Presidential Survivor Discussion

[dazzleman]

As for the final five, I'm going to be the first to suggest that Cleveland and Mckinley may be dark horses.

Do we need to vote Grover off twice?

This round, FDR v. Bush, is the first truly partisan round.  LBJ is legitimately despised as President by many of us.  FDR's domestic fiscal policies may not be well liked, but he did deal with WWII properly.  I would imagine many of the people voting FDR off are looking to get rid of him in retaliation for the run on Bush.

Really, no one can judge W, Bubba, and Bush the Elder in a proper historical context at this point.  In 20 years we may live in a world where International Terrorism is all but forgotten and democracy in the Middle East is the accepted norm.  We are just now beginning to enter the phase where we can properly judge Reagan.

My point exactly.  I don't think W should necessarily win, but I think it's premature to be trying to get rid of him with so much dead wood left.  We have to make the Democrats pay dearly for their blind partisanship.

[dazzleman]

The Republicans reacted to the Democrats attempting to knock off Dubya by beating you guys at your own game and taking out FDR and LBJ. Then again, you try to knock off Dubya and barely are able to before Clinton gets taken out. Now, you try to vote off the best President since Truman just because he was a Republican.

Absolutely correct.  Certain Democrats on this board have been on a single-minded crusade to eliminate George W. Bush from day one.  That is the only reason the rest of us voted off LBJ and FDR.

In their typical fashion, they claim that their drive against Bush is to seek revenge for FDR and LBJ, which is about on the level with most of their logic, since their drive against Bush is the only reason FDR and LBJ were eliminated when they were.

There was no move to get rid of Clinton until after the Democrats voted off George W. Bush, which we could have prevented if not for the fecklessness of certain people on our side.

Certain of the Democrats have barely voted for anybody but George W. Bush.  I can't think of any Republicans who have exhibited such single-minded hostility to any Democratic president (Lincoln is the only recipient of the consistent hostility of certain Republicans, ironically). 

It's amazing that in a historical game, these people would first focus on the president for whom we have the least historical perspective, and be willing to pay such a steep price for voting him off.  This is why the people and policies that these type of people support should never be returned to power.  They are truly dangerous because they are much more motivated by negative than positive things.  And now it's our job to make them pay a very steep price for their actions.