Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kenneth Kirk who wrote (3)	6/13/1999 12:34:00 AM
From: Little Engine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

It will be pretty sad if Al Gore turns out to be "more exciting" than George W. Bush... I imagine that both will stumble and bore people to the very end, with Gore winning on low turnout. Looks like a replay of the Bush-Dukakis campaign in many ways. Expect lots of negative campaigning on both sides if that's the matchup, since neither of the guys will inspire anybody.

To: Kenneth Kirk who wrote (3)	6/13/1999 1:30:00 AM
From: MKTBUZZ	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Among Bush's policy proposals were promises to reduce marginal tax rates, allow Americans to invest their Social Security taxes and add ''a touch of iron'' to the U.S. military. He leveled one attack against President Clinton and Vice President Al Gore, saying ''they did not invent prosperity'' in America. His top goals: -''Draw a moral line'' and encourage personal responsibility from Americans. -Get faith-based organizations and such as churches involved in easing social problems. -Improve schools so that ''no child will be left behind.'' In his centerpiece address at a country barbecue, Bush promised to end ''this season of cynicism'' in American politics. Republicans can be conservative without being mean, he said, offering these prescriptions: -Cut taxes, but help people save and make more money. -Cut welfare rolls, but ''confront the suffering that remains.'' -Retain local control of schools, but ''make sure that no single child gets left behind.'' ''I know that this approach has been criticized, but why? Is compassion beneath us? Is mercy below us? Should our party be led by someone who boasts of a hard heart?'' Bush said.

To: Kenneth Kirk who wrote (3)	6/13/1999 2:31:00 AM
From: somethingwicked	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

I wouldn't call Gore exciting, Ken. But Bush has no where to go in the polls now except down. And, the elections a long, long, way away. This means that he will eventually have to take some positions on issues of substance. Then he will take some hits. Elizabeth Dole would bring a lot of excitement. But, we've got to get Bob off of TV touting Viagra. I guess the old guy's so happy he can hold something in his hand besides a pen, he wants the world to know about it.

To: Kenneth Kirk who wrote (3)	6/15/1999 2:33:00 AM
From: Bob Lao-Tse	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

!!!!!!!!Gore in 2000!!!!!!!! (Hehehe!) Sorry, just pulling your leg... If the Democrats run Gore, any Republican could beat him. Hell, Pat Paulsen (RIP) could've beat Gore. If they run Bradley they might have a chance, but I seriously doubt they'll do that. You see... it Gore's turn. I do agree with you about the nature of Republican candidates, at least recently. I would only add that at least Michael Dukakis and Walter Mondale fit in the "milktoast" category as well. I think it's more just the nature of politics in general than of the Republicans in particular to run the most palatable candidate. Well... at least palatable by a sort of senior citizen's cafeteria standard. The reason for this? status quo Or as a song-- <rock the boat> Don't rock the boat baby <rock the boat> Don't tip the boat o-ver... I haven't really checked the candidates out yet. To me it's sort of like the Super Bowl. I can get as worked up about my favorites as I want, but ultimately it'll come down to two, and who those two are is pretty much out of my hands. Gonna wait and see... -BLT

To: Kenneth Kirk who wrote (3)	6/15/1999 9:43:00 PM
From: Tom Clarke	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

It is too bad that the candidates with the best ideas and the most courage get marginalized in the GOP, but after 8 years of Clinton, anybody they throw up there is gonna be an improvement. I spent 3 weeks in New Hampshire in 96 working for Buchanan. Believe me, there is no one I'd rather see in the White House. But this election is different. It is crucial that we win. Four years of Gore would be a disaster. The Supreme Court appointments alone are reason enough to vote for George W. As wishy washy as his father was, at least he gave us Clarence Thomas. Who would Gore give us? I shudder to think.