McCain is too old and has been through too much in life. He has no real agenda and he has no chance of presenting the leadership needed by America at this time. Electing McCain would be worst than Jimmy Carter. I like Jimmy Carter but do you remember the gas lines? George Bush beat McCain, Ronald Reagan may well have had Alzheimer's before he left the white house. McCain has already had health problems. Who knows what he might do in the event of a terrorist attack like 9/11 imagine him pushing the red button......
"do.rflex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Marek Reavis" wrote: > > Thanks, Do.rflex, for posting this (below), I appreciate the > historical pinpoints, and agree with the last paragraph completely: > > "Summary: Hillary Clinton's reference to 1968 was accurate (that > campaign was still in doubt) but tacky. Her reference to Bill's 1992 > race was wrong on the facts. Like Tsongas, Hillary Clinton is not > (yet) mathematically eliminated. Like Tsongas, Hillary's campaign is > out of money. Unlike Tsongas, she doesn't know when it's a good time > to wrap it up." > > And as how to determine *when" is the "good time" to wrap up her > campaign, Clinton is obviously using a different metric to measure > that than the writer's (above). She's clearly not opted > for "gracious" and "magnanimous"; nor should she, necessarily, but > many people (I do), have fond memories of the Clinton presidency and > I favor the scenario of a great-hearted Hilary Clinton ending her > campaign with some grand, magnanimous gesture, and garnering the > approbation and respect of everyone, even if she didn't win the > nomination (and accepts some cabinet level appointment -- or Supreme > Court justice). But that's just my preference for a particular > version of events and it's clear that she has not made her decisions > along those lines. And, again, she's doesn't have to. > > We'll see how her decision plays out. It certainly makes the whole > drama that much more interesting. And although it would be a > complete bummer if Obama loses in the general election, A McCain > presidency doesn't totally freak me out. No matter what John McCain > says to pander to his constituency, even a McCain presidency would > (overall) result in significant improvements, both in the US and the > world (IMO). McCain would be in a weak position relative to > Congress; he wouldn't (he doesn't now) have the whole-hearted > support of the Republican base; but, he's far more prudent and > informed than Bush, and less idealogically (and religiously) > informed; and he's pragmatic and used to working for consensus in > congressional and senatorial lawmaking, unlike Bush who has only > occupied executive positions. > > Marek I appreciate your views on McCain if by some chance he gets elected. I hadn't thought of it as it might be. Besides your very plausible analysis, it IS at least a little comforting to know that he isn't George W Bush. [snip] ------------------------------------ To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
