ToDaZeD odd history fact

Diveeeersity?

heard this t’other day…

1980: Reagan/Bush defeats Carter/Mondale
1984: Reagan/Bush defeats Mondale/Ferraro
1988: Bush/Quayle defeats Dukakis/Bentsen
1992: Clinton/Gore defeats Bush/Quayle
1996: Clinton/Gore defeats Dole/Kemp
2000: Bush/Cheney defeats Gore/Lieberman
2004: Bush/Cheney defeats Kerry/Edwards
2016: [Bush]/… -vs- [Clinton]/…

Sumthin’ to think over….

13 Comments!

  1. Fawkes News (Barack Lies Matter)
    Posted January 2, 2016 at 7:25 am |

    Clinton/Bush 2016.

    Or Bush/Clinton 2016.

    What difference, at this point, does it make?

  2. Posted January 2, 2016 at 7:47 am |

    Clintom may be n the race this year, but I doubt Bush will be. He’s stuck below the margin of error in most polls. I don’t see it happening.

  3. dick, not quite dead white guy
    Posted January 2, 2016 at 8:33 am |

    That royal house-like inbreeding and nepotism plus RINOs in Congress is why Trump is thriving. People outside the beltway are sick of betrayal and two shades of the same ole same ole.

  4. DougM (quiet, keeps to himself, kind of a loner, nobody thought he’d do anything like this)
    Posted January 2, 2016 at 11:18 am |

    Yeah, but the Clinton dynasty got schlonged in ’08.

  5. rickn8or
    Posted January 2, 2016 at 12:55 pm |

    Yeah, but the Clinton dynasty got schlonged in ’08.

    I can’t shake the feeling that Obama is working hard to repeat the schlonging in ’16.

  6. Dave
    Posted January 2, 2016 at 1:07 pm |

    In any normal presidential election cycle Bush wouldn’t even be in the race at this point in the polling. He’s one of the least liked Republican candidates.
    Apart from a miracle he’ll be out in 2 months, and then we can concentrate on defeating Teh Clintons and leave the Bush’s in the dustbin.

  7. geezerette
    Posted January 2, 2016 at 1:18 pm |

    I’ve been waiting for that person who has been laying in the weeds ready to reveal themselves to be the Shlonger.
    I wonder how wrong I’ve been all along in thinking she has been in on this since the begining while the money laundering foundations coffers are filling? Her being really serious about being the first woman president just didn’t jive with what she’s been doing. The Benghazi investigation conveniently went into a nose dive when the Obama administrations FBI took over the investigation(farse) into her private emails. Something smells verry verry phishy——-or Bull poopy.

  8. ZZMike
    Posted January 2, 2016 at 1:21 pm |

    Trouble is, Jeb! is so far behind the pack that he might not even get made ambassador to Transylvania.

  9. dick, not quite dead white guy
    Posted January 2, 2016 at 2:10 pm |

    ^Transylvania/ That’s one of Uhbama’s 57 states, right? Somewhere in the Northeast?
    Cheb would prefer ambassador to Florida.

  10. DougM (quiet, keeps to himself, kind of a loner, nobody thought he’d do anything like this)
    Posted January 2, 2016 at 3:00 pm |

    ^ Are the denizens called .. Trannies, d’y'think?

  11. Another Bob
    Posted January 2, 2016 at 8:56 pm |

    If this was actually an nation where the law was enforced, Hillary would be in jail.

  12. dick, not quite dead white guy
    Posted January 2, 2016 at 10:53 pm |

    ^Another Bob – Unfortunately, America has descended into being a nation where so-called social justice is more important than real, lawful justice, a place where the law means something and is enforced equally for all.
    Instead, we have an unholy mix of Americans thinking “Whatcha got for me today”, or “What’s in it for me?” and a leader enamored of social justice, sports, celebrities and himself setting a bad example for his cult of followers.

    When a nation is more concerned about appearances rather than reality, about connections over self improvement, that puts long disproven theories of income redistribution and achieving utopia above basic sustenance and rational fact-based thought, that nation is in decay.

  13. ZZMike
    Posted January 3, 2016 at 7:54 pm |

    dnqdwg: Yea, verily. There is only ‘justice’. Any attempt to modify it with ‘social’ &c only either dilutes it or pushes the scales way over to one side.