reactor1967
Quantum Scribe
Thanks for clearing that up.
September 2024
- Thread starter Lyndzee_Grummond
- Start date
reactor1967
Quantum Scribe
I doubt it. She is still trying to get her money back from the last time.
timetravelerbeliever
Chrono Cadet
then again...we change our minds all the time...she recently accepted failure...i dont see why she wouldnt want to come back. I am not saying this because I support Lynd, btw where the heck is she? I am just saying it because it is a human posibility...
You know I heard the court case sueing Obama for proof of US citizenship had not died today. Probably just rumors though. Meh... Ever since McCain Choose Palin I have been putting all my money on them...
Actully ever since Obama Chose Biden I have been betting against THAT team because I do not know of any two senator ticket that has ever won in the last 100 years..
Maybe a time traveler could weigh in their opinion about it...
Actully ever since Obama Chose Biden I have been betting against THAT team because I do not know of any two senator ticket that has ever won in the last 100 years..
Maybe a time traveler could weigh in their opinion about it...
Darby
Epochal Historian
Titorite,
Good observation.
In general it's always been the view of the parties that Sentaors don't make good Presidential candidates. In the current situation we have three Senators running and a fourth (Hillary) who was eliminated.
The Senate is the ultimate slow motion debating society. Senators rarely have to make quick decisions. Governors and mayors, on the other hand, have always been top candidates because they have to make "presidential" decisions on a daily basis. They have to react to instant situations, have no huge body of like members, and live (or die) on the basis of those decisions.
This is really not a good field of candidates to choose from. Sarah and Rudy are the only executive branch candidates to enter the fray this go-round.
Good observation.
In general it's always been the view of the parties that Sentaors don't make good Presidential candidates. In the current situation we have three Senators running and a fourth (Hillary) who was eliminated.
The Senate is the ultimate slow motion debating society. Senators rarely have to make quick decisions. Governors and mayors, on the other hand, have always been top candidates because they have to make "presidential" decisions on a daily basis. They have to react to instant situations, have no huge body of like members, and live (or die) on the basis of those decisions.
This is really not a good field of candidates to choose from. Sarah and Rudy are the only executive branch candidates to enter the fray this go-round.
Packerbacker
Quantum Scribe
John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson won the 1960 Presidential election and both served as President.
Both were U.S. Senators at the time of the 1960 election.
And in 1964, Johnson and Hubert Humphrey, a Senator, were elected.
Maybe there are others?
Both were U.S. Senators at the time of the 1960 election.
And in 1964, Johnson and Hubert Humphrey, a Senator, were elected.
Maybe there are others?
Packerbacker
Quantum Scribe
But old time travelers do die. "Time traveling" doesn't extend your actual life at all.
Darby
Epochal Historian
Packer,
There have been 15 Presidents who were Senators. But they are all really bunched up. Eight before 1846 and four in the last half of the 20th Century: Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon. The one thing they all had in common was they were military veterans during WWI (Truman) or WWII, and with the exception of Harry Truman (Army officer), all were U.S. Navy officers. And, of course, Truman and Johnson only became President because the sitting President died.
There have been 15 Presidents who were Senators. But they are all really bunched up. Eight before 1846 and four in the last half of the 20th Century: Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon. The one thing they all had in common was they were military veterans during WWI (Truman) or WWII, and with the exception of Harry Truman (Army officer), all were U.S. Navy officers. And, of course, Truman and Johnson only became President because the sitting President died.
And that might be why 2 senator tickets do not win often.... It might have something to do with presidential superstitions. I mean as it was pointed out to me both Johnson and Truman were two Senator presidential tickets.... and both teams had a president die.
Still If I can't rely on political history to base my chooses on something then I shall rely on my irrational belief in Titor because of that whole male female president thing... after all McCain did pick Palin and they do have the incumbent powerbase. .... Even if it is a democratic congress McCain has still been there going on 30 years. It doesn't get anymore good Ole' boy then that.
Still If I can't rely on political history to base my chooses on something then I shall rely on my irrational belief in Titor because of that whole male female president thing... after all McCain did pick Palin and they do have the incumbent powerbase. .... Even if it is a democratic congress McCain has still been there going on 30 years. It doesn't get anymore good Ole' boy then that.
reactor1967
Quantum Scribe
Good observation. I just like the saying thats all.
Darby
Epochal Historian
Titorite,
Our differences of opinion re. Titor aside, I have to agree with you, in general, on the on the two Senator ticket issue. I believe that the electorate doesn't view the situation superstitiously though. I believe that they see it as a situation of one (or two) legislative debaters who haven't had to face the instant realities of the world.
In some cases that might be an unfortunate opinion because there are Senators who have the executive experience at some point in their lives to the extent that they are fully qualified for the Presidency. But I don't discount their general view of the thing. The Senate is a wonderful body that has survived for over two thousand years. But it moves slowly. I have no problem with that in the realm that they cover. But mayors, governors and presidents have to not only move quickly, they have to take full credit for their failures as well as their victories. We, as citizens, have to put it into the proper context when we judge the outcomes. Presidents put real peoples' lives in danger. On a much smaller scale I've had to make those decisions. It's great when it comes out right but it's horrible when not everyone comes home...even when the outcome is a victory and even when you know in your heart that you made the right decision. And the Senate, thereafter, spends weeks or months debating the situation with no personal responsibility (even though they may have complied with the "Advice & Consent" clause to authorize the action) for the outcome. It's very lonely at the top.
Our differences of opinion re. Titor aside, I have to agree with you, in general, on the on the two Senator ticket issue. I believe that the electorate doesn't view the situation superstitiously though. I believe that they see it as a situation of one (or two) legislative debaters who haven't had to face the instant realities of the world.
In some cases that might be an unfortunate opinion because there are Senators who have the executive experience at some point in their lives to the extent that they are fully qualified for the Presidency. But I don't discount their general view of the thing. The Senate is a wonderful body that has survived for over two thousand years. But it moves slowly. I have no problem with that in the realm that they cover. But mayors, governors and presidents have to not only move quickly, they have to take full credit for their failures as well as their victories. We, as citizens, have to put it into the proper context when we judge the outcomes. Presidents put real peoples' lives in danger. On a much smaller scale I've had to make those decisions. It's great when it comes out right but it's horrible when not everyone comes home...even when the outcome is a victory and even when you know in your heart that you made the right decision. And the Senate, thereafter, spends weeks or months debating the situation with no personal responsibility (even though they may have complied with the "Advice & Consent" clause to authorize the action) for the outcome. It's very lonely at the top.
RainmanTime
Super Moderator
I feel the same way, Darby. And with ALL our differences aside, Titorite, your statements about Senators as Presidents is demonstrative of your knowledge of history. Here is a quote that I think also speaks well to this issue:
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1085466/sarah_palin_inexperienced_governor.html?cat=9
<font color="red"> "In a time when experience or lack thereof, seems to be at the forefront of the Presidential election, it is ironic that a governor is being attacked as having little to no experience. For anyone who understands how the US Constitution works, it is obvious that a U.S. Governor has more responsibilities than a U.S. Senator, yet so many seem to have no scope of the responsibilities of each role. In fact, a governor has an immense amount of constant responsibility and no recesses, as opposed to a senator, who is not required to vote, has many recesses, and is rarely, if ever, solely responsible for a piece of legislation.." [/COLOR]
Ray
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1085466/sarah_palin_inexperienced_governor.html?cat=9
<font color="red"> "In a time when experience or lack thereof, seems to be at the forefront of the Presidential election, it is ironic that a governor is being attacked as having little to no experience. For anyone who understands how the US Constitution works, it is obvious that a U.S. Governor has more responsibilities than a U.S. Senator, yet so many seem to have no scope of the responsibilities of each role. In fact, a governor has an immense amount of constant responsibility and no recesses, as opposed to a senator, who is not required to vote, has many recesses, and is rarely, if ever, solely responsible for a piece of legislation.." [/COLOR]
Ray
timetravelerbeliever
Chrono Cadet
soooo where are you??
joelos1111
Chrono Cadet
oh lindzee where are thou?,do we care?,well i guess no,you have been proven to be as fake as hell and Obama will win that is my prediction,hehehehe,of course anyone can say that being around 10 points ahead of Mcain,oh Gosh Time travelers fakers are so easy to get this days!!!!
reactor1967
Quantum Scribe
I am inclined to agree with you about an Obama win but Mcain and Palin still have a lot of pull so we will see. On the Time Traveler fakers they are a dime a dozen around here. But, if there were no fakers then there would be no one to try to prove them wrong then we all would just go home unless we want to discuss something else besides time travel. The fakers are doing their jobs keeping everyone on their toes. The time travel institute is suppose to be a fictional forum where people come and have fun for their own reasons. If the day ever comes around here that someone can actually prove time travel then of course it is still all good.