Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: kerry to unconcede?

Expand Messages
  • greg
    You re right, we need a lot of reform in how we do our elections. There s so many of us ordinary people who think that, but not many people in Washington who
    Message 1 of 8 , Dec 29, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      You're right, we need a lot of reform in how we do our elections.
      There's so many of us ordinary people who think that, but not
      many people in Washington who seem to agree.

      Yeah, there's no way Kerry will be president next year or probably
      ever I'd guess. I've noticed there's a lot of new yahoo groups to
      support various candidates in 2008, and I don't think there's a
      single one for Kerry. There's groups for Russ Feingold, Evan
      Bayh, Hillary Clinton (and some anti-Hillary groups), Bill
      Richardson, Michael Badnarik (the Libertarian), and some
      Republican groups that are 2008-focused but haven't picked a
      specific candidate. But none for John Kerry. Another interesting
      thing about 2008: it will be the first time since 1928 when neither
      party nominated a sitting president or vice president (unless
      Cheney decided not too old after all, or unless Cheney and/or
      Bush resign, die, or are removed from office before then, or
      unless the 22nd Amendment is repealed and George stays in
      office for the rest of his life).

      A correction: in 1952 neither party nominated a sitting president
      or vice president, but President Truman did apparently seek
      renomination for a short time. He dropped out after losing
      support to someone named Estes Kefauver, if I'm not mistaken.
      And, as others have pointed out, Eisenhower was practically a
      president-in-waiting by 1952 anyhow. I've even heard that
      Truman tried to convince Eisenhower to run as a Democrat in
      1948, but Eisenhower declined.

      About waiting a year after the election for the inauguration, that
      sounds kind of like how it used to be. Until the 1930s, the
      inauguration was in March. If we waited a year after the election
      for the inauguration these days, then September 11 would have
      happened on Clinton's watch, not Bush's.
       
      --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, "tonymaloley" <
      am7788zz@m...> wrote:
      >
      > Wouldn't it be hilarious if the Supreme Court or God or
      somebody
      > stepped in and made Kerry the new president?
      >
      > I'm afraid we would then have a little civil war. At this point it's
      > probably best to let the babies have their way.
      >
      > And next time, can't we shell out a few billion for pencils, paper,
      > and boxes, and maybe hire some people for counting, and a
      warehouse
      > to keep the ballots? And have people put their name and
      phone number
      > on the ballots, so we can verify legitimacy if we have to?
      >
      > Too much cost? I say it would be a small price to pay. Takes
      too
      > long? Let the election take place a year before swearing in,
      what
      > would it hurt? Might make it harder for a president to do his job
      > and campaign at the same time, but that ought to be illegal
      anyway...
    • Ram Lau
      ... Kefauver was a leader in the Senate, nominated as the VP-candidate in 1956 by Adlai Stevenson. He and Al Gore Senior and LBJ were the only Southern liberal
      Message 2 of 8 , Jan 2, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        > A correction: in 1952 neither party nominated a sitting president
        > or vice president, but President Truman did apparently seek
        > renomination for a short time. He dropped out after losing
        > support to someone named Estes Kefauver, if I'm not mistaken.

        Kefauver was a leader in the Senate, nominated as the VP-candidate in
        1956 by Adlai Stevenson. He and Al Gore Senior and LBJ were the only
        Southern liberal Democrats in the fifties.


        > And, as others have pointed out, Eisenhower was practically a
        > president-in-waiting by 1952 anyhow. I've even heard that
        > Truman tried to convince Eisenhower to run as a Democrat in
        > 1948, but Eisenhower declined.

        They didn't like each other. Eisenhower hated Truman for desegregating
        the military and actually had a fight on that issue.

        Ram
      • greg
        Kind of reminds me of the current policy on gays in the military. But of course don t ask, don t tell wouldn t work for skin color. I wonder if Eisenhower
        Message 3 of 8 , Jan 2, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Kind of reminds me of the current policy on gays in the military. But
          of course 'don't ask, don't tell' wouldn't work for skin color.

          I wonder if Eisenhower ever thought about resegrating the military?
          --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, "Ram Lau" <ramlau@y...> wrote:
          >
          > They didn't like each other. Eisenhower hated Truman for desegregating
          > the military and actually had a fight on that issue.
          >
          > Ram
        • tonymaloley
          ... desegregating the military and actually had a fight on that issue. I would pay $50 to see that fight on pay per view. Ike would probably be favored, but
          Message 4 of 8 , Jan 2, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, "Ram Lau" <ramlau@y...> wrote:
            > They didn't like each other. Eisenhower hated Truman for
            desegregating the military and actually had a fight on that issue.

            I would pay $50 to see that fight on pay per view. Ike would
            probably be favored, but Harry seems like a scrapper.
          • Ram Lau
            ... Kind of reminds me of this quote: Everyone knows that gays have served honorably in the military since at least the time of Julius Caesar. - Barry
            Message 5 of 8 , Jan 2, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              > Kind of reminds me of the current policy on gays in the military. But
              > of course 'don't ask, don't tell' wouldn't work for skin color.

              Kind of reminds me of this quote:

              "Everyone knows that gays have served honorably in the military since
              at least the time of Julius Caesar." - Barry Goldwater

              Ram
            • Ram Lau
              ... Physically speaking, Ike would crush Harry in the first round. But a presidential debate between them two would be amazing, given one decided to drop two
              Message 6 of 8 , Jan 2, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                > I would pay $50 to see that fight on pay per view. Ike would
                > probably be favored, but Harry seems like a scrapper.

                Physically speaking, Ike would crush Harry in the first round. But a
                presidential debate between them two would be amazing, given one
                decided to drop two atomic bombs and another fought a World War.

                Ram
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.