Just proves colleges don’t have the balls to flunk the children of the rich and powerful legacies.
Personally I find the whole board rather conservative. I lean with Nader and wind up going Dem because the repubs are thieves and fundamentally dangerous.
Both Bushes are Yale men, and Bonesmen as well. In all honesty I can’t see how George W. Bush got into Yale, except that he was a legacy and had gone to the right prep school. That still does happen, it’s true, but I didn’t mean to suggest that all Presidents should have Ivy League diplomas. What I do mean is that they should be exceptionally gifted individuals. Richard Nixon may have been despicable in regard to Watergate, and one may not have agreed with his policies, but he was a gifted man who finished at least third in his classes at high school, Whittier, and Duke Law. Bill Clinton grew up poor but distinguished himself sufficiently to become a Rhodes Scholar. My point is that aspirants to high office, whatever their political views, should be exceptional men and women who excel consistently. They don’t have to come from elite colleges, or from any college, but they should have a spark that sets them apart from, and above most other people.
To suggest that someone like Sarah Palin is anywhere near the league of Nixon or Clinton is preposterous.
I have here in my hand a list of 205 - a list of names made known to the liberal Dopers as being members of the Republican Party and who nevertheless are still working and shaping the course of threads on the SDMB.
He was a pilot in the Air National Guard. And, IIRC, he scored slightly higher than John Kerry on his college SATs.
McCain didnt pick Palin to please the left. I think he did it to reach out to those within his party that are to the right of him. (He may also be hoping that she appears more likable than himself or Biden, and appeals to middle America as someone not part of the system in DC, like him.) Palin gets a “meh” from me.
I guess he can now go back to being a “maverick”.
I am a registered republican in California. I have not been pleased with the fact that it was not a “clean campaign about the issues” as promised.
Has anyone actually made that claim?
A “list [being] made known”, for what purpose? You going to “TP” their home?
I’ve said this before and I know no one agrees with me but since when have I given a fuck about that, so here we go again.
The stuff about this place being unwelcoming to righties or a lefty club or whatever is crap. Anyone can post here as long as they aren’t a jerk and I’m not going to suggest that either lefties or righties are disporportionately jerks. Before it was pay to post, now it isn’t. There is no reason that either of those states should bias left or right. SA says the influx of righties recently is a regression to 50/50 as a consequence of removal of pay to post. This isn’t a sufficient explanation since there is (as just said) no reason why it wasn’t 50/50 during pay to post.
The reality is it’s been about Bush. His is (was) not a fact based administration. His was not a reasoning based adminstration. This is a fact and reasoning based message board. When lefties are starting thread after thread bringing up insupportable Bush incompetence, what are you going to do as an intelligent, fact based righty? Go quiet is what.
I can think of several very smart doper righties who I respect who are still here but just left off from posting about politics for the duration. What are you to do when you would generally think of yourself as a Republican supporter but the Republican guy in charge is fucking things up severely and in a manner that cannot be logically and factually defended?
But now Bush is an ex-president in all but name. He’s yesterday’s news and we have stopped talking about him to any real extent. On the right, it’s now about McCain and Palin. They, unlike Bush, are not so batshit incompetent that even 'Pubbies don’t support them. Quite the contrary. So now the righties climbing back out of the bunkers they have been sheltering in for the duration of the bombardment.
There might be some truth to that.
On the other hand, it’s entirely possible that if the board already had a leftward tilt when it went pay-to-play, the liberals that visited the place found it more hospitable than did the conservatives, so the liberals stayed and played, and the conservatives wandered off.
It’s no different than partisan magazines. A magazine might start out fairly centrist, and collect righties and lefties. Then as its editorial positions start to slant in one direction, the people on the other side don’t renew. The choir being preached to signs up. Choirmembers who see it on a newstand and them through it buy it if they like what they read, and put it back if they don’t. I doubt there are a whole lot of Republicans out there that would thumb through a copy of The Nation and think, “hot damn, I’ve got to get me a subscription to this!”
Now that it’s free again, a lot of those casual people might stop in and toss their .02 into the fray, then get hooked by the debate and start participating. So if the board had gone markedly left, you’d expect a regression to the mean once the filter of a membership is removed.
It looks like I’m going to have to what I said for the second time in this thread. I said that now that the board is going to allow Google and other search engines to locate us, and now that CL/SDMB powers that be are taking additional steps to make us known to the country’s population at large, we can hopefully expect that the left/right breakdown of the population (currently around fifty-fifty if you go by voting habits) to be reflected in the board’s new posters. I don’t know if that will actually be the case or not, but it’s what I would like to see happen.
If that is all you meant then it adds nothing. It doesn’t explain anything.
It explains that you were wrong about what I said.
That’s right! Because we’re Amurka, and if the rest of the world hates us, then they must all be wrong! What other explanation could there be?
From that well-known liberal pussy Robert McNamara:
Since you originally wrote what you wrote before I entered this thread, I take it you just wrote it as an explanation of something I would write later. Oh, you righties and your powers of prediction. I do marvel.
Fake Pumas and Chuck Taylors? Why are we wasting time talking about off-brand shoes?
I don’t quite think that is excellent enough to be regarded as a presidential qualification. :dubious:
Not a single Viet Cong aircraft penetrated Texas airspace while GW was on watch! Not one!
What’s funny is that you think you are satirizing my position to humorous effect, but you’re simply stating what I (unashamedly) believe. Well, I don’t think the rest of the world is “wrong” if they hate us, I just think we shouldn’t take any special paoins to make other countries like us.
Here, let me try it for Obama’s position:
We don’t need a military! We’ll just talk to our enemies and persuade them not to hurt us! Sure we’ll have to make large payments to other countries once we can no longer defend ourselves and/or there will be a military coup in the US, but hope hope change hope change!
Harrumph. Apparently Ms. Congeniality means nothing to you.