🚀 go-pugleaf

smr <me@shawnritchie.com> wrote:
>On 9/22/2011 8:59 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

>>You're lying that you were thinking of a time before Andrew Jackson's
>>campaigning created the first popular elections for president.

>Seriously, I'm gonna knock you outta your shitty, threadbare coat at the 
>next gather. Where the fuck do you get off claiming to know this and 
>accuse me of lying, you ginormous asshole?

Because you're being such a defensive douchebag and making such a
racket over nothing. Because you've painted yourself into a corner
and keep right on painting.

>>You
>>failed to make your point that incumbents didn't campaign in any era
>>for reasons of dignity. You made an absurd comment several articles
>>back and you've gone to absurd lengths to defend it, except that you
>>never even bothered to tell us what dignified incumbent re-election
>>you were even thinking of. But lame insults fly out of your mouth
>>fast and thick, about all you're good for.

>Here, you fucking cunt:

>"It's hard to imagine nowadays, but there was a time when it was 
>considered poor form for a candidate to campaign openly for the 
>presidency. They did not even attend their own nominating conventions. 
>Historian Alan Brinkley explains how, in the nineteenth century, "The 
>public aloofness of most presidential candidates gave an aura of 
>nonpartisan dignity to the election process and kept alive the vision of 
>the nation's founders of a political world free of parties and 
>factions." Indeed,

>As late as 1900, when William McKinley ran for reelection as president, 
>it was possible for a candidate to remain almost entirely out of view 
>during the national campaign and allow other party leaders to do 
>virtually all the work of mobilizing voters. Successful presidential 
>candidates in the nineteenth century accepted election almost as if it 
>were a gift of the people -- a gift that they pretended never to have 
>sought and that they had made no active efforts to accept (although of 
>course they had almost always worked incessantly if quietly to obtain 
>it).[1]

>The custom was so powerful that an orator the caliber of Abraham Lincoln 
>adhered to it -- even in 1864, when the nation was at war, and even 
>though the president was driven to serve a second term. As David Herbert 
>Donald explains,

>There was little that Lincoln could do openly to promote his 
>renomination and reelection. Custom prohibited him from soliciting 
>support, making public statements, or appearing to campaign for office. 
>But as the nominating season approached, he made a point of hosting 
>numerous social activities at the White House ... which could only boost 
>the president's hopes for a second term.[2]

>This custom of imposed restraint affected much American political life. 
>Indeed, one pretext for drawing up articles of impeachment against 
>Andrew Johnson was that he "disgraced" Congress by openly, unabashedly 
>campaigning; not for himself, mind you, which was considered beyond the 
>pale even for him -- but for his supporters. After Congress slapped 
>Johnson down, presidential aspirants dared not openly campaign for 
>another three decades."

>NOW EAT EIGHT DICKS AND FUCK RIGHT OFF.

You're quoting an article without citing it, going so far as to provide
footnote references without the footnotes? That's hysterical.

Again, let's remind shawn of the bullshit he uttered so many precursor
articles back:

	Here's part of our problem in a nutshell: people want our
	presidential election to be entertainment. So we get entertainers;
	Obama's handsome young Hope & Change show, Dubya's "Not too smart
	to scare ya" faux cowboy shtick, Clinton's insanely powerful
	charisma...

	And then we wonder why this country sucks shitcock now.

	We should go back to the old days where the incumbent didn't even
	campaign because it was considered beneath the office. You just
	voted on his record.

According to your uncited quote, it wasn't beneath the dignity of the
office to seek it behind the scenes, and it wasn't beneath the dignity
of the office to have your partisans campaign on your behalf.

So where the fuck did you get "You just voted on his record" from?

Obama lacked a record; he couldn't run for his first term like that.
For his second term, well, unemployment is still hideously high, so
running on his record won't work too well.