FW: [Peace-discuss] on Kucinich and Paul

[Laurie at advancenet.net]

"So apparently ALL Presidents do precisely the opposite of what they said
they were going to do when they were running for office.  If that's  the
case,  then we should obviously look for the worst possible candidate and
vote for him or her. "

 

I was going to agree with you; but then I realized that there are exceptions
to every rule.  Isn't that what we did with respect to George W. Bush?  He
turn out to be just as advertised and not the opposite. J  Of course, that
assessment depends on what campaign promises you are looking at and which
term of office you are focusing on.  It may be truer of the second election
than the first where the campaign promises were not as dictatorial and power
hungry, as uncompromising and thuggish, as imperialistic and moralistic,
etc. as they became after the 9/11 event and during the second election.

 

From: peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net
[mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of John W.
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 1:50 PM
To: Peace Discuss
Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] on Kucinich and Paul

 

At 01:03 PM 11/13/2007, David Green wrote:



LBJ ran in 1964 as the peace candidate in contrast to Goldwater, even after
his provocation in the Gulf of Tonkin. Reagan ran as opposed to government
spending, and then increased the military budget by 3-fold, if I recall
correctly, exploding the deficit. Nixon used the southern stategy and
exploited class/race resenement regarding the minimal northern gains of the
Civil Rights Movement, and then implemented a large federal jobs program and
affirmative action in the construction trades, making him the last liberal
president, in that sense.


So apparently ALL Presidents do precisely the opposite of what they said
they were going to do when they were running for office.  If that's the
case, then we should obviously look for the worst possible candidate and
vote for him or her.

John Wason





"C. G. Estabrook" <galliher at uiuc.edu> wrote: 

There's very little correlation. Remember Bush the Less campaigned

against the Clinton admin's "nation building."

Classic case is the 1932 election, when FDR campaigned against incumbent

Herbert Hoover in the midst of the Great Depression. At the center of

FDR's campaign was a promise to balance the budget, over against

Hoover's deficit spending!

Roosevelt said: "I pledge you, I pledge myself, to a new deal for the 

American people", coining a slogan that was later adopted for his 

legislative program as well as his new coalition. But during the 

campaign, it meant the opposite of what it came to mean. Roosevelt 

campaigned on the Democratic platform advocating "immediate and drastic 

reductions of all public expenditures" and for a "sound currency to be 

maintained at all hazards."

In some cases expediency, in others flat-out lies. To the latter

category belong John Kennedy's 1960 "missile gap" scare stories, which

Kennedy knew weren't true. (But his belligerent, semi-fascist rhetoric

was all too true and announced what was probably the most dangerous

admin until the current one.) --CGE

Karen Medina wrote:

> Peace discuss,

> 

> Anyone know some good political science studies that look at the 

> campaigns of presidential candidates and then the terms in office 

> that shows what they say and what they end up doing.

> 

> I know we all get general impressions and there are media reports 

> that summarize things like the first 100 days in office, but I am 

> more interested in a deeper analysis. Can anyone suggest one?

> 

> With regard to Tom Mackaman's complaint that one particular person 

> did not stand up for the peace demonstrators as they were removed 

> from the Democratic National Convention, was there anyone who did 

> stand up for the demonstrators? And ultimately is there anything we 

> can say about all of those who did not defend the demonstrators?

> 

> Who would Ron Paul have defended?

> 

> -karen medina 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/private/peace-discuss/attachments/20071113/d03e9eb5/attachment.htm