I think Cheney would have made a better president than Bush.

I think Cheney would have made a better president than Bush.

 

I agree with you.

I think Cheney would have made a better president than Bush.

 

 

I agree, although I don't know if he would have been as electable due to his health issues.

He is hands down the most powerful VP this country has ever had imo. Also I believe he is the main reason we are in Iraq. Him and Donald still had a vendetta imo against Hussein from when dubya senior wouldn't go into Iraq(because even he thought it would be too big of a mess). I think his power has been on a downslope lately though. I think Bush is getting tired of being one of the most disliked Presidents in history and he's starting to pay a little less attention to Cheney and a little more to people like Rice.

So powerful, he gets to pick what branch of government he is part of …

:lol: That was my exact first thought as well.

What? Polls?

 

My apologies for being unclear.

 

The VP rarely has played into the equation of who a voter picks (those that are not in lockstep with a particular party that is) because they were essentially ceremonial figures and in most cases had little if any influence on policy.

 

Now comes Dick Cheney who is controlling access to the President and driving policy and then deciding what info goes to the President.

 

So, with this precedent being set, do voters now change thier decision-making criteria a bit? Is it truly a team we are now voting for? Do we put the VP through our own vetting process?

 

Secondly, will this next crop of candidates take Cheney into consideration when choosing their running mate?

. I think Bush is getting tired of being one of the most disliked Presidents in history and he's starting to pay a little less attention to Cheney and a little more to people like Rice.

 

Based on what?

My apologies for being unclear.

 

The VP rarely has played into the equation of who a voter picks (those that are not in lockstep with a particular party that is) because they were essentially ceremonial figures and in most cases had little if any influence on policy.

 

Now comes Dick Cheney who is controlling access to the President and driving policy and then deciding what info goes to the President.

 

So, with this precedent being set, do voters now change thier decision-making criteria a bit? Is it truly a team we are now voting for? Do we put the VP through our own vetting process?

 

Secondly, will this next crop of candidates take Cheney into consideration when choosing their running mate?

 

I don't think it will "substantially" change voter pattern. First, I doubt you will see as dynamic a VP as Cheney for a bit. Second, I think the country is too engrained in its processes and its memory too short to allow a VP to become too important in future elections. We give them a VP debate, and that's enough.

 

I don't think Dick will accept any Veep requests. With the exception of Thompson, I don't think any of the candidates will have the spine to find a Veep candidate as dynamic, and will instead retreat to a weaker person as running mate in a political move.

I don't think it will "substantially" change voter pattern.

 

I don't think Dick will accept any Veep requests.

I agree in both instances. People just don't care who the VP is. Also, I don't think anyone would even offer Cheney VP. Don't get me wrong, I think he is an excellent executive. But he would also be a political hindrance because of how he's been portrayed in the media.

He is hands down the most powerful VP this country has ever had imo. Also I believe he is the main reason we are in Iraq. Him and Donald still had a vendetta imo against Hussein from when dubya senior wouldn't go into Iraq(because even he thought it would be too big of a mess). I think his power has been on a downslope lately though. I think Bush is getting tired of being one of the most disliked Presidents in history and he's starting to pay a little less attention to Cheney and a little more to people like Rice.

I would say Saddam and Saddam's actions are the main reason we are in Iraq.

He is hands down the most powerful VP this country has ever had imo. Also I believe he is the main reason we are in Iraq. Him and Donald still had a vendetta imo against Hussein from when dubya senior wouldn't go into Iraq(because even he thought it would be too big of a mess). I think his power has been on a downslope lately though. I think Bush is getting tired of being one of the most disliked Presidents in history and he's starting to pay a little less attention to Cheney and a little more to people like Rice.

I don't know. Ole Al Gore invented this Internet thingy we are talking on.:sssh:

I would say Saddam and Saddam's actions are the main reason we are in Iraq.

 

Incorrect. Sadaam did little different than about three dozen or so other low-rent third-world dictators. Why are we not going after them as well? Because the administration had it in for Sadaam before the 2000 primaries ever got underway, and they were myopic about it.

I don't know. Ole Al Gore invented this Internet thingy we are talking on.:sssh:

You are aware that the claim that Al Gore invented the internet was never made by Gore. It is a myth that has been repeated so many times that it has become common knowledge. Never happened.

You are aware that the claim that Al Gore invented the internet was never made by Gore. It is a myth that has been repeated so many times that it has become common knowledge. Never happened.

 

Perhaps, but it is awful fun to poke at him with. ManBearPig.

You are aware that the claim that Al Gore invented the internet was never made by Gore. It is a myth that has been repeated so many times that it has become common knowledge. Never happened.

 

To Wolf Blitzer:"During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet."

 

Pretty darn close, particularly since he joined Congress 8-10 years after the creation of the internet.