mvscal wrote:Oh please...Jsc810 wrote:With perhaps the meanest campaign literature ever,
Word, not even close.
Moderator: Jesus H Christ
mvscal wrote:Oh please...Jsc810 wrote:With perhaps the meanest campaign literature ever,
How about George H. W. Bush suggesting that Michael Dukakis intended to release convicted murderers for the purpose of terrorizing the civilian populace?mvscal wrote:Much like everything else in American life, politics has become pussified.
Rough campaign literature? You mean like Henry Clay running "Yo Momma a Ho" smack at Andrew Jackson?
Or a US Senator getting beaten into a coma on the floor of the House by a Congressman?
Or a Vice President murdering a former Treasury Secretary in a duel over aspersions cast on his integrity?
War Wagon wrote:The first time I click on one of your youtube links will be the first time.
Not only would it be entertaining but would also get rid of a few of them.Jsc810 wrote: Today, do we really want politicians dueling with pistols, fist fighting, or calling their opponent's mother a whore?
TheJON wrote:What does the winner get? Because if it's a handjob from Frisco, I'd like to campaign for my victory.
Just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to 19th century American politics.mvscal wrote:Actually it's a perfectly valid point.Jsc810 wrote:OK, maybe not the "meanest ever", but still, that is prety rough.
Much like everything else in American life, politics has become pussified.
Rough campaign literature? You mean like Henry Clay running "Yo Momma a Ho" smack at Andrew Jackson?
Or a US Senator getting beaten into a coma on the floor of the House by a Congressman?
Or a Vice President murdering a former Treasury Secretary in a duel over aspersions cast on his integrity?
mvscal wrote: I believe he became Adams' Sec. of State.
OK, I was thinking about the election of 1828, not 1824. It's damn hard work keeping the Jackson, Clay, Adams soap opera straight.mvscal wrote:It was Henry Clay in response to Jackson calling Adams a pimp. He was working for the Adams campaign. I believe he became Adams' Sec. of State.
The campaign was the first true mud-slinging contest. Adams was accused of misusing public funds—he had supposedly purchased gambling devices for the presidential residence; actually he had simply bought a chessboard and a pool table. The charges against Jackson were much more malicious. He was accused of murder for executing militia deserters and dueling. In addition, he and his wife were accused of adultery. Rachel was a divorcee'; she and Jackson believed her divorce was finalized before their marriage. The papers were incomplete, however, and she was publicly branded an adulteress by Jackson’s political opponents. Mrs. Jackson was humiliated, became ill and died before the inauguration. Jackson believed these attacks caused his wife’s death and said, “May God Almighty forgive her murderers as I know she forgave them. I never can.”
Disagree.mvscal wrote:Oh, fuck yeah.Terry in Crapchester wrote:Do you think we'd be better off if we go back to that approach?
I'll take your answer off the air.
War Wagon wrote:The first time I click on one of your youtube links will be the first time.
Without a doubt, the media also has played a role in this.BSmack wrote:That being said, Terry is right that the relatively tame post WWII political landscape has morphed into something far more akin to the 1800s as we move into the 21st century.
War Wagon wrote:The first time I click on one of your youtube links will be the first time.
Voter turnout wasn't an issue in 1828. Hell, less than 1 in 4 of the people in this country were even eligible to vote back then. Maybe if we told more people they couldn't vote, then they would value the franchise more dearly.Terry in Crapchester wrote:Disagree.mvscal wrote:Oh, fuck yeah.Terry in Crapchester wrote:Do you think we'd be better off if we go back to that approach?
I'll take your answer off the air.
One of the real disgraces of our system is that so few eligible voters bother to vote. We barely get 50% voter turnout in a Presidential election year, and significantly less than that in so-called "off" years. The mud-slinging that goes on now, while perhaps tame by standards of the first century of this Republic, is a major factor behind the low voter turnout.
word-------mvscal wrote:That isn't a bad thing. The vast, overwhelming majority of people are too fucking stupid to be voting anyway.Terry in Crapchester wrote: One of the real disgraces of our system is that so few eligible voters bother to vote. We barely get 50% voter turnout in a Presidential election year,
Perhaps the number of females in the WH press corp had something to do with that.Terry in Crapchester wrote: And remember how breathlessly, and relentlessly, the media reported Bill Clinton's extracurricular love life? Strictly minor-league compared to JFK's, of course (imagine Clinton banging Pamela Anderson and you'd have a rough comparison to JFK and Marilyn), but nobody knew about JFK's affairs until years after he died. And from reading Ben Bradlee's autobiography, it's quite clear that the media knew all about it at the time, but didn't consider it newsworthy.
mvscal wrote:The only precious metals in a SHTF scenario are lead and brass.
Of course, that doesn't tell the whole story, now does it?smackaholic wrote:nah, it's just that the press corp had some sense of doing the right thing for the country. pointing out that jfk was putting the wood to mm woudn't have done the country any good. they just looked at it for what it was. some rich powerful dude nailing a hottie.
comparing this with the willy/monica debacle is apples/oranges. he was already up on harassment charges. he lied. and also, he was nailing a 21 yo kid that worked for him. mm was a middle aged successful star that had her pick of guys. if clinton had tagged someone like pam anderson, I might have voted for him.
War Wagon wrote:The first time I click on one of your youtube links will be the first time.