clinton/bush seems like the best on the list when you put it out like that... and that is downright sad...
I think this is why we keep seeing the appearance of the third party option get thrown around...
I remember being intriuged by perot when he first came out...
nadar always seemed a little too weird for me...
But recently you saw people gravitating away from the GOP/DEM combo and look toward Ron Paul as something different... you also saw interest in libertarian candidates like Johnson...
I think the teaparty could have been a thrid party, but lacked the courage to run on its own and instead took over the GOP party and pretty much crashed the car, and will walk away leaving it totalled for the GOP to have to try to figure out how to repair itself...
clinton/bush seems like the best on the list when you put it out like that... and that is downright sad...
I think this is why we keep seeing the appearance of the third party option get thrown around...
I remember being intriuged by perot when he first came out...
nadar always seemed a little too weird for me...
But recently you saw people gravitating away from the GOP/DEM combo and look toward Ron Paul as something different... you also saw interest in libertarian candidates like Johnson...
I think the teaparty could have been a thrid party, but lacked the courage to run on its own and instead took over the GOP party and pretty much crashed the car, and will walk away leaving it totalled for the GOP to have to try to figure out how to repair itself...
clinton/bush seems like the best on the list when you put it out like that... and that is downright sad...
I think this is why we keep seeing the appearance of the third party option get thrown around...
I remember being intriuged by perot when he first came out...
nadar always seemed a little too weird for me...
But recently you saw people gravitating away from the GOP/DEM combo and look toward Ron Paul as something different... you also saw interest in libertarian candidates like Johnson...
I think the teaparty could have been a thrid party, but lacked the courage to run on its own and instead took over the GOP party and pretty much crashed the car, and will walk away leaving it totalled for the GOP to have to try to figure out how to repair itself...
Nadar is the only reason GWB carried the White House in 2000.
clinton/bush seems like the best on the list when you put it out like that... and that is downright sad...
I think this is why we keep seeing the appearance of the third party option get thrown around...
I remember being intriuged by perot when he first came out...
nadar always seemed a little too weird for me...
But recently you saw people gravitating away from the GOP/DEM combo and look toward Ron Paul as something different... you also saw interest in libertarian candidates like Johnson...
I think the teaparty could have been a thrid party, but lacked the courage to run on its own and instead took over the GOP party and pretty much crashed the car, and will walk away leaving it totalled for the GOP to have to try to figure out how to repair itself...
Nadar is the only reason GWB carried the White House in 2000.
Nadar is the only reason GWB carried the White House in 2000.
And the rest is history my friend.
Now replace Nader with Perot, GWB with Clinton, and 2000 with 1992.
It's The Butterfly Effect. If Bush The Elder doesn't lose to Clinton Gore doesn't become VP. If Gore doesn't become VP would he have run against Bush in 2000? Would "W" have run if his father had spent eight years in the Oval Office?
Nadar is the only reason GWB carried the White House in 2000.
And the rest is history my friend.
Now replace Nader with Perot, GWB with Clinton, and 2000 with 1992.
It's The Butterfly Effect. If Bush The Elder doesn't lose to Clinton Gore doesn't become VP. If Gore doesn't become VP would he have run against Bush in 2000? Would "W" have run if his father had spent eight years in the Oval Office?
I say there were 3 great candidates, 6 times.. Obama twice, Clinton twice, Carter twice.
I mean look at what Obama has done.. Unemployment rate down to 7.7, housing covering, stock market soaring from 6000 to 14000. and banking regulation is taking hold.
Afforable care to take over in 2014, insurance companies cannot pick and choose. kids up to age 26 can now stay on parents insurance.etc.. No wonder the stock market is up and repulsicans are down for the count.
I say there were 3 great candidates, 6 times.. Obama twice, Clinton twice, Carter twice.
I mean look at what Obama has done.. Unemployment rate down to 7.7, housing covering, stock market soaring from 6000 to 14000. and banking regulation is taking hold.
Afforable care to take over in 2014, insurance companies cannot pick and choose. kids up to age 26 can now stay on parents insurance.etc.. No wonder the stock market is up and repulsicans are down for the count.
I say there were 3 great candidates, 6 times.. Obama twice, Clinton twice, Carter twice.
I mean look at what Obama has done.. Unemployment rate down to 7.7, housing covering, stock market soaring from 6000 to 14000. and banking regulation is taking hold.
Afforable care to take over in 2014, insurance companies cannot pick and choose. kids up to age 26 can now stay on parents insurance.etc.. No wonder the stock market is up and repulsicans are down for the count.
The rest of your post is invalidated by saying Carter was a good candidate. Horrible candidate and President.
Seriously though, what I meant was two good candidates at the same time. From the list I put out, I can honestly look at those pairings and cannot find one election where I would say yes both those guys would make a good President and numerous times thinking is this the best these parties have to offer?
I say there were 3 great candidates, 6 times.. Obama twice, Clinton twice, Carter twice.
I mean look at what Obama has done.. Unemployment rate down to 7.7, housing covering, stock market soaring from 6000 to 14000. and banking regulation is taking hold.
Afforable care to take over in 2014, insurance companies cannot pick and choose. kids up to age 26 can now stay on parents insurance.etc.. No wonder the stock market is up and repulsicans are down for the count.
The rest of your post is invalidated by saying Carter was a good candidate. Horrible candidate and President.
Seriously though, what I meant was two good candidates at the same time. From the list I put out, I can honestly look at those pairings and cannot find one election where I would say yes both those guys would make a good President and numerous times thinking is this the best these parties have to offer?
I say there were 3 great candidates, 6 times.. Obama twice, Clinton twice, Carter twice.
I mean look at what Obama has done.. Unemployment rate down to 7.7, housing covering, stock market soaring from 6000 to 14000. and banking regulation is taking hold.
Afforable care to take over in 2014, insurance companies cannot pick and choose. kids up to age 26 can now stay on parents insurance.etc.. No wonder the stock market is up and repulsicans are down for the count.
I say there were 3 great candidates, 6 times.. Obama twice, Clinton twice, Carter twice.
I mean look at what Obama has done.. Unemployment rate down to 7.7, housing covering, stock market soaring from 6000 to 14000. and banking regulation is taking hold.
Afforable care to take over in 2014, insurance companies cannot pick and choose. kids up to age 26 can now stay on parents insurance.etc.. No wonder the stock market is up and repulsicans are down for the count.
The rest of your post is invalidated by saying Carter was a good candidate. Horrible candidate and President.
Seriously though, what I meant was two good candidates at the same time. From the list I put out, I can honestly look at those pairings and cannot find one election where I would say yes both those guys would make a good President and numerous times thinking is this the best these parties have to offer?
Jimmy Carter was the greatest humanitarion president of all time..Oil prices spiked while he was president because of the captives. It was the greatest chance to wean us off of oil. However, big oil companies and Wall St took over when Reagan was elected and we've been at their mercy until the Honorable President Obama took over.
The rest of your post is invalidated by saying Carter was a good candidate. Horrible candidate and President.
Seriously though, what I meant was two good candidates at the same time. From the list I put out, I can honestly look at those pairings and cannot find one election where I would say yes both those guys would make a good President and numerous times thinking is this the best these parties have to offer?
Jimmy Carter was the greatest humanitarion president of all time..Oil prices spiked while he was president because of the captives. It was the greatest chance to wean us off of oil. However, big oil companies and Wall St took over when Reagan was elected and we've been at their mercy until the Honorable President Obama took over.
Jimmy Carter was the greatest humanitarion president of all time..Oil prices spiked while he was president because of the captives. It was the greatest chance to wean us off of oil. However, big oil companies and Wall St took over when Reagan was elected and we've been at their mercy until the Honorable President Obama took over.
You, my friend watch to much Faux News.
Under Jimmy Carter: 10%+ unemployment, infaltion and interest rates. Yeah he was a swell President.
Jimmy Carter was the greatest humanitarion president of all time..Oil prices spiked while he was president because of the captives. It was the greatest chance to wean us off of oil. However, big oil companies and Wall St took over when Reagan was elected and we've been at their mercy until the Honorable President Obama took over.
You, my friend watch to much Faux News.
Under Jimmy Carter: 10%+ unemployment, infaltion and interest rates. Yeah he was a swell President.
Wow, I can't believe we are arguing about how bad a President Carter was but if you insist.
The oil production from the change in regime's in Iran was only about 4% less since other oil producers picked up the slack. Carter panicked and stopped the import of Iranian oil which caused prices to shoot up. Even with that, the price for a barrel of oil was under $16, hardly high oil prices as you claim.
For you to claim unemployment, inflation and interest rates at all 10%+ was due to one issue, "high" oil prices is laughable.
Wow, I can't believe we are arguing about how bad a President Carter was but if you insist.
The oil production from the change in regime's in Iran was only about 4% less since other oil producers picked up the slack. Carter panicked and stopped the import of Iranian oil which caused prices to shoot up. Even with that, the price for a barrel of oil was under $16, hardly high oil prices as you claim.
For you to claim unemployment, inflation and interest rates at all 10%+ was due to one issue, "high" oil prices is laughable.
Wow, I can't believe we are arguing about how bad a President Carter was but if you insist.
The oil production from the change in regime's in Iran was only about 4% less since other oil producers picked up the slack. Carter panicked and stopped the import of Iranian oil which caused prices to shoot up. Even with that, the price for a barrel of oil was under $16, hardly high oil prices as you claim.
For you to claim unemployment, inflation and interest rates at all 10%+ was due to one issue, "high" oil prices is laughable.
Dude.. your ignorance is showing..
The oil embargo began in 1967 after the 6 day war. L Johnson was President..
Again the oil crisis in 1973, Richard Nixon was President.
Look it up.
I was doing a lot of driving at that time, we had gas lines a mile long. You were probably not even born, maybe just a twinkle in your father's eye.
Wow, I can't believe we are arguing about how bad a President Carter was but if you insist.
The oil production from the change in regime's in Iran was only about 4% less since other oil producers picked up the slack. Carter panicked and stopped the import of Iranian oil which caused prices to shoot up. Even with that, the price for a barrel of oil was under $16, hardly high oil prices as you claim.
For you to claim unemployment, inflation and interest rates at all 10%+ was due to one issue, "high" oil prices is laughable.
Dude.. your ignorance is showing..
The oil embargo began in 1967 after the 6 day war. L Johnson was President..
Again the oil crisis in 1973, Richard Nixon was President.
Look it up.
I was doing a lot of driving at that time, we had gas lines a mile long. You were probably not even born, maybe just a twinkle in your father's eye.
The oil embargo began in 1967 after the 6 day war. L Johnson was President..
Again the oil crisis in 1973, Richard Nixon was President.
Look it up.
I was doing a lot of driving at that time, we had gas lines a mile long. You were probably not even born, maybe just a twinkle in your father's eye.
Jimmy Carter began the Dept of Energy.
In 1977 The Dept of Energy was created to lessen our dependence on foreign oil. Thirty five years ago 30% of our oil consumption was foreign imports. Today it is 70%.
Today, the Department of Energy's budget is $24 billion a year with 16,000 employees.
I wouldn't be touting The Department of Energy unless you think it is a good thing that billions of tax dollars and thousands of useless government jobs were created.
The oil embargo began in 1967 after the 6 day war. L Johnson was President..
Again the oil crisis in 1973, Richard Nixon was President.
Look it up.
I was doing a lot of driving at that time, we had gas lines a mile long. You were probably not even born, maybe just a twinkle in your father's eye.
Jimmy Carter began the Dept of Energy.
In 1977 The Dept of Energy was created to lessen our dependence on foreign oil. Thirty five years ago 30% of our oil consumption was foreign imports. Today it is 70%.
Today, the Department of Energy's budget is $24 billion a year with 16,000 employees.
I wouldn't be touting The Department of Energy unless you think it is a good thing that billions of tax dollars and thousands of useless government jobs were created.
The Dept of Energy was created to bring together government programs under one single agency.It can be traced back to the Atomic bomb, Manhattan project..! We had no energy policy in the 1970s so in the wake of the oil crisis, it was created.
Canosoup, you can look at the glass half full or half emtpy. I choose half full. It is reponsable for the safe handling of nuclear materials, nuclear reactors, radioactive waste, domestic energy production, research and developement.
Perhaps you'd rather we close all govt agencies , no regulation, and give everyone an assault weapon of mass destruction, let us all fight it out.
The Dept of Energy was created to bring together government programs under one single agency.It can be traced back to the Atomic bomb, Manhattan project..! We had no energy policy in the 1970s so in the wake of the oil crisis, it was created.
Canosoup, you can look at the glass half full or half emtpy. I choose half full. It is reponsable for the safe handling of nuclear materials, nuclear reactors, radioactive waste, domestic energy production, research and developement.
Perhaps you'd rather we close all govt agencies , no regulation, and give everyone an assault weapon of mass destruction, let us all fight it out.
The Dept of Energy was created to bring together government programs under one single agency.It can be traced back to the Atomic bomb, Manhattan project..! We had no energy policy in the 1970s so in the wake of the oil crisis, it was created.
Canosoup, you can look at the glass half full or half emtpy. I choose half full. It is reponsable for the safe handling of nuclear materials, nuclear reactors, radioactive waste, domestic energy production, research and developement.
Perhaps you'd rather we close all govt agencies , no regulation, and give everyone an assault weapon of mass destruction, let us all fight it out.
Well, since you put it that way, you've convinced me.
Now I see the light.
If it wasn't for The Dept of Energy and other Govt agencies the world
The Dept of Energy was created to bring together government programs under one single agency.It can be traced back to the Atomic bomb, Manhattan project..! We had no energy policy in the 1970s so in the wake of the oil crisis, it was created.
Canosoup, you can look at the glass half full or half emtpy. I choose half full. It is reponsable for the safe handling of nuclear materials, nuclear reactors, radioactive waste, domestic energy production, research and developement.
Perhaps you'd rather we close all govt agencies , no regulation, and give everyone an assault weapon of mass destruction, let us all fight it out.
Well, since you put it that way, you've convinced me.
Now I see the light.
If it wasn't for The Dept of Energy and other Govt agencies the world
The oil embargo began in 1967 after the 6 day war. L Johnson was President..
Again the oil crisis in 1973, Richard Nixon was President.
Look it up.
I was doing a lot of driving at that time, we had gas lines a mile long. You were probably not even born, maybe just a twinkle in your father's eye.
Jimmy Carter began the Dept of Energy.
I'm ignorant but you're the one touting Carter as a good President? Thanks I needed that laugh.
I also love when people play the "I was there so I know" card. Yes because you had to have been there to know history. What's next using cute little play on words like Faux news, Robney, and repulsicans. Oh wait.
Pretty sure people are reading your defense of Carter as a good President and just laughing.
The oil embargo began in 1967 after the 6 day war. L Johnson was President..
Again the oil crisis in 1973, Richard Nixon was President.
Look it up.
I was doing a lot of driving at that time, we had gas lines a mile long. You were probably not even born, maybe just a twinkle in your father's eye.
Jimmy Carter began the Dept of Energy.
I'm ignorant but you're the one touting Carter as a good President? Thanks I needed that laugh.
I also love when people play the "I was there so I know" card. Yes because you had to have been there to know history. What's next using cute little play on words like Faux news, Robney, and repulsicans. Oh wait.
Pretty sure people are reading your defense of Carter as a good President and just laughing.
Can't believe I'm saying this but how about Mr. Clinton?? I wasn't a big fan but did vote for him over Dole for a 2nd term since I felt he was doing well, the country was doing well and why rock the boat. Plus Dole was a fool.
Can't believe I'm saying this but how about Mr. Clinton?? I wasn't a big fan but did vote for him over Dole for a 2nd term since I felt he was doing well, the country was doing well and why rock the boat. Plus Dole was a fool.
Can't believe I'm saying this but how about Mr. Clinton?? I wasn't a big fan but did vote for him over Dole for a 2nd term since I felt he was doing well, the country was doing well and why rock the boat. Plus Dole was a fool.
That's funny, because I really wasn't even thinking about Clinton. It just seems like you would have to go back, I mean WAY back to find a great Southern President.
Can't believe I'm saying this but how about Mr. Clinton?? I wasn't a big fan but did vote for him over Dole for a 2nd term since I felt he was doing well, the country was doing well and why rock the boat. Plus Dole was a fool.
That's funny, because I really wasn't even thinking about Clinton. It just seems like you would have to go back, I mean WAY back to find a great Southern President.
That's funny, because I really wasn't even thinking about Clinton. It just seems like you would have to go back, I mean WAY back to find a great Southern President.
I did the same thing, started thinking way back and going through each state. Shh, don't tell my conservative friends I said something nice about Clinton.
That's funny, because I really wasn't even thinking about Clinton. It just seems like you would have to go back, I mean WAY back to find a great Southern President.
I did the same thing, started thinking way back and going through each state. Shh, don't tell my conservative friends I said something nice about Clinton.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so. It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly. Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality. Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it. As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.