Commanders Post at The Warpath - View Single Post

illdefined · 08-04-2004, 07:59 PM

all the constant election studies say people vote for the PRESIDENT. NOT the VP, not even them together. at best VPs are sent as highest level emissaries, but their congress job is literally figurehead.

i think the only time the VP would actually make a difference in an election would be if it was WBush/Quayle. can you imagine THAT one?? seriously tho, only a ticket like Kerry/McCain would make a big enough difference in our super polarized partisan elections.

never mentioned Clinton in any of my posts, but if Cheney was such a defense guru why didn't he change (thru Bush of course) the so-obviously broken system? not even after 9/11? not even after the complete strikeout in Iraq? only now when Congress has embarassed them nationally and bi-partisanly??

08-04-2004, 07:59 PM	#25
illdefined Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: nyc Age: 48 Posts: 2,631	all the constant election studies say people vote for the PRESIDENT. NOT the VP, not even them together. at best VPs are sent as highest level emissaries, but their congress job is literally figurehead. i think the only time the VP would actually make a difference in an election would be if it was WBush/Quayle. can you imagine THAT one?? seriously tho, only a ticket like Kerry/McCain would make a big enough difference in our super polarized partisan elections. never mentioned Clinton in any of my posts, but if Cheney was such a defense guru why didn't he change (thru Bush of course) the so-obviously broken system? not even after 9/11? not even after the complete strikeout in Iraq? only now when Congress has embarassed them nationally and bi-partisanly??