Election Breakdown From A Canadian Viewpoint

wow, that's a lot of republican rhetoric. lemme guess, the national post is canada's answer to the weekly standard, right?

 

I thought that was a pretty fair write up.

 

Experience is not the only qualification for a presidential candidate; if it were, then Nixon, not JFK, would've won the 1960 presidential election. And candidates who have more experience do not always make the best president. W. Bush was perceived as having alot of experience as the governor of Texas, but look how he turned out in these 8 years.

 

Well, of course there is.

When you have 436 candidates running, you're bound to have more of it somewhere

 

aside from the snarky comments and exaggerations about the dems (edwards' $1200 haircut??? wasn't it $400?). and the extremely favorable comments on the reps, yeah it's fair.

the dems had plenty of experienced candidates (richardson, biden, dodd), the media just didn't go down on them like they did for hillary and obama.

 

Experience isn't everything. Just look at Gordon Brown.

 

Biden and Dodd were both favorites of mine.

 

both were decent candidates. i was pulling for richardson.

 

I agree, when I read that, that's what I thought

Again, I agree with you. If I had to vote for a Dem this election cycle, it would have been Richardson. He actually cut taxes, unusual for a Democrat.

 

Because Nixon wasn't shot less than three years into his presidency.

Though I agree, in terms of policy, Nixon did a hell of a lot more than Kennedy did. Though at the same time, he completely damaged the face of the American presidency.

 

Nixon's Presidency is horribly tainted because he's a criminal, but he was a great President regardless.

 

Kennedy is the most overrated President EVER.

 

I wouldn't call FDR overrated. The New Deal was necessary for its time and he had a great hand at leadership during World War II.

He's right up there with George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, Thomas Jefferson, and Ronald Reagan as one of the best Presidents.

 

The New Deal helped the people who were hurt by the Great Depression. It's a relic today, but it was needed then.

Civil Rights weren't the forefront at that time. And he had no choice but to ally with Stalin.

 

Not to mention getting the US into Vietnam out of pure negligence and corruption.

Take out Reagan, and I'd agree.

As for the article, it does gloss over the Republicans.

Rudy, while good economically, monumentally f**ked-up with 9/11.

Romney's comment about "freedom requires faith" still creeps me out and from the recent spat with the AP reporter he looks like he'll snap and turn into Mormon Hulk at the drop of a hat.

McCain, from when Blair left and until very recently, was George Bush's sock puppet.

Huckabee is a completely insane, racist, homophobic piece of crap.

Paul, while definately the smartest guy in the room, was negligent and let racist asswipes write in his newsletter, took dubious donations and screwed over groups after taking their donations (such as the 9/11 Truth Movement).

Really, there's not many canidates on either side that really inspires at this point.

 

But what about Barrack Obama and his sexiness?














(that was a joke, by the way)

 

Brains before beauty.

 

Like MaskedMan, I also don't believe Reagan ranks as one of the best presidents in U.S. history. Cold War was ending because Soviet Union was getting bankrupt, and any president at that time would've "ended" Cold War. And Reagan's economic boom was rather short-lived, and he delivered a gigantic deficit that lasted until Clinton took office. He was a very charismatic president, but not one of "the" best.