The election of 1864 is instructive in this.

Current Events » in reply to Don't know if anyone here is a "Bush hater" as such

The election of 1864 is instructive in this.

ebnelson — 11/12/2003 4:38:48 AM (archived)

Lincoln was broadly hated and was expected by many to do poorly. The Civil War had not done well, and the nation had casulty level that makes the entire War on Terror, including the deaths of 911, look like abouta one day of intense fighting.
Lincoln won huge.
Ed

The whole thread (29 posts)

Question on Bush hatred for the left - FrankC - 11/12/2003 12:11:00 AM
- Its not about "hate"... - Donald - 11/12/2003 3:18:12 PM
  - No it is not about just hate... - ebnelson - 11/13/2003 1:12:26 PM
  - Thanks for the attempt at an answer - FrankC - 11/12/2003 4:04:51 PM
    - Quit yer bitchin, I'll take a whack at it. - et - 11/12/2003 9:19:12 PM
      - Clinton probably a better party guy - FrankC - 11/12/2003 9:53:51 PM
  - And tell me Donald, what would this "replacement" do in Iraq? (n/t) - Tom Brosz - 11/12/2003 4:02:13 PM
    - imagine if France had invaded Iraq - Greg - 11/13/2003 6:06:22 AM
      - more on governing to avoid humiliation rather than doing things properly - Greg - 11/13/2003 6:12:51 AM
    - Easy one Tom - FrankC - 11/12/2003 5:15:09 PM
- Don't know if anyone here is a "Bush hater" as such - Tom Brosz - 11/12/2003 3:29:03 AM
  - The election of 1864 is instructive in this. - ebnelson - 11/12/2003 4:38:48 AM
  - Yes, but it makes such flashy rhetoric and is sunch a nice red herring to throw around - Davin L. - 11/12/2003 3:56:41 AM
- The Hatred is a Bush vs. Kennedy thing. - Scott Evil - 11/12/2003 12:20:18 AM
  - On the contrary... - Tom Brosz - 11/12/2003 3:26:46 AM
  - Naah - FrankC - 11/12/2003 2:39:00 AM
  - Nobody has shot a Bush either (n/t) - Mary Anne - 11/12/2003 1:08:57 AM
    - Nor has a Bush drowned any women, either n/t - Larry J - 11/12/2003 1:33:33 AM
      - OK, that's it, I'm outta here. - Mary Anne - 11/12/2003 4:46:00 AM
        
        Tubby is just iritable from the caloric restriction. He needs an emergency porterhouse, STAT! (n/t) - et - 11/12/2003 9:05:26 PM
        
        Bringing the post quality right up there, aren't we? - Tom Brosz - 11/12/2003 10:05:50 PM
        
        Nope, just the status quo.... - et - 11/12/2003 10:12:29 PM
        
        Why is what he said any sleazier than what you said? (n/t) - Tom Brosz - 11/12/2003 5:06:32 AM
        
        Because I dared to point out the truth about "America's Royal Family" - Larry J - 11/12/2003 2:50:13 PM
        
        Isn't that what CBS said? (n/t) - et - 11/12/2003 9:03:42 PM
        
        If you're referring to the "Reagan" miniseries... - Larry J - 11/12/2003 9:48:39 PM
        
        I'm sure they meant a "fair and balanced" portrayal. (n/t) - et - 11/12/2003 10:04:05 PM
        
        Neither was sleazy and both were true (n/t) - ebnelson - 11/12/2003 1:45:19 PM
        
        re: Probably because John Kennedy wasn't Ted Kennedy just as Bush Sr isn't Bush Jr (n/t) - Raoul - 11/12/2003 6:44:31 AM

Recent posts

On this day in Current Events

The whole thread (29 posts)