestler is both getting elected, AND making more sense than our major presidential candidates, you know things are so far out in left field that they’re behind home plate.
This is my 99th post. Please be so kind as to read my 100th, which will be posted in the IMHO forum shortly.
I believe the rant itself should get about 8 - 8.5, but the title is a clean 10! “Dryhump of an election” - I will have to work that into a conversation some day…
Actually, the one thing that this election has going for it is that at least it’s a contest. The last one wasn’t any better, and absolutely no one with half a brain gave Dole a snowball’s chance in hell of winning. Personally, the main thing I’m interested in is seeing where the Libertarians end up this year.
[hijack]
I know this is the wrong forum for this request, but please don’t flame me into next Tuesday (which, after all, is the dreaded day after the long weekend) for asking, out of a fairly extensive ignorance of politics, who’s going to win this “predictable” election? I’m not saying this to be sarcastic, but I honestly don’t know who’s going to win. I mean, G. W. Bush is from all accounts (and the L.A. Times debates, which I actually watched), a frickin’ moron, while Gore, by rights should have the support of every teachers’ union in the country simply because he’s the candidate that doesn’t support school vouchers. (Or am I wrong here?)
Despite this, Bush is up by quite a few points in the polls - go figure. So am I missing something horribly fundamental in the “why Bush is going to win” area? Sorry for the ignorance, thanks for any pertinent info.
[/hijack]
sigh My sig’s going to come back to haunt me, I know it…
By predictable, I was referring to the ease with which one can anticipate the actions and motives of all parties involved. Fortunately, according to recent accounts, Gore is taking a 10 point lead over Shrub. Meanwhile the Dubya is starting a negative ad campaign that only betrays his desperation. The most galling thing of all about this election is that some fairly important issues are at stake. The importance of these issues is so far out of proportion to the dignity of the players that irony is the order of the day.
With Gore, we have a hypocrite entrusted with championing the rights of the individual while his wife has done just the opposite. With Bush, we have a mental midget who had decided to champion the repressive causes of a religious minority. A cause that could potentially subvert our Constitution in direct conflict with the intentions of those who framed it. Quite the Hobson’s choice, no? It is for this reason that I am compelled to vote in this election at all. Too much is at stake to boycott what is otherwise one of the more boring contests in recent history.
Superintendent Chalmers (speaking of Seymour Skinner):
“Good Lord, the rod up that man’s butt must have a rod up its butt.”
A fair description of Al Gore if ever there was one.
our senate race is similar. the republican candidate is the state attorney general, the democrat a former two term governor. the democrat is a well respected, centrist. the rebuplican’s best shot: don’t let him fool you folks, he’s a democrat! his questions in the debates: is it true that you were jimmy carter’s state campaign chairman?
our third district house seat will be filled by a republican running virtually unopposed soley on the fact that he was is the retired college football coach. no debates, no speeches, no positions, just “osborn for congress” bumper stickers.
Well, I will say that the title to this thread is for some reason one of the funniest I’ve ever seen. Dryhump! (snort) That perfectly captures the spirit of Election 2000. Nice one!
After my pathetic showing in the Mr Beauty contest and the “dopers you want to meet” thread, I couldn’t be elected dogcatcher of the SDMB, to say nothing of president.
The “humping” part sounds good, though.
Re elections: I wish California would have it’s primaries earlier in the year–we might actually have some impact in determining the candidates of both parties. As it is, I cannot even remember the last time EITHER party’s presidential candidate races had NOT already been LONG decided.
I’ll go out on a limb and say that Harry Browne (Libertarian) will get roughly 1-3% of the vote, like the Libertarians get every election.
And that perplexes me. The Libertarians get more like 30% of the vote in Internet mock elections, even big ones run by organizations like TIME. Harry actually won a bunch of big mock elections last time around. Every time I’ve seen him on TV, his sound bites get huge applause from the audience.
But come election time, his ‘supporters’ scatter like rabbits. How come?
Actually, this doesn’t belong in the pit. Maybe I’ll start a Great debate. So nevermind.
It is comforting to know that I am not the only one bored to distraction and at the same time a little aprehensive over this pathetic excuse for an election. “Dry hump” has got to be the best description possible for it. Wish I’d thought of it.
The laughable part is all of the talking heads trying and failing to pump a little life into it. Perhaps in the next month or so, one turkey or the other’ll step on his dick and we’ll maybe see some excitment.
As stated, there is a lot at stake, here. Makes it tough to choose between a cretin and a double-talker.
Well, could be worse. Buchannon could be amongst the leaders. But then, at least, we’d get some entertainment out of it.
Thank you for being the first to bring up an overlooked but important facet of this election. In these forums I have repeatedly rued the fact that I cannot vote FOR someone and instead, must vote AGAINST a disliked candidate. Contrary posts not withstanding, it is just too sad that the Republicans continually strive to desecrate our Constitution with their divisive and anti-choice platforms. If these hollow Conservatives would let up for just one election cycle I would vote Libertarian in a heartbeat.
I thought it was nothing short of pure genius that Browne was willing to pardon a large portion of prisoners convicted of victimless crime. The Libertarians are the only party that intends to shrink government. For that reason among others, they easily get my respect. I suspect that this notion alone terrifies both Democrats and Republicans alike to the point where they collude to keep these hot button issues on the ticket solely as a diversionary tactic. It is most likely this sort of continuing distraction from genuine issues that forces so many closet Libertarians to continue voting as Democrats.
My only regret was that during Clinton’s reelection, when I was entirely unable to vote for the philandering nit wit, I voted for Perot instead of the Libertarian candidate. Trust me on this one, never again. Thank you twice for submitting such a choice observation.
