quote:

Originally posted by frankvan:

quote:

Honestly, I don't think either one stands a chance. And, unless the Dems can come up with a better candidate before next year, they're very likely to lose their chance to win back the White House, and end this stupid war.

.

I hope you're no more accurate than you were when you backed Dukakis.

Yes, Valor D was outnumbered by people who wouldn't vote for a man in a tank. Now, what kind of reasoning was that?

There must have been a time when British pundits thought that nobody would vote for a woman as leader.The lady in question once said that she did not think that there would be a woman Prime Minister in her lifetime.

Margaret Thatcher was our Prime Minister from 1979 to 1990, the longest continuous tenure of that office since early in the C19. People used to joke that that was because she was 'the best man we have'

Oh, and by the way, she was once memorably photographed in a tank .

Either we are very different from Americans or it matters not what gender the candidate has if initially they are self-evidently, and then provenly, the best for the job. It must be said that only an exceptional woman would have been chosen by such a conservative, male-dominated, organisation as our Conservative Party in the 1970s.When she was chosen as leader of the party the party's own exclusive club, The Carlton, had a rule forbidding women membership. The club had to make an exception once she was Prime Minister because another of their rules was that a Conservative Prime Minister was ex officio a member !

Yeah, so Dukakis' pic in the tank on the cover of LIFE wasn't the most flattering. But, this is exactly my point. How people can make such a monumental judgment based on how photogenic someone is, is shallow, at the very least; and, irresponsible, in my opinion. Had this been the case during the civil war era, Lincoln would never have been elected, and slavery might still be legal.

I don't think it's fair to paint every voter with the same brush. Dukakis wasn't rejected because - or ONLY because - of his tank picture. Nor as Fred says because we rejected a "man in a tank" image. I voted for the man, but I had to admit that he looked ridiculous and dwarfed by the tank, and out of character in the helmet. Image does count for something, if not for everything, unfortunately.

Dukakis told everyone the truth; taxes would have to be raised. Bush said what he had to to get elected: "Read My Lips: No New Taxes." America has always been a sucker for movie-type phrases, and Bush won. And promptly raised taxes. In my opinion, telling the truth was as big a factor in that election as the stupid picture.

quote:

Originally posted by frankvan:
I voted for the man, but I had to admit that he looked ridiculous and dwarfed by the tank, and out of character in the helmet. Image does count for something, if not for everything, unfortunately.

"Out of character in the helmet" Isn't that what did for him ? Dukakis was not the kind of man who'd be in a tank,so putting him in one looked false. Candidates should behave in accordance with their character. If you're an ex-marine, with a liking for war and machinery, then pose with tanks but if, say, you are a former accountant with diplomatic tendencies then don't.

Mrs Thatcher not only rode in a tank but looked for all the world as though she wanted to ride through the next town in it, blasting Labour Party headquarters! She was quite disappointed when she had to get out of it. But that was entirely in character.That's how she was and how the public saw her, a woman whom the Russians were to call 'the Iron Lady' after a Russian tank. That woman in a tank looked and seemed right, a latter-day Boudicca, but Dukakis in a tank didn't.

I think that's it, exactly, Fred. Hillary would look right at home in a tank, but had best stay out of one. Bill, on the other hand, would look completely wrong in one. IMHO.