From: exudtn@exu.ericsson.se (Derek Nelson)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Bob Dole, Sore Loser
Date: 21 Dec 92 22:11:28 GMT
Reply-To: exudtn@exu.ericsson.se
Organization: Ericsson Network Systems, Inc.
X-Disclaimer: This article was posted by a user at Ericsson.
              Any opinions expressed are strictly those of the
              user and not necessarily those of Ericsson.

>Look, Clinton beat TWO contenders. Reagan and Bush barely
>beat ONE. Furthermore, this nonsense about needing 51% of
>the popular vote to win a mandate is simply cr*p: by that
>measure Bush and Reagan didn't have a mandate either--in fact,

Uhhhh. You should be a spin doctor.  Reagan did have a majority
and so did Bush.  Reagan crushed Mondale.  Mondale won only
one state, his own home state. This would be funny if it weren't 
for the fact that you intentionally try to fake the facts to your 
own ends. 

Yes, Bush lost. So?  I will support President Clinton if his ideas/
programs have merit.  

>No mandate my ass. Hey, Dole--surely you're aware that the only
>president to do worse in this century than Bush was Taft? Carter
>did better. NIXON did better. FORD did better. And as a matter
>of fact, both Mondale and Dukakis did better than Bush. Bush got
>37.5%, which is roughly the proportion of mean-spirited right-wing
>lunatics to the saner base population. Taft got 23.2%. EVERYBODY
>ELSE THIS CENTURY DID BETTER. No mandate? Right. Basically, Bush
>and the neo-fascists went down so hard and ugly they're only
>claim is that at least they didn't come in dead last this century.
>They only came in SECOND to dead last.

Ha ha ha ha.  This is great.  NIXON did better? Yes , in the 1972 
election,  but in 1968 he also got 43% of the vote just like Clinton 
did.  Yes, Mondale and Dukakis did better, but they weren't in a 
three way race.  If so, they might not have done as well.  So what 
does your paragraph have to do with Clinton having no mandate?  
He doesn't, but that doesn't mean he won't be effective at building 
a competent team to work on the problems of the U.S. As for talking 
about the saner part of the population.  You sure have a lot of nerve 
identifiing your self with us considering all of the stuff you've 
spewed that are hateful vindictive things. Name calling went out
in elementary school.

>A prediction: In '96, Clinton will do as well as Reagan did in '80.
>And then, of course, we have Gore waiting in the wings. Nyah nyah
>nyah.
>At least Bush went down graciously.

Things go in cycles.  You talk about Bush being graceful now, but
before you said and I quote "Basically, Bush and the neo-fascists 
went down so hard and ugly". So which  is it?  Take a lesson from 
him, be graceful in victory and defeat. 

[Stuff deleted]
> there's
>this Dole-Thing running around shooting off his mouth about
>trying to block Clinton's agenda.
>
>Right. I'd like to see him try. How much of a presidential
>hopeful is Dole going to be if Clinton goes on TV to announce
>that Dole is the only thing standing between the electorate
>and health care reform? Dole gets in line or gets out of
>politics forever is the way I figure this works out.

Well, since you have a logical/political mind like a trap
you are undoubtably correct.  Sense any sacrasm here?

Derek
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton