The Power of Citizen Journalism
Post News ($)»     Post Blog»     Upload Image»     Groups»     Events»     Alerts»     User Benefits»
Email Print Share

Email this article

Recipient email:
Your email:
optional
Message:
optional

Op-Ed: Is There a Pattern Here?

Posted Aug 21, 2007 by  S.H. Mills in Politics | 15 comments | 505 views
Advertising
Should we elect another Clinton to the White House in 2008? If so, what then, another Bush in 2012 or 2016? This model could conceivably continue for years to come. Do voters believe this pattern is good for America or is it time for someone new?
With so many serious issues facing this country today, should the 2008 election be geared toward change or will Americans continue down the same path? Have we tired of Bush, Clinton, Bush (Clinton) or will this pattern continue?

It is a very real possibility that this pattern could go on for the foreseeable future. It began with our forty-first president, George Herbert Walker Bush in 1988. He only served one term, and lost his re-election bid to William Jefferson Clinton in 1992. Clinton remained president until the 2000 election in which George Walker Bush, who is currently serving, replaced him.

Who will it be in 2008? Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton may well be next as she is currently a Democratic frontrunner. While many would like to see America elect its first woman president, some also question if she is in fact the right woman for the job. She's also a Clinton.

If Hillary Clinton wins in 2008, will she be followed by John Ellis “Jeb” Bush? The former Governor of Florida has denied any desire to run for president -at least in 2008- but his dad and big brother, our forty-first and forty-third presidents, both think he’d make a good president. This is according to the Washington Post, which also reports Bush Sr. as saying he'd like to see Jeb run but it’s the wrong time. He indicated that it’s because Jeb doesn’t want to run now. I’m of the opinion that Bush fatigue has more to do with the timing.

If Jeb becomes president in 2012 or 2016, could he be followed by a Chelsea Victoria Clinton presidency? It's hard to say at this point. Chelsea may not even be interested. Yet, there is the possibility that we could end up with over 40 years of these two families controlling our country (and that's if no other family members decide to run).

What this could mean:

41 – (1988-1992) George Bush, Sr.
42 – (1992-2000) Bill Clinton
43 – (2000-2008) George W. Bush
44 – (2008-2016) Hillary Clinton
45 – (2016-2024) Jeb Bush
46 – (2024-2032) Chelsea Clinton

If the Bush/Clinton era continues, how long will it take for this pattern to look like a stranglehold on power, by two families (and parties) that perhaps are not really as different as many seem to think they are?
article:219544:9::0

1 subscriber
Subscribe To This Thread[?] :
  • avatar Posted Aug 21, 2007 by  Bocephalus
    #1
    Doesn't really matter who you vote for, the special interests are in power. Although I would take a Clinton over a Bush anytime (so would the international community for that matter).

    You're also assuming that Dubya is leaving office in January '09.

    What you need is to embrace a Parliamentary system. That way your politicians are actually held accountable as there are multiple parties and the power of the PM is checked by them in parliament. .
  • avatar Posted Aug 21, 2007 by  S.H. Mills
    #2
    @ Bocephalus
    Doesn't really matter who you vote for, the special interests are in power. Although I would take a Clinton over a Bush anytime (so would the international community for that matter).

    You're also assuming that Dubya is leaving office in January '09.

    What you need is to embrace a Parliamentary system. That way your politicians are actually held accountable as there are multiple parties and the power of the PM is checked by them in parliament. .


    I agree that special interests are out of hand, but I don't see much difference between a Bush and a Clinton.

    We are supposed to have checks and balances but our "leaders" seem to have forgotten the oaths they swore to defend the Constitution.

    Thanks for commenting.
  • avatar Posted Aug 21, 2007 by  Eric S. Wyatt
    #3
    We do have checks and balances, but it requires an informed and engaged electorate for them to work. When only half of eligible voters are even registered, and only half of those registered actually vote, who is to blame? The system? Or the people?

    The system or special interests or big oil or environmentalists or big farm/pharm...they are all boogy men. It is the people out here who don't participate who are to blame.
  • avatar Posted Aug 21, 2007 by  Kim Ruiz (givemetruth)
    #4
    Good point, Eric! I'm willing to do my part to break the pattern and NOT VOTE FOR HILLARY. Anyone else care to help break the trend?
  • avatar Posted Aug 21, 2007 by  Chris V. (cgull)
    #5
    Great post, I think you should add another candidate to the above Bush/Clinton list, Laura Bush is pregnant :)
  • avatar Posted Aug 21, 2007 by  S.H. Mills
    #6
    @ Eric S. Wyatt
    We do have checks and balances, but it requires an informed and engaged electorate for them to work. When only half of eligible voters are even registered, and only half of those registered actually vote, who is to blame? The system? Or the people?

    The system or special interests or big oil or environmentalists or big farm/pharm...they are all boogy men. It is the people out here who don't participate who are to blame.


    Great points. I agree.
  • avatar Posted Aug 21, 2007 by  S.H. Mills
    #7
    @ Chris V. (cgull)
    Great post, I think you should add another candidate to the above Bush/Clinton list, Laura Bush is pregnant :)


    Ha. ha.

    Thanks, friend. :o)
  • Stancel Spencer Posted Aug 21, 2007 by  Stancel Spencer
    #8
    Look up George Prescott Bush he is Jeb Bush's son....I guess he would run against Chelsea.

    It's really annoying how the two families are ruling politics.
  • avatar Posted Aug 21, 2007 by  S.H. Mills
    #9
    @ Stancel Spencer
    Look up George Prescott Bush he is Jeb Bush's son....I guess he would run against Chelsea.

    It's really annoying how the two families are ruling politics.


    There are other family members and more could come along... in either event, it's not something I'd like to see continue.
  • avatar Posted Aug 22, 2007 by  pbrite
    #10
    Well, Obama could break that all up, I guess. You know what would help our country improve foreign relations? Bill Clinton in the UN. THAT would rock.
  • avatar Posted Aug 22, 2007 by  Paul Wallis (Wanderlaugh)
    #11
    Aw, c'mon. Think of the savings in letterheads, and not taxing voter's attention spans with remembering who the candidates are. As long as they know one's Republican and one's Democrat, what does it matter?

    You could start stud farms.
  • avatar Posted Aug 22, 2007 by  S.H. Mills
    #12
    @ Kim Ruiz (givemetruth)
    Good point, Eric! I'm willing to do my part to break the pattern and NOT VOTE FOR HILLARY. Anyone else care to help break the trend?


    That's the spirit!
  • avatar Posted Aug 23, 2007 by  S.H. Mills
    #13
    @ Paul Wallis (Wanderlaugh)
    Aw, c'mon. Think of the savings in letterheads, and not taxing voter's attention spans with remembering who the candidates are. As long as they know one's Republican and one's Democrat, what does it matter?

    You could start stud farms.


    Two sides of the same coin.
  • avatar Posted Aug 23, 2007 by  MDee
    #14
    You raise a most interesting point.
    Good post.
    MDee
  • avatar Posted Aug 23, 2007 by  S.H. Mills
    #15
    @ MDee
    You raise a most interesting point.
    Good post.
    MDee


    Thanks, Mdee. I think it should give one pause...

Add a Comment

emptyAdd a Comment or Login/Register empty