Senator Benson Rockefeller Goes For The Gold (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
May 19, 2024, 01:45:42 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Election What-ifs? (Moderator: Dereich)
  Senator Benson Rockefeller Goes For The Gold (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Senator Benson Rockefeller Goes For The Gold  (Read 27911 times)
Mechaman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,791
Jamaica
« on: June 12, 2010, 09:18:28 AM »
« edited: June 12, 2010, 10:07:23 AM by Metal Mario »

Political commentator Patrick Buchanan (who ran for the Republican nomination)

This election is about our future. It's about what kind of a nation we're going to be. Our Republican Party represents mainstream America. But be prepared, our Democratic opponents and their friends in the national media will try to portray you and me as radical.

Let me ask you. Is it radical to cut taxes for working families? Bill Clinton thinks it is. Is it radical to want to balance the budget? Bill Clinton thinks it is. Is it radical to offer parents choice in education? Bill Clinton, he's against parental choice.

Is it radical to try to reform the legal system and make it more efficient for all of us? Bill Clinton vetoed legal reform. Is it radical, is it radical, in the seventh or eighth month of pregnancy to protect the baby? Bill Clinton supports partial birth abortions. And how about my favorite, is it radical to ask Americans to live the family values that make our nation strong?

My friends, you're right. These are not radical positions. These are American values. Our values. And they are the values we need to move America in the 21st century. Strong, free and proud..........

 



Great strategy, Rockefeller's name isn't mentioned once in Buchanan's speech.  It looks like you did your research on this one.  Especially if Rockefeller is pro-free trade I expect him and Buchanan to butt heads in the future.......
Good job Smiley
Logged
Mechaman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,791
Jamaica
« Reply #1 on: June 12, 2010, 10:31:00 AM »

It looks like the Republicans are focused on national security and foreign policy in this election.  I can only imagine that if the Olympic Park bombing happens like it did IRL (or even worse) how much of an effect that would have on the general election season.  It would seem perfect timing to have a campaign based around national security.
Logged
Mechaman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,791
Jamaica
« Reply #2 on: July 08, 2010, 03:12:11 PM »

There are more compelling issues in 1996 than abortion, the safety and security of the nation for one.

Rockefeller did not choose a pro choice running mate, he chose a pro life running mate.

Rockefeller's stand on abortion may not be what every conservative is looking for, however, it is infinitely preferrable to the stand taken by most Democrats, including Clinton.

Well, onward and upward.  The campaign continues.

Of course there were more important, real issues but, suprisingly, a lot of people don't care about real issues. And if you're think that a conservative base would let the character to go on with "I just personally oppose abortion"... well, what can I say? I think you're deadly wrong.

Also, if this Benson Rockefeller is anywhere as "moderate" (LOL actually, Benson Rockefeller from what I remembered was a borderline liberal) on other issues like healthcare, the environment, iodine, pro-smoking ban, pro-tanning bed ban, I really don't see how the conservative base would be motivated (even with Liddy Dole) to go to the voting booths for someone who on the sum of things is probably more liberal than Clinton.  I mean from what I've read it sounds like the Reagan Revolution still occured.  So yeah, if this election revolves around security it better be because of a pretty dang bad attack on domestic soil enough to distract conservative Republicans from the fact that they are voting for a Mee-Too Republican.

Or perhaps this Rockefeller is different?
Logged
Mechaman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,791
Jamaica
« Reply #3 on: July 19, 2010, 08:54:09 AM »

Actually, this was a very good timeline.

Thank you Hawkeye.  I never thought I would be hearing that from you, so that makes it all that much more appreciated.

I plan to pursue this timeline now into the transition and then into the Rockefeller Presidency.
When you started, you made this very Rockefeller-biased, but that has stopped since.

Yes, and you took into consideration circumstances like Rockefeller's stance on the issues and how that would affect the election.  In fact, I was kind of hoping for a terror attack on US Soil to make the election a little more pro-Rockefeller.

This is very well written.
Logged
Mechaman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,791
Jamaica
« Reply #4 on: November 19, 2011, 05:55:00 AM »

Now that my foray into Atlasian politics has come to an end, I hope to get back to this time line.

FOUR MORE YEARS!  FOUR MORE YEARS!  FOUR MORE YEARS!
WOOT!  WOOT!  WOOT!

But seriously though, please continue.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.022 seconds with 7 queries.