Edmund Muskie and Nikki Haley: I can remember when Edmund Mukie had to pull out of the P**********l race after teering up over remarks that were made about his wife. The perception it...

SteveR Loc: Michigan

I can remember when Edmund Mukie had to pull out of the P**********l race after teering up over remarks that were made about his wife. The perception it gave was that he didn't have the right kind of emotional strength to be President. Now we have Nikki Haley teering up over a remark made about her husband. Does it, too, show weakness and the lack of the necessary emotional strength for the office?

I like Nikki, for the most part. I like her stance on Ukraine better than Trumps. However, the question needed to be asked considering past history.

Texcaster Loc: Queensland

SteveR wrote:

I can remember when Edmund Mukie had to pull out o... (show quote)

... and Trump with his salacious, gossip boy, innuendo has the right stuff??? Remember Lord Bigly to Ted Cruz ... *"Your wife is ugly and your dad shot Kennedy and you weren't born here!" What an inspiration for the kiddies.

* more or less

SteveR Loc: Michigan

Texcaster wrote:

... and Trump with his salacious, gossip boy, innuendo has the right stuff??? Remember Lord Bigly to Ted Cruz ... *"Your wife is ugly and your dad shot Kennedy and you weren't born here!" What an inspiration for the kiddies.

* more or less

He wouldn't be my choice, Tex. I think I've made that clear. Do I need to list the reasons?

I'm not saying Haley should be dumped. I'm just reminding people of the brouhaha made over Muskie's show of emotion, yet nothing has been said of Haley's, yet both are very, very similar. Most who read this post are probably scratching their head and asking, "who's Edmund Muskie?"

Texcaster Loc: Queensland

SteveR wrote:

He wouldn't be my choice, Tex. I think I've made that clear. Do I need to list the reasons?

I'm not saying Haley should be dumped. I'm just reminding people of the brouhaha made over Muskie's show of emotion, yet nothing has been said of Haley's, yet both are very, very similar.

Haley can beat Biden. The soon to be Big Felon can't. That's your 2024.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

Texcaster wrote:

Haley can beat Biden. The soon to be Big Felon can't. That's your 2024.

I'm not counting on Biden being the nominee, for one. The latest story out is that Biden will withdraw with the projection being Newsom getting his delegates and the nomination. That doesn't quite seem like a kosher way of becoming a nominee.

You may underestimate the i*****l i*******t problem.

Texcaster Loc: Queensland

SteveR wrote:

I'm not counting on Biden being the nominee, for one. The latest story out is that Biden will withdraw with the projection being Newsom getting his delegates and the nomination. That doesn't quite seem like a kosher way of becoming a nominee.

You may underestimate the i*****l i*******t problem.

Newsom can beat Haley and The Defendant! Trump just exacerbated the border problem with his rejection of some MAGA dream border legislation. All so he can campaign on, wait for it ... broken borders! *YCMTCSU! I think you might underestimate women's desire for 'choice'. They want it, overwhelmingly, across party lines.

*you can't make this cynical stuff up.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

Texcaster wrote:

Newsom can beat Haley and The Defendant! Trump just exacerbated the border problem with his rejection of some MAGA dream border legislation. All so he can campaign on, wait for it ... broken borders! *YCMTCSU! I think you might underestimate women's desire for 'choice'. They want it, overwhelmingly, across party lines.

*you can't make this cynical stuff up.

Heaven help us.

Choice has been settled. It's not a federal issue and it's been winning on most state levels. Whoever is President won't make a hill o' beans difference.

Rab-Eye Loc: Indiana

SteveR wrote:

He wouldn't be my choice, Tex. I think I've made that clear. Do I need to list the reasons?

I'm not saying Haley should be dumped. I'm just reminding people of the brouhaha made over Muskie's show of emotion, yet nothing has been said of Haley's, yet both are very, very similar. Most who read this post are probably scratching their head and asking, "who's Edmund Muskie?"

The difference between them is the time in which they happened.

Effate Loc: El Dorado Hills, Ca.

Texcaster wrote:

Newsom can beat Haley and The Defendant! Trump just exacerbated the border problem with his rejection of some MAGA dream border legislation. All so he can campaign on, wait for it ... broken borders! *YCMTCSU! I think you might underestimate women's desire for 'choice'. They want it, overwhelmingly, across party lines.

*you can't make this cynical stuff up.

Newsom, 20-30 million illegal/undocumented given taxpayer paid medical (when he is elected) and a completely open border where people can fly thousands of miles from all over the world, passing any number of countries to land and stage at California’s border to enter unfettered and sign up for benefits while claiming asylum yeah that sounds about right. Newsom 2024!!

SteveR Loc: Michigan

Rab-Eye wrote:

The difference between them is the time in which they happened.

Certainly. However, I AM surprised that some astute journalist has not made the connection. If we had decent independent newspapers and independent journalists it would at least have been a story. Frankly, in re-reading about the Muskie situation and the fact that it was actually snow and not tears that came down his face, Muskie got a bum deal by the press.

Triple G

SteveR wrote:

Certainly. However, I AM surprised that some astute journalist has not made the connection. If we had decent independent newspapers and independent journalists it would at least have been a story. Frankly, in re-reading about the Muskie situation and the fact that it was actually snow and not tears that came down his face, Muskie got a bum deal by the press.

That would be considered a sexist piece if written in the way you portrayed it.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

Triple G wrote:

That would be considered a sexist piece if written in the way you portrayed it.

I don't see how you would get that? It would be holding her up to the same standard as Muskie. Isn't that non-sexist? Isn't equat treatment what they want?

Triple G

SteveR wrote:

I don't see how you would get that? It would be holding her up to the same standard as Muskie. Isn't that non-sexist? Isn't equat treatment what they want?

https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna22329566

SteveR Loc: Michigan

Triple G wrote:

https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna22329566

Times do change. Remember Gary Hart in 1987. I'm afraid today's v**ers would hardly blush.

Triple G

SteveR wrote:

Times do change. Remember Gary Hart in 1987. I'm afraid today's v**ers would hardly blush.

They'd think him a fool to let it derail his campaign.