Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm sick of this thing about having to have only a bush or a Clinton to vote for again! Why wasn't this an issue when the present bushy ran?????And ran AGAIN?
In case no one has noticed only one Clinton has been president....
I'm sorry that she's in that position, but still... If I wanted to see the same last name on the ballot for my entire life, I'd move to Cuba.
No, but I certainly feel that my choices have been limited because of a couple of names. You aren't in the least bit concerned that a person in his/her 40s may never have been able to vote in a presidential election without a Bush or Clinton on the ballot? And how many of those elections have you felt you had to pick from the "lesser of two evils"?
No, but I certainly feel that my choices have been limited because of a couple of names. You aren't in the least bit concerned that a person in his/her 40s may never have been able to vote in a presidential election without a Bush or Clinton on the ballot? And how many of those elections have you felt you had to pick from the "lesser of two evils"?
That doesn't bother you at all?
No, why should it...your age shouldn't determine who you vote for either. Does it bother me that both bushes were elected...Oh ya, THAT bothers me but neither their name nor the fact that they're related is the reason.
What's in a name?...a Bush by any other name still smells!
In every election I have always picked the lesser of two evils...that's politics.
Politically active people no matter what their age determine WHO will run, or really really rich people.
You can always break the chain by voting for Obama....and even he is related to DICK cheney.
No, why should it...your age shouldn't determine who you vote for either. Does it bother me that both bushes were elected...Oh ya, THAT bothers me but neither their name nor the fact that they're related is the reason.
This will also be my first non-Bush, non-Clinton election, and I can also proudly say that I never voted for any of them. I'd be exaggerating a little though cause I didn't start voting in Presidential elections until 2000.
But I found your comment very interesting Who?Me?, because I agree, your age shouldn't determine who you vote for. But strangely enough, it really does. The most loyal block of Republican voters are those whose first voted in a presidential election for Reagan, and remained loyal to him and his party. I also don't think there's any denying that the Democratic nominee, whomever it may be will be more popular with first time voters this year, as a reaction to Bush. And it's been generally the case that people are more likely to remain loyal to the party they vote for in their first Presidential vote. I think it will do McCain a lot of good to be subtle, but to remind people of things he's been campaigning for since his first run at the Republican nomination *against* George W. Bush while we're still in the Primary season.
This will also be my first non-Bush, non-Clinton election, and I can also proudly say that I never voted for any of them. I'd be exaggerating a little though cause I didn't start voting in Presidential elections until 2000.
But I found your comment very interesting Who?Me?, because I agree, your age shouldn't determine who you vote for. But strangely enough, it really does. The most loyal block of Republican voters are those whose first voted in a presidential election for Reagan, and remained loyal to him and his party. I also don't think there's any denying that the Democratic nominee, whomever it may be will be more popular with first time voters this year, as a reaction to Bush. And it's been generally the case that people are more likely to remain loyal to the party they vote for in their first Presidential vote. I think it will do McCain a lot of good to be subtle, but to remind people of things he's been campaigning for since his first run at the Republican nomination *against* George W. Bush while we're still in the Primary season.
I agree(especially about McCain "distancing" himself from all that is "bush") but that wasn't the point of the exchange with atxcio who said, ""You aren't in the least bit concerned that a person in his/her 40s may never have been able to vote in a presidential election without a Bush or Clinton on the ballot? ""
That poster seems to think that there is something wrong if you weren't old enough to be able to vote for someone other than a bush or Clinton
and seemed to balk at voting for someone with the same name as someone else which isn't a very good reason to vote or not vote.
My original thought was that for some reason people seem to be objecting NOW instead of 3 or 7 years ago.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
