Pigtails

ROTFLMAO!!! Now I know you're out of your stupid little mind!

Pigtails

I like you!

anotherlimey

I think you'll find it would have happened. But we'll never know now.

Ah well, we could attack the argument but that would be too difficult wouldn't it.

snowbunny

He's a world class asshole who makes the state look bad. Welfare? Texas has no welfare. Texas is a weak governor state -- the lieutenant governor runs things, so Bush had very little to do with most governmental affairs. However, he was in a position of prominence, including holding veto power and the power to appoint members to various state boards. His choices in these areas were awful.

Try to find a glowing review of Bush's time as governor of Texas that comes from any even slightly unbiased source.

fatbrit

Underhand tactics are, I would presume, the traditional paths open to the minority parties in a democratic legislature.

Certainly gotta get rid of those ASAP!!!

anotherlimey

Perhaps dissolving the minority party would be the best option! Lets just have one party rule, I mean what's so wrong with that?

snowbunny

Interesting poll:

http://www.yougov.com/archives/pdf/MOS020101006.pdf

While the Daily Mail readers felt (in May of 2003) that the UK was justified in attacking Iraq, they *did not* believe any WMDs would be found. Hmmm.

fatbrit

Works a treat in many parts of the world, I believe. Of course, if the dictator gets out of hand, the US may invade you...

pingu

The 3.8 million Texans that voted for him in the 2000 election may disagree with you.

Franklin

Just an observation: the last "close" election left the Democratic Party the minority party in both the Senate and the House of Representatives, and a Republican President in the White House. That was a hell of a close (not) election.

The Democratic Party is not doing a lot, imho, to win back the Senate, HoR or the Presidency. The Democratic Party needs to lead based on policy and not on negative commentary. Kennedy is misleading the party; while I like the current head of the DNC, putting him into that position was a major strategic error. The Democratic Party has to win votes in the middle states to win back power in the Congress and White House. Propagating the notion that those that voted for the Republican Party are racist idiots is a major vote loser in the middle states. Swing voters who voted Republican last election cycle sure (not) want to hear that message. Sadly, the Democratic Party are into name calling, negative diatribes that simply don't impress swing voters in the middle states.

I suspect a Clinton will be running as the Democratic nominee for President come next election cycle. If that happens, the Democrats will once again fail to win back the White House and will have to remain content with name calling and outpouring negative diatribes that once again will not win critical votes or minds in the middle states.

fatbrit

Shome mistake here, surely?

anotherlimey

Yeah, and the Republicans are taking the moral high ground? Don't make me laugh.

They are both as bad as each other in that department.

pingu

I think the point that Franklin is trying to make is that the Republicans are the ones that are in power, and if the Democrats want to win in 2008 they will have to come up with something a little more constructive than calling everybody racist that doesn't agree with them

Pigtails

Well, they'd be smart enough to do that if they hadn't lowered the standards in our public schools so that more kids pass in order to increase their delicate self esteem.

scrubbedexpat099

Similar situation to when the Conservatives imploded, all the Democrats have to do is to look electable, Bush is their best friend.