The JP.net Presidential Poll

[Brad1711]

How about George W. Bush for a third term?

My hair actually stood up when I read this.

[TAP-A343]

How about George W. Bush for a third term?

[Sweetheart]

Perhaps The Ladies Man might find his way here . . . ?

*clink* *wink*

[Joey]

Joey, Joey, Joey. You don't know very much about women, do you?



I have it on good authority that he is considering his options, along with some other political figures, but may be waiting for a time when the forum needs a boost.

Me? Know much about women? Nah, not me. LOL.

Perhaps The Ladies Man might find his way here . . . ?

[Half Bottle]

Oh my gosh I think I just crapped myself.
Skip ahead to 0:40

The really funny thing is I didn't even watch the video before posting the Cheney joke. I saw the screen shot and assumed the whole thing was going to be about Giuliani.

Go figure the first 30 seconds were all Dickie boy.

[Brad1711]

Dick Cheney is running?

Oh my gosh I think I just crapped myself.
Skip ahead to 0:40

[Half Bottle]

Don't forget to vote for the person who says "9/11", "Terrorism", and "Weapons of Mass Destruction" the most.

Dick Cheney is running?

[Brad1711]

Besides voting for the person who uses the word "change" the most, I will vote for the person who promises me the most "stuff".

Don't forget to vote for the person who says "9/11", "Terrorism", and "Weapons of Mass Destruction" the most.

[NewSowBreath]

Besides voting for the person who uses the word "change" the most, I will vote for the person who promises me the most "stuff".

[uy707]

Ron looks interesting enough.

Obama could be worth the consideration but I fear he will re-enact Carter's year ...

[seahawk]

Sometimes you do not need a great leader, sometimes a hard working person is just better. I do not like politicians with visions so much, as they often ignore reality in their drive to make the visions come true.

[HalcyonDays]

To me she brings more of the same hypocrisy which is a cornerstone for most politicians in varying amounts. For her however, it's pretty much her entire foundation.

But would you care to elaborate? I don't really understand what you are saying. Most of the people I know dislike her, and even more so with her current elevated level of bitchiness after she lost Iowa.

I am sure you're a very sociable person with a wide social circle, but that's still a very small number of people compared with the overall number of those who will cast votes ! All I'm saying is that Clinton raises very strong emotions in a lot of people, who rarely seem able to see past those emotions and often prejudices. I know she can sound shrill and her style can be criticized at times, and she doesn't 'turn me on' in a political or any other sense. However, looking beyond the superficial, I believe she does have the experience and the intellect to do the job. She has learned from experience and has a great analytical ability. She is probably as well equipped to deal with some of our serious problems as anyone. She has been very successful in persuading skeptical and conservative upstate New Yorkers to vote for her as senator, where I sense she has done a reasonably good job. Much of a presidential administration's success depends on the people appointed to White House staff and to Cabinet positions, and while there will be cronies (all presidents have their cronies, so what....), I think she will be better than some here, partly because of some of the experience she has had. I doubt she would ever be a great president, but I think we could do worse. It's true that this year the Republican field is lousy, simply lousy, so it's not difficult to rise above gross mediocrity.

[Brad1711]

Don't you think that you can draw a similar conclusion about other candidates, notably Romney and Giuliani, for example, even Obama and Edwards maybe, and maybe some others ? I don't know that Clinton is that different.

I agree with you wholeheartedly. I'm voting for Ron Paul.

[Greg]

Edwards. A Democrat who has more going for him than the gender/race thing. imo

[Airbus_A320]

She brings a certain conservatism and pragmatism to her liberalism, shall we say, which you'd think might appeal to a broad church.

To me she brings more of the same hypocrisy which is a cornerstone for most politicians in varying amounts. For her however, it's pretty much her entire foundation.

But would you care to elaborate? I don't really understand what you are saying. Most of the people I know dislike her, and even more so with her current elevated level of bitchiness after she lost Iowa.