How many of you would like to see Bush as permanent "president"? serious answers please

Grady - about Bill Clinton referring to a country "living the same problems it did twenty years earlier" and a former president coming back to assume the mantle, I'm sure he was referring to British politicians like William Gladstone, who was last elected Prime Minister when he was over 80. In Canada, former PM Trudeau often used that example to say that he might run again some day... even though he was over 75 and had already served four terms.

If a country can't find some talented politicians in a younger generation to take up the challenges, then that country has a big problem.

And... for the partisans of Jeb... if a party can't resort to other talented people within its ranks to assume the mantle, if it has to defer to the "family name", there's a big problem indeed...

Originally posted by ZeddicusZulZorander

Originally posted by Bout Time
We have two stolen elections in a row, with a sizable portion of the country willfully blind to it, another more sizable chunk completely disenfranchaised and the last portion oblivious, yet poorer & sicker none the less.
No to consecutive terms, but if you have a president, like Clinton, who reversed the destructive policies of the previous 12 years prior to his first term, why not take him in 2004 or 2008, should he muster the votes?
People actually knowing what they're getting? Good god, can't have that, can we!?!?

Hmmm, proof of a "stolen election"? If the election wears a blue dress, maybe...

I like the spin.

Saying things like "stolen", "oblivious", and "blind" when referring to the fact that democrats lost and continue to cry about it, certainly helps the credibility. I guess you're right. BJ Bill is just a Saint of Leadership (among interns anyway) despite the fact that he lied to the world over and over and over and got caught.

Zed, I don't think you could part the curtain of dingleberries wide enough to extract your head so you can see proof; so why ask for what's been vetted on ATS? It's there, and since my prose gets your tights in a bunch, you can look to several others who've made analogous arguments. But, Zed ( you should have put a 'Z' on Dean Cain's chest! ) , when the heck will a conspiracy be acknowledged as valid by the very entity that's enabled it!?!? Is a GOP Congress, Supreme Court, and two GOP State Secretaries who were State GOP Co-Chairs & Executive branch going to blow the whistle on getting their boy in the top seat? Or, are things like the 14th Amendment going to be used in a twisted & contorted way to bring "closure" to things? You see, being one of the champions of the willfully blind, I'm sure 2000 & 2004 will go down for you as a few 'hiccup' level anomalies on the way to the "better man winning".
"Continuing to Cry about it" - WOW! That's just an adorable piece of nonsense ! I want to pinch it's cheeks and make cooing noises! Forget THOUSANDS of Bush votes being tabulated in an area with 800 registered voters! Forget that several counties in Florida, all above 85% registered Democrat, were won by Bush by a substantial margin!

As for the dispersion on President Clinton, sure, fixate on his penis and a married man lying about infidelity; since it, of course, was the first time in recorded history that sort of thing occurred. History has already recorded his turn around of the US economy, and record numbers in job creation + welfare decrease + poverty decrease, after 12 years of failed Republican oligarchy. Four years of Bush has only enhanced that further.

...on the other hand... its headed down this way and aint nobody gonna stop the flow of things.

Iwonder if any psychics out there can see who the president will be in 2008.
Cant wait to see what they see in their crystal ball.