[geeks] Re: [rescue] It's official, the U.S. is screwed for 4 more years

[Francisco Javier Mesa-Martinez]

On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 22:39:59 -0500
  patrick at mail.zill.net (Patrick Giagnocavo) wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 08, 2004 at 06:21:45PM -0800, Francisco 
>Javier Mesa-Martinez wrote:
>> On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 23:31:34 +0000
>>  Lionel Peterson <lionel4287 at verizon.net> wrote:
>> >I hear Mr. Moore is blaming the "upset" on the religous 
>> >folks in "fly-over" states...
>> 
>> I am an optimist, so I see this actually as a good 
>>thing.
>> Maybe the DNC will finally grow a pair and kick 
>>McAullife
>> and the rest of spineless wimps and get an actual 
>>liberal
>> platform... just "not being Bush" proved to not be 
>>enough
> 
> It always amazes me to hear Democrats praise Bill 
>Clinton.

It goes both ways, a lot of Demos did not care much for 
Bill really. And in fact I am amazed at the visceral 
hatred that some elements of the republican party 
displayed for Clinton, since a lot of his policies where 
to the rigth of Nixon really.

> "Most popular President" ? -- got less total votes than 
>Gore or Bush
> did in 2000, or Kerry or Bush in 2004

Popularity is usually defined as approval rate when 
leaving the white house. Reagan did get fewer votes than 
those candidates too, and he was a more popular president 
than Bush (at least for now). Of course population growth 
and whatnot need to be taken into account to provide 
context to an election...
  
> Who installed McAuliffe?  Bill and Hillary.

The DLC has long been singled out as the real problem for 
the democratic future with their efforts to move the party 
towards a center right platform. And I sort of agree, in 
the same sense as the Club for Growth et al with their 
RINO hunts have presented a real problem for the 
Republican identity. Democrats need to be Democrats and 
stop trying to be republican-lite... IMHO. I am however 
not pleased at all with the radicalization of the GOP 
which can not lead to anything good either. And Rove and 
his power plays annoy the f'k out of me...

> Of course, "morals are relative" are one position, which 
>moral
> absolutists of one kind or another, would disagree with.

I just was alarmed that in this election with the milliard 
of more pressing issues a lot of people decided to vote 
for a "moral agenda" whatever that is. Especially things 
like gay marriage and what not, which IMHO is none of the 
government business...

> In two years there is another election, where 1/3 of the 
>Senate can be
> replaced and some of the House as well... so if they 
>screw up, there
> can be some indication of displeasure relatively 
>quickly.
> 

As I said it is going to be interesting.... I still miss 
the 90's though... :)