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.

Technology Stocks : All About Sun Microsystems -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Charles Tutt who wrote (33866)	7/24/2000 11:24:03 PM
From: fuzzymath	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 64865

Well, maybe stated in economic terms it's relevant. Gore and Clinton are two very different people -- Clinton ran as a "New Democrat" more mainstream, supported NAFTA, etc. His positions on many economic matters were abhorred by the more liberal union-oriented people who support Gore. Also, under Clinton's last 6 years, we've had a Democratic president who willingly acted with moderation in the face of a Republican-controlled Congress. We've had about as middle-of-the-road government as we can get in this country. So, who's to credit for this boom? If anything, isn't it the fact that we've had MODERATE government for the past 6 years? Now, if Gore is elected and the Democrats take over the House of Representatives, then we have Clinton's first 2 years, only with a much more ideological president. Clinton's goal was to be president, to have that power, to influence. To do that, he was willing to move across the political spectrum. Gore, I think, is far more ideological. I don't think a Gore presidency will continue what we've had, in terms of economic policy. I think we'll have a much more activist government, which will be destructive to business. Because I don't think we'll see a Gore victory without the Democrats also taking over the House. That will result in a major shift in our economic policy, and I would expect the markets to react accordingly. Look at your charts. Look at post-Nov 1994 compared with before then. When the Republicans took over the House and in essence handcuffed Clinton's liberal tendencies, the markets began their surge. We need moderate government for this great economy to continue. A Gore victory will move us away from moderate government more than a Bush victory will, in my opinion. fuzzymath

To: Charles Tutt who wrote (33866)	7/24/2000 11:36:01 PM
From: JC Jaros	Respond to of 64865

Well, I for one don't see much to get vehement about either way (Bush/Gore). Maybe though Charles, we'll see more and more posts regarding politics and finance as we approach the election. --- JDN has just said that 'if he were in cash he'd freeze, ala Y2k' (paraphrased). That's of some significance. (IMO) -JCJ

To: Charles Tutt who wrote (33866)	7/25/2000 12:04:37 AM
From: Michael L. Voorhees	Respond to of 64865

Charles: I have to agree with you on this one and I have historically been a republican (I prefer to vote for the best man and in this case Gore is a better man and a more intelligent man). The Bush family represents the most arrogant form of elitism. Their shallow philosophy involves simply taking care of their rich friends. That's not America and it is not good for the American economy. I have seen GWB's brother shut down the court systems in Florida for his rich friends, continue the destruction of the Everglades by development at supersonic pace, and in general lack any form of intellectual basis in his philosophy whatsoever. I'm a Republican but a Republican in the Theodore Roosevelt mold. The Bush Family, "anything for the buck" approach HAS to be stopped because it is the antithesis of how America has become a great country and will continue to remain a great country. Also remember that GWB was more than willing to be "bought out" by Mr. Gates (there we go again, "Anything for the Buck"). Can you really believe that GWB would be anything but detrimental to our "near and dear", Open, SUNW? We need open competition not "DEALS" made in "smoke-filled" rooms.