History will kind to George W. Bush (outside of the vacuum where we "live" at this time.) I have no doubt.
CW ----- Original Message ----- From: "jgg1000a" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "PoliticalForum" <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 04:10 Subject: Re: Was this a tidal wave election? Or is the MSM and the Democrats just lying. I suggest that that is exactly how NON bi-partisanship starts... Thinking "we won, you lose" is the problem here... This is the style the Congressional Democrats and Obama have in fact practiced... To become bi-partisan requires restraining your sides crazies in order to get the support of the more moderate opposition, and this what FDR and Reagan did... And this is in fact what GW Bush has done for the last 2-4 years... I note that unlike FDR/Hoover, Bush took action before the next President took office... FDR refused to take joint action and prolonged the Depression... On Nov 5, 4:00 pm, Hollywood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > jgg, > > Only important word in your post was VICTORY. > > On Nov 5, 2:54 pm, jgg1000a <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > The answer is this is NOT a tidal wave election... Why? > > > 1) the margin of victory is less than GHBush election in 1988, and far > > less than the elections in 1984, 1972, 1964, 1956, 1952, for all of > > FDR's terms... > > > 2) The margin of victory between the PV of the two candidates is only > > 5.5%, and when compared to the other change years of 1980, 1964, 1952, > > 1932 the margin is only half of those years... > > > 3) The change in Congress is moderate and NOT historic. Between 1929 > > to 1933 ( by election and Presidential election) the Democrats picked > > up 20 seats... Between 1959 to 1961 they picked up 15 senators.... > > Between 1979 and 1981 the GOP picked up 12 seats... The Democrats in > > the last two election have picked up 12. In the House the figures > > are less impressive... For FDR the pickup was over 150... For > > Eisenhower it was 50. For Kennedy it was 30 (gain 50 in 1958 lose 20 > > in 1961. For Reagan it was 59. For Obama it has been 50... > > > The real question here is can the Democrats and Obama restrain the LW > > radical base??? If not, we will see a quick ebb tide reversal... --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
