Finally, a bumper sticker for BOTH political parties. The hottest selling bumper sticker comes from New York State: "RUN HILLARY RUN"

Democrats put it on the rear bumper.
Republicans put it on the front bumper

I say a prayer daily that Hillary runs as the Dem nominee. I might actually work for Hillary to get her thru the primaries, thus guaranteeing another 8 years of Republican rule. I cannot think of anyone more divisive than 'ol Hil. She'll turn the whole country bright red.http://www.lincolnvscadillac.com//images/icons/icon8.gif

:iconcur:

I can't see Hillary being more divisive than Bush. 2 elections basically 50/50 both times. That's divisive. I often think that Hillary could get in. Americans for the most part seemed to love the Clintonistas....

I can't see Hillary being more divisive than Bush. 2 elections basically 50/50 both times. That's divisive. I often think that Hillary could get in. Americans for the most part seemed to love the Clintonistas....

How do you call the biggest popular vote margin in 20 years 50/50?

I wouldn't vote for hillary. The democrats need to find someone worth a dam though.

Finally, a bumper sticker for BOTH political parties. The hottest selling bumper sticker comes from New York State: "RUN HILLARY RUN"

Democrats put it on the rear bumper.
Republicans put it on the front bumperLOL!

Hillary is a bit of a large step. We are going to need more of a widely democratic country before that. Howard Dean didnt seem too bad.

:feedback I still think Joe Liberman would have been the best choice.
He is not one of thoes crazies so far to the left that he is off the map.
Of all the candidates that ran during the primaries, He was the only one that came across with the class of a world leader.
I would vote for him in a minute if He chooses to run in 2008.
Hilary(although smart and coy) has too much baggage.

How do you call the biggest popular vote margin in 20 years 50/50?

It was largest popular vote margin by number of votes not by percentage. Percentage wise the vote basically turned out 50% Bush, .5% Nader, 49.5% Gore

Saying it's the biggest popular vote margin by numbers is misleading because every year there is a larger margin by the numbers by the sheer fact that more people are in this country to vote.

ha... hillary, what a joke.

I have yet to see what she's supposed to have done for the people of NY (I'm not holding my breath) except for make things worse for us upstate

Hilary(although smart and coy) has too much baggage.http://www.lincolnvscadillac.com//images/icons/icon10.gif Especially around her hips! http://www.lincolnvscadillac.com//images/icons/icon10.gif

It was largest popular vote margin by number of votes not by percentage. Percentage wise the vote basically turned out 50% Bush, .5% Nader, 49.5% Gore

Uuhh, just being picky here, but it was 51% Bush 48% Kerry.

Uuhh, just being picky here, but it was 51% Bush 48% Kerry.
not too be a dink. but wrong election there, which he is referring to.

not too be a dink. but wrong election there, which he is referring to.I think we're all confused now. And hopefully to clear it up:

2004 election results: Bush 51%, Kerry 48%
2000 election results: Bush 48%, Gore 48%

I think we're all confused now. And hopefully to clear it up:

2004 election results: Bush 51%, Kerry 48%
2000 election results: Bush 48%, Gore 48%

And considering that BuSh LOST the popular vote to Gore in '00, if you combine the results of both elections, it comes to something like 49.5% GOP, 48.5% Dems. Again, not even close to a "landslide" or a "mandate" as the GOP wants all of us to believe.

And considering that BuSh LOST the popular vote to Gore in '00, if you combine the results of both elections, it comes to something like 49.5% GOP, 48.5% Dems. Again, not even close to a "landslide" or a "mandate" as the GOP wants all of us to believe.I think averaging 2 elections is a mistake. A lot happens in 4 years, as we have witnessed in the last 4. It would be more prudent to take each election on its own. There was no "landslide" victory for Bush this year, but there was a majority. There was also a majority victory for the GOP. Any democrat ignoring that does so at the peril of their parties future. The times are divisive, but not the most divisive ever. Things can still go wrong, but the current trend is leading towards more unity here in the U.S. going by approval ratings. There will always be naysayers and their objections should be considered. But constructive criticism will always be accepted better than bashing.

How 'bout the fact that the incumbent President always loses members/support in the House and Senate from his own party. This time, he gained support. Now toss in the fact that record amounts of money were spent to defeat this President, and that does not even include the billions worth of negative ads (lets call it major news media political commentary) that he had to overcome. I have never seen such a one-sided negative media attack against a sitting President.

If that were not the fact, Bush wins by 15 points. (Johnny) That, my friend, would be a landslide and a mandate. So, all said, Bush's win means he can do whatever he wants. Live with it another 4 years and run around and push Hillary in '08 so I can enjoy another 8 years of Republican rule.