When Was The Last Time The GOP Put Up A Presidental Candidate...

[DigitalDrifter]

As long as we continue to have more and more Americans with their palms out to the government, it wont matter who the GOP fields for a candidate, the Dims will continue to hold the White House.

 

[Pogo]

as though they seriously wanted and realistically expected to win the election...?

imho, the last time the GOP got serious about putting up a winnable presidential candidate was in 1988...

GWB...? clueless dumb fuck who got lucky the first time... and the second time too...

McCain...? pasty old-guy war hero completely out of touch with his supposed base...

Romney...? decent guy who obviously had too much baggage to overcome well before he has nominated...


so... now the talk is all about Christie... yet another unelectable person... will he represent the latest GOP implosion...? does the GOP seriously want to win the White House...?

PROVE this statement IN LIGHT of THESE FACTS!!! "GWB...? clueless dumb fuck who got lucky the first time... and the second time too..."

Do you recall these events??

1) Recession that started under Clinton ended 11/01?
Specifically, 50.8 million jobs were lost through the first six quarters of the ‘01 recession .
Heritage Employment Report: February Continues Winter Blues
The 2001 recession officially started 03/2001... BUT the steps leading up to it started under Clinton!

DID THIS HAPPEN?? WAS IT BUSH's FAULT???
1) Dot.com bust cost $5 trillion in lost market value..
this means every year for 30 years now starting in 2000 the federal revenue is over $20 billion written off against taxes owed.
According to the Los Angeles Times, when the dot-com bubble burst, it wiped out $5 trillion dollars in market value for tech companies.
More than half of the Internet companies created since 1995 were gone by 2004 -
and hundreds of thousands of skilled technology workers were out of jobs.
The dot-com bubble: How to lose $5 trillion ? Anderson Cooper 360 - CNN.com Blogs

DID THIS HAPPEN???
DID THIS HAPPEN??
2) Did YOU forget that 9/11 occurred and it cost $2 trillion over the next 30 years again $8 billion will NOT BE PAiD.. was that Bush's fault?
Jobs lost in New York owing to the attacks: 146,100 JUST in New York!!
Year 2001: September 11 Terrorist Attacks
The 9/11 terrorist attacks were the events that helped shape other financial events of the decade. After that terrible day in September 2001, our economic climate was never to be the same again. It was only the third time in history that the New York Stock Exchange was shut down for a period of time. In this case, it was closed from September 10 - 17. Besides the tragic human loss of that day, the economic loss cannot even be estimated. Some estimate that there was over $60 billion in insurance losses alone.

Approximately 18,000 small businesses were either displaced or destroyed in Lower Manhattan after the Twin Towers fell. There was a buildup in homeland security on all levels. 9/11 caused a catastrophic financial loss for the U.S.
The Top 10 Financial Events of the Decade

DID THIS HAPPEN???

DID THIS HAPPEN?? DID BUSH CAUSE THE WORST HURRICANE SEASONS!!!!???
3) $1 trillion in written off losses due to the WORST Hurricane SEASONS in history!
The worst Katrina made landfall in Louisiana as a Category 3 in 2005. It took 1,836 lives and caused $81.2 billion in damages. Andrew slammed into South Florida in 1992 as a Category 5. It caused 40 deaths and $30 billion in property damage. More than 250,000 people were left homeless and 82,000 businesses were destroyed or damaged.
Hurricane Katrina ALONE! Year 2005: Hurricanes Katrina and Rita
On August 25, 2005, Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf Coast of the U.S. as a strong Category 3 or low Category 4 storm. It quickly became the biggest natural disaster in U.S. history, almost destroying New Orleans due to severe flooding.

Hurricane Rita quickly followed Katrina only to make matters worse. Between the two, more than $200 billion in damage was done. 400,000 jobs were lost and 275,000 homes were destroyed. Many of the jobs and homes were never to be recovered. Hundreds of thousands of people were displaced and over 1,000 were killed and more are missing. The effect on oil and gasoline prices was long-lasting.

400,000 jobs due to Hurricanes Katrina/Rita
145,000 jobs in NYC alone due to 9/11
300,000 jobs lost due to dot.com busts.

Largest Gross Domestic Product in history!!
When Bush took office in 2001 GDP was $12.355,271,000,000
when Bush left office in 2008 GDP was $14,359,490,000,000
A 16% increase in GDP or $2 TRILLION.

Bush growth of the GDP was greater then Clinton in 2005 GDP grew at 6.5% Clinton's best:6.4%
Measuring Worth - GDP result.

When Bush started 131,785,000 people employed.
At the end of 2008 136,790,000 people employed or

5,000,000 more employed then when he took office.


I would LIKE YOU to prove THE ABOVE NEVER HAPPENED!

 

[Pogo]

as though they seriously wanted and realistically expected to win the election...?

imho, the last time the GOP got serious about putting up a winnable presidential candidate was in 1988...

GWB...? clueless dumb fuck who got lucky the first time... and the second time too...

McCain...? pasty old-guy war hero completely out of touch with his supposed base...

Romney...? decent guy who obviously had too much baggage to overcome well before he has nominated...


so... now the talk is all about Christie... yet another unelectable person... will he represent the latest GOP implosion...? does the GOP seriously want to win the White House...?

This is funny. In 2008, the Democrats put up a complete incompetent who had ZERO experience and has really, really shitty judgment. A "clean articulate black" community organizer. The only reason he won was because Bush had flamed out in spectacular fashion, and the nation had Bush/Clinton fatigue.

If Obama continues on his downward trend, the GOP can put up a hooker and win.

Remove the "black" part and you have the Republican 2012 candidate too.

Let's face it, neither party in the primary process comes up with a leader. That's not the point. They come up with the guy whose rhetoric offends the fewest people.

 

[Avatar4321]

2012. before that 2004.

 

[ClosedCaption]

The problem is the GOP doesn't know it has a problem. Ask them and they will say that the reason they lost is because everyone else is too stupid to realize their choice is a good one

Or that the GOP nominates people who don't represent the GOP. And repubs back that person as an alternative by force or under duress.

Basically nothing is their fault

 

[g5000]

as though they seriously wanted and realistically expected to win the election...?

imho, the last time the GOP got serious about putting up a winnable presidential candidate was in 1988...

GWB...? clueless dumb fuck who got lucky the first time... and the second time too...

McCain...? pasty old-guy war hero completely out of touch with his supposed base...

Romney...? decent guy who obviously had too much baggage to overcome well before he has nominated...


so... now the talk is all about Christie... yet another unelectable person... will he represent the latest GOP implosion...? does the GOP seriously want to win the White House...?

This is funny. In 2008, the Democrats put up a complete incompetent who had ZERO experience and has really, really shitty judgment. A "clean articulate black" community organizer. The only reason he won was because Bush had flamed out in spectacular fashion, and the nation had Bush/Clinton fatigue.

If Obama continues on his downward trend, the GOP can put up a hooker and win.

Remove the "black" part and you have the Republican 2012 candidate too.

Let's face it, neither party in the primary process comes up with a leader. That's not the point. They come up with the guy whose rhetoric offends the fewest people.

I agree. The 2012 Republican primary process was a cage match of tards.

 

[HelenaHandbag]

Mr. bill, it's not for lack of a candidate. It is for lack of a voter with some semblance of a brain.

The reason many of us refused to hold out noses and vote for saps like the ones Bill mentioned, is because we do have brains.

Telling me that you are less of a loser than the loser you are opposing wouldn't get you a date from me, let alone my vote.

 

[Pogo]

The problem is the GOP doesn't know it has a problem. Ask them and they will say that the reason they lost is because everyone else is too stupid to realize their choice is a good one

Or that the GOP nominates people who don't represent the GOP. And repubs back that person as an alternative by force or under duress.

Basically nothing is their fault

And don't forget the "takers" or whatever that bullshit was.

Spend every 3½ years polarizing people into "us" and "them" and then half a year preaching "big tent".

Yeah, that's a good plan...

 

[Rebelitarian]

as though they seriously wanted and realistically expected to win the election...?

imho, the last time the GOP got serious about putting up a winnable presidential candidate was in 1988...

GWB...? clueless dumb fuck who got lucky the first time... and the second time too...

McCain...? pasty old-guy war hero completely out of touch with his supposed base...

Romney...? decent guy who obviously had too much baggage to overcome well before he has nominated...


so... now the talk is all about Christie... yet another unelectable person... will he represent the latest GOP implosion...? does the GOP seriously want to win the White House...?

No it is all part of the Globalists' plans to have a one party rule. The Nazis, the Communists, the Chi-Communists, the Stasi etc. The 2 party system has been stagnating their agenda for a long time.

Either that or the Republican Party is Bilderberg Party #2 to siphone votes away from Bilderberg Party #1.

So far their agenda has been going forward but a lot slower than a 1 party regime would push it.