Texsox Posted January 23, 2006 Share Posted January 23, 2006 QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jan 20, 2006 -> 07:07 AM) Good I say. Hopefully he and John McCain breakaway and establish some kind of honest to goodness moderate party. While I like both guys, and of plausable scenarios, that would be a great ticket, I think their time has passed. McCain should have been elected in 2000, but an effective Bush strategy kept him out. I think we need more of a Reagan get tough and kick ass around the world guy. These guys are too soft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted January 23, 2006 Share Posted January 23, 2006 QUOTE(Texsox @ Jan 23, 2006 -> 12:23 PM) While I like both guys, and of plausable scenarios, that would be a great ticket, I think their time has passed. McCain should have been elected in 2000, but an effective Bush strategy kept him out. I think we need more of a Reagan get tough and kick ass around the world guy. These guys are too soft. I really wish we could get a candidate from EITHER party that would take a hard line against terrorism, look at the REAL effects of tax cuts, be a fiscal conservative, and steer the government OUT of our day-to-day lives. Where is that type of candidate likely to emerge from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted January 23, 2006 Share Posted January 23, 2006 QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jan 23, 2006 -> 07:33 AM) I really wish we could get a candidate from EITHER party that would take a hard line against terrorism, look at the REAL effects of tax cuts, be a fiscal conservative, and steer the government OUT of our day-to-day lives. Where is that type of candidate likely to emerge from? Not from either party. They all want to cut our taxes and give us free stuff. They want to trample on the constitution. They will also attract enemies as fast as they attract supporters. They would probably be very confrontational. I can think of a couple politicians that could pull it off. Some better than others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted January 23, 2006 Share Posted January 23, 2006 QUOTE(YASNY @ Jan 23, 2006 -> 02:56 AM) Okay. I see where you are coming from now. But isn't that what you'd call smart politics on the part of the GOP? Sure, but then so would the idea of finding a new Democrat to represent CT in the Senate who wouldn't consider such a move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted January 23, 2006 Share Posted January 23, 2006 QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Jan 23, 2006 -> 09:00 AM) Sure, but then so would the idea of finding a new Democrat to represent CT in the Senate who wouldn't consider such a move. Now why would that be smart politics on the part of the GOP? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilliamTell Posted January 23, 2006 Share Posted January 23, 2006 Oh come on now, leave Lieberman alone, he's a good guy. haha this won't happen but wouldn't it be crazy if Lieberman was the Democratic nominee and McCain was the Republican nominee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted January 23, 2006 Share Posted January 23, 2006 QUOTE(WilliamTell @ Jan 23, 2006 -> 11:54 AM) Oh come on now, leave Lieberman alone, he's a good guy. haha this won't happen but wouldn't it be crazy if Lieberman was the Democratic nominee and McCain was the Republican nominee. Then we might have an election that was based on issues instead of personalities. Wait! What am I saying? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted January 23, 2006 Share Posted January 23, 2006 QUOTE(WilliamTell @ Jan 23, 2006 -> 12:54 PM) Oh come on now, leave Lieberman alone, he's a good guy. haha this won't happen but wouldn't it be crazy if Lieberman was the Democratic nominee and McCain was the Republican nominee. I for one would be thrilled. Seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilliamTell Posted January 23, 2006 Share Posted January 23, 2006 QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 23, 2006 -> 12:04 PM) I for one would be thrilled. Seriously. I would be thrilled too, it'd be awesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted January 23, 2006 Share Posted January 23, 2006 QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 23, 2006 -> 12:04 PM) I for one would be thrilled. Seriously. As would I. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted January 23, 2006 Share Posted January 23, 2006 QUOTE(Texsox @ Jan 23, 2006 -> 01:47 PM) Not from either party. They all want to cut our taxes and give us free stuff. They want to trample on the constitution. They will also attract enemies as fast as they attract supporters. They would probably be very confrontational. I can think of a couple politicians that could pull it off. Some better than others. I forgot. You're right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted January 23, 2006 Share Posted January 23, 2006 QUOTE(YASNY @ Jan 23, 2006 -> 12:51 PM) Now why would that be smart politics on the part of the GOP? Because, for the most part, it's not party line that people vote for in Congressional elections, it's the incumbent. Once you seat someone in a post, it's very difficult to unseat someone in the following election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 23, 2006 Share Posted January 23, 2006 QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Jan 23, 2006 -> 01:24 PM) Because, for the most part, it's not party line that people vote for in Congressional elections, it's the incumbent. Once you seat someone in a post, it's very difficult to unseat someone in the following election. And given how important seniority can be towards getting plum assignments on committees in the House and Senate, and how important those committee assignments and chairmanships can be for bringing home federal dollars to your state...there's actually a real major disincentive to replace someone who's served more than 1 term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted January 24, 2006 Share Posted January 24, 2006 QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jan 23, 2006 -> 12:18 PM) I forgot. You're right. LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted January 24, 2006 Share Posted January 24, 2006 QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Jan 23, 2006 -> 03:24 PM) Because, for the most part, it's not party line that people vote for in Congressional elections, it's the incumbent. Once you seat someone in a post, it's very difficult to unseat someone in the following election. It seems to me that you are making my case that it's smart politics. Of course, 'politics' being the key word. If it's not party lines, but unseating an incumbent that is so difficult, then wouldn't the appointee then be the incumbent and therefore more difficult to unseat? Then Balta reinforces by pointing out the 'disincentive to replace'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted January 24, 2006 Share Posted January 24, 2006 But if it's smart politics to draw someone out of the Senate and increase a majority for the Republicans, it's also smart politics to try to get that person out of the Senate and replaced with someone who wouldn't consider leaving the reservation, so to speak, and head off to a Presidential cabinet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted January 24, 2006 Share Posted January 24, 2006 QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Jan 24, 2006 -> 07:13 AM) But if it's smart politics to draw someone out of the Senate and increase a majority for the Republicans, it's also smart politics to try to get that person out of the Senate and replaced with someone who wouldn't consider leaving the reservation, so to speak, and head off to a Presidential cabinet. I won't argue that point at all. That's up to voters of CT. Circle complete. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts