Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Saturday, Nov. 10, 2012 | 2:01 a.m.
Another view?
View more of the Las Vegas Sun's opinion section:
• Editorials - the Sun's viewpoint.
• Columnists - local and syndicated writers.
• Letters to the editor - readers' views.
Have your own opinion? Write a letter to the editor.
I wonder whether the following fact is a reflection of the disconnect between the Republican Party and the American people or whether it is a reflection of how Americans viewed Richard Nixon and the Bush family.
The last time a Republican won a presidential race without a Nixon or a Bush on the ticket was in 1928, when Herbert Hoover captured the presidency. That was 84 years ago.
Robert writes "The last time a Republican won a presidential race without a Nixon or a Bush on the ticket was in 1928, when Herbert Hoover captured the presidency. That was 84 years ago."
Incorrect. Reagan and Eisenhower were republican elected presidents unless you're ignoring Eisenhower because Nixon was the VP on the ticket.
Since the 1960's, only two out of 5 democratic Presidents won re-election.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Pre...
Only two presidents have been elected since Truman without a Johnson or a peanut farmer on the ticket.
The letter writer basks in the glow of irrelevant stats.
We know that Bill Clinton was on the ticket with Obama because he was the one who made sense in the campaign
Bill Clinton won not Obama
The people did not vote for Obama. - we voted for Bill Clinton
Typical of the ignorant left. They either revise history to meet their agenda or simply make up facts like Harry the Red did in proclaiming Romney paid no taxes for 10 years.
"Incorrect. Reagan and Eisenhower were republican elected presidents unless you're ignoring Eisenhower because Nixon was the VP on the ticket."
Not so. The letter writer IS correct. The term "ticket" refers to BOTH the presidential and vice-presidential nominee. Nixon was Ike's vp and Bush was Reagan's vp.
Two of the last two Democratic Presidents won re-election. Only one, Jimmy Carter, ran for re-election and was defeated since 1944.
Since the 1930's, democratic presidents have sent our troops into battle resulting in 1,416,349 total dead & wounded.
Jim,
I put the exception in might comment "unless you're ignoring Eisenhower because Nixon was the VP on the ticket".
But you're right, I should have referenced VP Bush as well for Reagan.
I'm sure we will see soon a democratic supported write an LVS letter about how many republican presidents were either bald, gray haired or old.
"Since the 1930's, democratic presidents have sent our troops into battle resulting in 1,416,349 total dead & wounded."
I wonder how high it would be if Democrats weren't so much into appeasement. :-)
Jim,
This is the LVS silly correlation letter of the day. Odd and meaningless partisan-based factoids.
Freeman
I wasn't trying to be partisan. I thought we were just funnin' each other. :-)
Jim,
I sense you prefer to debate the topics over dishing out partisan rhetoric. I read all of your comments and you present valid points within your arguments. You're one of the few who find common ground between the parties which is refreshing. In other words, you try to see both sides. The rare partisan rhetoric we exchange is always fun, respectful and harmless.
I think the point Mr. Bencivenga is making here is that Pres. Nixon and Pres.'s Bush were associated with 'tickets' that didn't insult or denigrate voters. To win people over to your point of view you must give them dignity and respect, to their family and friends too. Far too many Republicans have forgotten that, as you can see by the comments posted here.
Dwayne,
Robert states "I wonder whether the following fact is a reflection of the disconnect between the Republican Party and the American people or whether it is a reflection of how Americans viewed Richard Nixon and the Bush family.The last time a Republican won a presidential race without a Nixon or a Bush on the ticket was in 1928, when Herbert Hoover captured the presidency. That was 84 years ago."
Robert is indirectly using Saul Alinsky's rules for radicals. I'll let you figure out which one(s):
Always remember the first rule of power tactics: Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have.
The second rule is: Never go outside the experience of your people.
"The third rule is: Wherever possible go outside the experience of the enemy. Here you want to cause confusion, fear, and retreat.
"the fourth rule is: Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules.
"the fifth rule carries within it the fifth rule: Ridicule is man's most potent weapon.
"the sixth rule is: A good tactic is one that your people enjoy.
"the seventh rule is: A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.
"the eighth rule: Keep the pressure on.
"the ninth rule: The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.
The tenth rule: The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition.
"The eleventh rule is: If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside.
"The twelfth rule: The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.
"The thirteenth rule: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.
@Freeman, 9:00 a.m.
I enjoyed your post. Have a nice day :)
We the People asked Willard to show us ten years of tax returns and he basically said "I have something else I want to show you moochers." It was his middle finger.
Today there's good news for Willard. We the People don't give a damn what's in those tax returns, lol.
Robert.......
And it will be another 84 years before republicans
win another presidential election.
If then.