|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) |
ruggerson (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Apr-06-08 12:52 AM Original message |
Transformational figures in American history were partisan, rigidly ideological and combatative |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cliffordu (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Apr-06-08 12:54 AM Response to Original message |
1. I don't know how you can qualify all that stuff you said. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
anigbrowl (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Apr-06-08 12:55 AM Response to Original message |
2. You forgot Bush 43. He fits your description to a T. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ruggerson (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Apr-06-08 12:55 AM Response to Reply #2 |
3. You're absolutely correct |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Mooney (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Apr-06-08 01:13 AM Response to Reply #3 |
7. I don't think he failed at all. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ruggerson (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Apr-06-08 01:24 AM Response to Reply #7 |
8. He failed |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Mooney (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Apr-06-08 09:49 AM Response to Reply #8 |
14. I don't think he ever cared about those things at all. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
On the Road (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Apr-06-08 12:57 AM Response to Original message |
4. That is an Interesting Argument |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ruggerson (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Apr-06-08 01:01 AM Response to Reply #4 |
5. The Bill Cinton/Eisenhower/Wilson paradigm |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
On the Road (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Apr-07-08 11:53 AM Response to Reply #5 |
20. I See Both Obama and Clinton as Co-Opters |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Umbram (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Apr-06-08 01:11 AM Response to Original message |
6. deleted - redundant. (nt) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bicoastal (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Apr-06-08 01:34 AM Response to Original message |
9. If FDR was so partisan and divisive... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JVS (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Apr-07-08 06:21 AM Response to Reply #9 |
19. FDR was only divisive because after winning his 3rd term in 1940, the republicans thought they'd... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
anonymous171 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Apr-06-08 01:36 AM Response to Original message |
10. Bump B/C this is the kind of well thought out discourse that has become rare in the GD-P |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ruggerson (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Apr-06-08 11:29 AM Response to Reply #10 |
15. thanks |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PerfectSage (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Apr-06-08 01:36 AM Response to Original message |
11. So the last confrontational, divisive president was clusterfuck in chief. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Political Heretic (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Apr-06-08 02:14 AM Response to Original message |
12. Times change. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ruggerson (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Apr-06-08 11:34 AM Response to Reply #12 |
16. History repeats itself |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Political Heretic (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Apr-07-08 06:16 AM Response to Reply #16 |
17. Not really. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
intaglio (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Apr-06-08 02:47 AM Response to Original message |
13. What a pity HRC doesn't fit this description |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JVS (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Apr-07-08 06:19 AM Response to Original message |
18. She's had 8 years in the senate to show ideological rigor. She hasn't. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Mon May 13th 2024, 12:39 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC