Author Topic: Question about American history (Read 1076 times)

NUKE · « **Reply #15 on:** October 18, 2004, 11:57:14 PM »

I wouldn't mind not having a term limit. I can't think of a time in history when a term limit would have been a bad thing....other than Clinton.

If Americans want to vote Bush into office for the next 12 years, who could blame us?

Wotan · « **Reply #16 on:** October 19, 2004, 12:04:44 AM »

Quote

Well... if third terms were allowed, Willy Jeff would still be the president.

Not necessarily Ronny would have a third term easily. Who knows what would have happened after that. Ole' Willy could still be flashing truck stop potatos in Arkansas.

Term limits haven't made our country better. FDR was a terrible president but the 'people' picked him. In fact every 8 years we are guaranteed to see another upstart running for President claiming he has all new answer to all the new problems.

How great would it be if politicians ran on a platform of 'I will do nothing in the interest of not screwing everything up'.

Every new candidate will try to sell you on the idea of how screwed up the last guy left it and at the same time try and convince you only he can fix it.

The only limits we need are limits set on how long Congress stays in session. Give umm 3 months to do what they gotta do then send home for 9 unless there's an emergency.

Otto · « **Reply #17 on:** October 19, 2004, 12:20:47 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sandman
Well... if third terms were allowed, Willy Jeff would still be the president.

Bill (blue dress) Clinton never won a majority of the votes in either of his elections as President. Do you think he's be so lucky a third time?

StarOfAfrica2 · « **Reply #18 on:** October 19, 2004, 01:04:42 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Otto
Bill (blue dress) Clinton never won a majority of the votes in either of his elections as President. Do you think he's be so lucky a third time?

Not sure where YOU live and vote, but in the US Bill Clinton won the majority. 50% of the popular vote in 96 compared to Dole's 42%. In 92 he took 43% compared to GB Sr.'s 37%. You need to quit using that new math.

If I remember correctly, GB Jr. is only the third president to lose the popular election and win the presidency. Both previous times were in the 1800s.

Wolfala · « **Reply #19 on:** October 19, 2004, 01:26:05 AM »

For clinton, let me check my figures - but i'm pretty certain when he was getting a hummer every now and then the DOW was way up - so yes - I think there is a correlation. I'd give him a 3rd is only a hummer was required to keep the economy going.

Vudak · « **Reply #20 on:** October 19, 2004, 05:55:41 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Wotan

FDR was a terrible president but the 'people' picked him.

Not sure I agree with you on that Wotan...

My Grandfather (who spent much of his early life living in boxcars, alleys, whatever he could find, terrible poverty, "Angela's Ashes" type story) summed it up pretty well:

"I never liked Reagan because he earned his wealth but then seemed to forget where he came from, but I loved FDR because he was born into his wealth yet devoted his life to working for the poor".

Besides, name another president that actually had someone on his white house staff answer the phone and try to help someone out with their life problems??? Try that today.

Or name one who's been willing to drop one idea of his, admit it didn't work, and try a different idea until one finally does. That's near unthinkable today.

The man was genuinely loved by millions, and is still revered by them today. Go into a convalescent home and ask around. You'll see some dull eyes start shining at the mere mention of his name.

Bottom line is, you aren't adored like that if you're a "terrible" president. You don't make top 3 in numerous books (of course, just opinions but still), if you're "terrible".

You just don't.

storch · « **Reply #21 on:** October 19, 2004, 06:42:35 PM »

Roosevelt did more long term damage to America than any other President with his domestic policies.

His appeasement of Soviet Dictator Josef Stalin was treasonous.

Otto · « **Reply #22 on:** October 19, 2004, 06:43:35 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by StarOfAfrica2
Not sure where YOU live and vote, but in the US Bill Clinton won the majority. 50% of the popular vote in 96 compared to Dole's 42%. In 92 he took 43% compared to GB Sr.'s 37%. You need to quit using that new math.

If I remember correctly, GB Jr. is only the third president to lose the popular election and win the presidency. Both previous times were in the 1800s.

You are correct. I should have said that Bill Clinton never won 50% of the vote in either election. (in 1996 it was 49%) He did win a majority of all the votes cast in both.

Also, I live outside of Philadelphia and vote there as well.

Vudak · « **Reply #23 on:** October 19, 2004, 06:54:55 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by storch

His appeasement of Soviet Dictator Josef Stalin was treasonous.

I'm a Pole. I'll agree with that to an extent. Then again, it's easy to label such things with hindsight... Besides, if appeasing dictators that are for the time being working "with" you, is treasonous, well, our executive branch has a dark history that continues to this day.

As for his domestics, well, people could eat again. That was a big issue of the day.

"People don't eat in the long run, people eat every day" - Harry Hopkins

(approximate quote might have used slightly different wording, don't have it in front of me).

Wotan · « **Reply #24 on:** October 20, 2004, 12:48:45 AM »

Vudak, Roosevelts policies didn't pull the US out of the depression. Most were feel good messures. I have no interest in having a long discussion but my opinion stands.

Roosevelt and Johnson were the worst Presidents this country has had.

storch · « **Reply #25 on:** October 20, 2004, 07:12:43 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Wotan
Vudak, Roosevelts policies didn't pull the US out of the depression. Most were feel good messures. I have no interest in having a long discussion but my opinion stands.

Roosevelt and Johnson were the worst Presidents this country has had.

dang wotox!!!! Johnson should have been charged with treason and tried for his mishandling of the execution of the Viet nam conflict. We are still paying for his and Roosevelt's domestic policies today. Can anyone say the "A" word?

If the execution of the Viet Nam conflict had been handled the same way Bush 41 and now Bush 43 are handling their conflicts the results would have been similar to the Iraq conflicts. We would have Ho Chi Ming's scalp hanging outside of our lodge and John Kerry wouldn't have to be embarassed by his collaboration with the enemy.

Easily the two most incompetent men in the oval office in modern times.

lasersailor184 · « **Reply #26 on:** October 20, 2004, 07:33:01 AM »

Also, inconsideration for VP's.

If a President dies before the mid way mark, that is considered one term (assuming he serves the whole way) for the Vice President.

If a president dies after the mid way mark, it is not considered one term for the VP.

Just clarifying, but some handsomehunkes were calling for Bill Clinton to be vice president. He cannot just incase the president dies, putting Clinton into his third term.

storch · « **Reply #27 on:** October 20, 2004, 07:45:42 AM »

I think you are wrong there. IIRC the 22nd amendment states the terms may not be consecutive terms He may if he wishes run again.

Boroda · « **Reply #28 on:** October 20, 2004, 12:35:06 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by storch
Roosevelt did more long term damage to America than any other President with his domestic policies.

His appeasement of Soviet Dictator Josef Stalin was treasonous.

His friendship with USSR was probably the most important thing he have done.

You have to admit that Soviet money paid for American technology and goods in the 30s really helped to get out of economical crisis.

I wish Russia had a leader like FDR now. Our situation is close to what US had in early-30s. We need a "New deal", but our leaders just make deals between themselves and methodicaly kill what remained from USSR...

ra · « **Reply #29 on:** October 20, 2004, 12:53:45 PM »

Quote

You have to admit that Soviet money paid for American technology and goods in the 30s really helped to get out of economical crisis.

What?