|
|
 Up |
  |
Author: Jerry KrausJerry Kraus Date: Aug 30, 2008 07:19
I've been thinking about the choice of Sarah Palin as the Republican
cadidate for Vice-President in Novemeber 2008. No experience, no
electoral votes, no appeal to anyone other than the right wing of the
Party, currently being investigated for corruption as Governor of an
insignificant, isolated state. And something has occurred to me. I
would have been a better choice for Vice President. So would you. So
would anyone. Anyone would have been more useful on the Republican
ticket than Sarah Palin. It's not easy to totally torpedo a
Presidential campaign with a merely poor choice for Vice-President.
You have to choose someone totally, and completely odious to the vast
majority of the electorate. And you can't do that by accident. The
Republicans want to lose in November.
|
| Show full article (1.96Kb) |
| 27 Comments |
|
|
Author: tgtg Date: Aug 30, 2008 08:11
On Aug 30, 10:19 am, Jerry Kraus yahoo.com> wrote:> I've been thinking about the choice of Sarah Palin as the Republican
> cadidate for Vice-President in Novemeber 2008. No experience, no
> electoral votes, no appeal to anyone other than the right wing of the
> Party, currently being investigated for corruption as Governor of an
> insignificant, isolated state. And something has occurred to me. I
> would have been a better choice for Vice President. So would you. So
> would anyone. Anyone would have been more useful on the Republican
> ticket than Sarah Palin. It's not easy to totally torpedo a
> Presidential campaign with a merely poor choice for Vice-President.
> You have to choose someone totally, and completely odious to the vast
> majority of the electorate. And you can't do that by accident. The
> Republicans want to lose in November.
>
> And, it's not hard to see why. As it is, the Congress, both the House
> and the Senate, will be 60%% Democrat in 2009. What would the Congress
> be after another 4 years of Republican control in the White House? It
> would be 75%% Democratic. Democrats would outnumber Republicans three
> to one. Republicans could never recover from this great a deficit in
> Congress, they would cease to exist as a Party when the Democrats ...
|
| Show full article (2.67Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Jerry KrausJerry Kraus Date: Aug 30, 2008 08:41
On Aug 30, 10:11 am, tg earthlink.net> wrote:> On Aug 30, 10:19 am, Jerry Kraus yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>>> I've been thinking about the choice of Sarah Palin as the Republican
>> cadidate for Vice-President in Novemeber 2008. No experience, no
>> electoral votes, no appeal to anyone other than the right wing of the
>> Party, currently being investigated for corruption as Governor of an
>> insignificant, isolated state. And something has occurred to me. I
>> would have been a better choice for Vice President. So would you. So
>> would anyone. Anyone would have been more useful on the Republican
>> ticket than Sarah Palin. It's not easy to totally torpedo a
>> Presidential campaign with a merely poor choice for Vice-President.
>> You have to choose someone totally, and completely odious to the vast
>> majority of the electorate. And you can't do that by accident. The
>> Republicans want to lose in November.
> ...
|
| Show full article (3.20Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: abelardabelard Date: Aug 30, 2008 09:18
On Sat, 30 Aug 2008 07:19:43 -0700 (PDT), Jerry Kraus
yahoo.com> wrote:
>I've been thinking about the choice of Sarah Palin as the Republican
>cadidate for Vice-President in Novemeber 2008. No experience, no
>electoral votes, no appeal to anyone other than the right wing of the
>Party, currently being investigated for corruption as Governor of an
>insignificant, isolated state. And something has occurred to me. I
>would have been a better choice for Vice President. So would you. So
>would anyone. Anyone would have been more useful on the Republican
>ticket than Sarah Palin. It's not easy to totally torpedo a
>Presidential campaign with a merely poor choice for Vice-President.
>You have to choose someone totally, and completely odious to the vast
>majority of the electorate. And you can't do that by accident. The
>Republicans want to lose in November.
your 'argument' would be more convincing if obarmy were not
considerably less qualified than palin...
and obarmy was not heavily enmeshed in corrupt chicago politics
rather than subject to unsupported demogocrat scuttlebutt
|
| Show full article (1.66Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: toolytooly Date: Aug 30, 2008 09:43
"tg" earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:bfc84b40-b9fa-4539-bfdd-315fdc8bd12c@73g2000hsx.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 30, 10:19 am, Jerry Kraus yahoo.com> wrote:> I've been thinking about the choice of Sarah Palin as the Republican
> cadidate for Vice-President in Novemeber 2008. No experience, no
> electoral votes, no appeal to anyone other than the right wing of the
> Party, currently being investigated for corruption as Governor of an
> insignificant, isolated state. And something has occurred to me. I
> would have been a better choice for Vice President. So would you. So
> would anyone. Anyone would have been more useful on the Republican
> ticket than Sarah Palin. It's not easy to totally torpedo a
> Presidential campaign with a merely poor choice for Vice-President.
> You have to choose someone totally, and completely odious to the vast
> majority of the electorate. And you can't do that by accident. The
> Republicans want to lose in November.
>
> And, it's not hard to see why. As it is, the Congress, both the House
> and the Senate, will be 60%% Democrat in 2009. What would the Congress
> be after another 4 years of Republican control in the White House? It
> would be 75%% Democratic. Democrats would outnumber Republicans three ...
|
| Show full article (3.61Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Jerry KrausJerry Kraus Date: Aug 30, 2008 11:54
On Aug 30, 11:18 am, abelard abelard.org> wrote:> On Sat, 30 Aug 2008 07:19:43 -0700 (PDT), Jerry Kraus
>
> yahoo.com> wrote:>>I've been thinking about the choice of Sarah Palin as the Republican
>>cadidate for Vice-President in Novemeber 2008. No experience, no
>>electoral votes, no appeal to anyone other than the right wing of the
>>Party, currently being investigated for corruption as Governor of an
>>insignificant, isolated state. And something has occurred to me. I
>>would have been a better choice for Vice President. So would you. So
>>would anyone. Anyone would have been more useful on the Republican
>>ticket than Sarah Palin. It's not easy to totally torpedo a
>>Presidential campaign with a merely poor choice for Vice-President.
>>You have to choose someone totally, and completely odious to the vast
>>majority of the electorate. And you can't do that by accident. The
>>Republicans want to lose in November.
>
> your 'argument' would be more convincing if obarmy were not
> considerably less qualified than palin...
> and obarmy was not heavily enmeshed in corrupt chicago politics ...
|
| Show full article (2.34Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: abelardabelard Date: Aug 30, 2008 13:06
On Sat, 30 Aug 2008 11:54:57 -0700 (PDT), Jerry Kraus
yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Aug 30, 11:18 am, abelard abelard.org> wrote:>> On Sat, 30 Aug 2008 07:19:43 -0700 (PDT), Jerry Kraus
>>
>> yahoo.com> wrote:>>>I've been thinking about the choice of Sarah...
|
| Show full article (2.81Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Jerry KrausJerry Kraus Date: Aug 30, 2008 13:14
On Aug 30, 3:06 pm, abelard abelard.org> wrote:> On Sat, 30 Aug 2008 11:54:57 -0700 (PDT), Jerry Kraus
>
>
>
>
>
> yahoo.com> wrote:>>On Aug 30, 11:18 am, abelard abelard.org> wrote:>>> On Sat, 30 Aug 2008 07:19:43 -0700 (PDT), Jerry Kraus
>
>>>>I've been thinking about the choice of Sarah Palin as the Republican
>>>>cadidate for Vice-President in Novemeber 2008. No experience, no
>>>>electoral votes, no appeal to anyone other than the right wing of the
>>>>Party, currently being investigated for corruption as Governor of an
>>>>insignificant, isolated state. And something has occurred to me. I
>>>>would have been a better choice for Vice President. So would you. So
>>>>would anyone. Anyone would have been more useful on the Republican
>>>>ticket than Sarah Palin. It's not easy to totally torpedo a ...
|
| Show full article (3.30Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: abelardabelard Date: Aug 30, 2008 13:29
On Sat, 30 Aug 2008 13:14:48 -0700 (PDT), Jerry Kraus
yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Aug 30, 3:06 pm, abelard abelard.org> wrote:>Somehow, I think they'll prefer a Harvard Law Professor over a loser
>in the Miss Alaska beauty pageant. This is about who we want as
>President, not who we want to go to bed with. McCain seems to have
>missed that small point. Or, perhaps not!
you are looking at it from the pov of an intellectual wanker...
'a harvard law professor' translates to the masses as...
intellectual wanker who has never done a real job....
to seriously able people and opinion formers it translates
into...never had any real responsibility or executive
experience....
to seriously educated people it translates to...soft course
relying on parrot memory with no scientific foundation...
*of course* he will appeal to some intellectual wankers but they
are a fairly small coterie....
|
| Show full article (1.49Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: janet_reno_jrjanet_reno_jr Date: Aug 30, 2008 13:51
On Aug 30, 10:19 am, Jerry Kraus yahoo.com> wrote:
> The Republicans want to lose in November.
Good call all the way, Dude.
Deja vu all over again - shades of 1996.
When they ran Dole against Clinton - another word for "no-show".
Looks like they're planning another no-show for '08.
Could be they have no serious contenders to offer, so they'll run a
ticket of sure-thing losers.
However - should they decide to steal another election with McCain-
Palin ..
|
| |
| no comments |
|
RELATED THREADS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
