earthworm
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2005
- Messages
- 5,728
- Reaction score
- 904
- Location
- Goldsboro,PA
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
That which is true, you find to be "funny".funny.
that, of course, being because we spent much of Bush's Presidency in historically low unemployment, climbing rapidly at the end. Obama, of course, won't be held responsible for the climb. he will be held responsible for his utter inability to turn it around.
Considering how Obama is sucking ass right now in every way, it's hard to imagine how you came to that well considered opinion.No, neither of the two can beat Obama, they are both wacky in their own ways.
haymarket said:So you do know that the growth in the unemployment rate was over 400% higher under Bush than under Obama.
Wait until you see Perry debate. The Donald would actually be a better choice. Name recognition counts. Bush had it, Perry doesn't.
I dunno, I think Perry has almost as much recognition as Bush did.
Well, Bush's Father was an ex-president. Wouldn't that be just a little bit more name recognition?
I've noticed that the Democrats and RINOS are starting to get worried. The things that they are saying about Perry are the exact same things they said about Ronald Reagan in 1980.
I've noticed that the Democrats and RINOS are starting to get worried. The things that they are saying about Perry are the exact same things they said about Ronald Reagan in 1980.
If you're a politician from Texas, you have built-in recognition.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?