Mothering Forum banner
1 - 20 of 52 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
2,668 Posts
One must have been elected rather than appointed (or s-elected) by SCOTUS, to be re-elected.

(I know, it's sure to get me flamed, but, like it or not, that is how I see it!!!)

So, no danger of re-election that I can see.

Joyce in the mts.

(PS- SCOTUS is the Supreme Court of the US...saves typing is all)
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,668 Posts
I see what you are saying about an October surprise,...which is an entirely separate issue to me.

I am saying that since he was not elected the first time, regardless, he cannot be re-elected, so there can be no re-election.

It keeps me relatively sane to say it.

But I DO hear you, TiredX2.

Joyce in the mts.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
6,127 Posts
I heard Kerry was slightly ahead. Too early for the polls to mean much, but I'll grab onto any little reason for hope at this point. The idea of four more years of Shrub with no election to think about is frankly terrifying.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,842 Posts
I think he probably will be re-elected. Problem with Kerry is he is not as strongly favored among Dems as Bush is among Repubs.

Not crazy about the idea but don't think Kerry is an improvement. It's like in The Waitresses song "Redland"- It won't be better but I'll settle for different.

I'm voting for my friend Michael Badnarik, he's the Libertarian Party candiate and a big fan of DD!!


thistle
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
20,157 Posts
Joyce---

Quote:
I see what you are saying about an October surprise,...which is an entirely separate issue to me.

I am saying that since he was not elected the first time, regardless, he cannot be re-elected, so there can be no re-election.

It keeps me relatively sane to say it.

But I DO hear you, TiredX2.
Sorry, what I meant in my earlier post was:

What Joyce said TWICE (times 2= X2)

ITA about the selected resident

and then my drivel


Kay
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,508 Posts
Hmm, that link is interesting. I've been thinking about this a lot. I can see that Al Queda would want Bush to be re-s/elected, but would a terrorist strike against the US in October drive people to vote for or against him?

It seems like a gamble to me.

The Spanish electorate were unbelievably stupid imo, although so were the two parties. Both parties should have come out and stated categorically that people should vote how they would have voted prior to the terrorist attack. A precedent was set that gives confidence to any terrorist group wanting to influence an election. Trouble is, that they cannot accurately predict what affect an attack will have on the US electorate. IMO, anyway.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,343 Posts
Quote:
The Spanish electorate were unbelievably stupid imo, although so were the two parties. Both parties should have come out and stated categorically that people should vote how they would have voted prior to the terrorist attack.
I disagree. I think the Spanish electorate did what they would have done with or without the Madrid bombings. The majority of the Spanish were against the war to begin with, and were going to choose the Socialists because they had pledged to pull out of Iraq. The idiots in this election were the people in the incumbent government that tried to tag the Basques with the bombing, in spite of all evidence to the contrary. I do believe that their cynical attempt at trying to railroad the Basques may have tipped some undecided voters against them. The margin of victory might have been smaller without the bombing, but the result would have been the same.
 
1 - 20 of 52 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top