it would have been disturbing if romney had won in florida.

spending his own personal fortune, he placed 10 times as many florida TV ads as mccain did (4,400 to about 450). mccain still won.

ultra rich candidates haven't fared too well in their quest for the white house. the 2004 team of kerry/edwards, bringing the richest man in the senate together with the 2nd richest, apparently didn't attract many crossover votes.

bloomberg is rumored to be considering a run for the presidency - as a 3rd party candidate. may he suffer the same fate as billionaire h. ross perot, please!

i think its possible to pass a threshold of wealth where you're completely out of touch with the american people - whether its because you made a fortune running a hedge fund which put thousands of people out of work; you believe $400 haircuts are reasonably priced; you have 6 residences around the world; you have a huge carbon footprint while nagging the middle class to scale back their own lifestyles . . .

mccain isn't the perfect candidate . . . none of them are, in either party. but he's going to have easier sledding against obama or hillary, just by virtue of not being the guy who put your dad out of work with his personal enrichment plan.

Edwards was nowhere near the second-wealthiest senator. I have no idea where you got that information. He was ninth:

<link>

And it was Kerry's wife who was super-wealthy, not Kerry himself. And spouses have the same contribution limits as any other citizen, meaning she could not (and did not) bankrole his candidacy.

And I agree that McCain is a much stronger candidate, especially against Hillary. Obama is probably unbeatable in the general election, but most Democrats are too stupid to do the math on independant voters, so it will most likely be Hillary. McCain will kill Hillary.

Gee, I must have missed the report about the Bushes living on food stamps.

Let's see, um, third generation scion of a wealthy family, sent to elite prep schools and ivy league colleges on the legacy plan, never had to work a real day in his life, used daddy's connections to jump ahead of the line to get into the National Guard so he wouldn't have to go to Vietnam.

Exactly how does Bush not qualify as "ultra-rich?"

Please, don't let the fact that the 147th Fighter Interceptor Group was flying missions in Vietnam when Bush enlisted stop your half-informed petulant populist babble.

<link>

point taken, but GW was still ultra rich; which was his main point.

Please don't let the fact that both Johnson and Nixon made it policy not to send the National Guard to Vietnam and everyone at the time knew it stop you from making childish name calling in place of an actual intelligent point.

Bush knew joining the guard would mean not going to Vietnam, regardless of what plane he trained on. And that's without even mentioning that he was suspended from flying because he refused to take physical that included a drug test or that there still isn't any proof that he actually completed his guard responsibilities.

But, hey, why cite facts when you have your Hannitized talking points, right?

That fighter group you cited was the exception, not the rule. Again, it was common knowledge at the time that the guard was considered an "honorable" way for rich young men to avoid the draft.

And none of changes that Bush does qualify as ultra-rich, a point you conveniently dodged in your name-calling.

"But, hey, why cite facts"

I did, jackass-- complete with a source.

You, on the other hand, "cite" your mind-reading ability: "Bush knew joining the guard would mean not going to Vietnam"

Save the Hannity crap for somebody else-- not everybody who recognizes your ignorant partisan drivel for what it is needs to be a devotee of right-wing infotainers.

Bear vs. Wolf.

Are you ready? Are you ready? Lets get it on!

Again, name-calling is not a substitute for an intelligent point.

Tell you what, let's continue this conversation after you've finished the eighth grade, okay?

screwjack2007:

Bear vs. Wolf.

Are you ready? Are you ready? Lets get it on!

More like Bear vs Cub.

I don't fight children. I'll wait until he grows up and can make a post without name calling.

I agree that trying to change the topic from your abject failure to support your childish BS claim to something about me is all that is left to you by now-- I'll leave you to try to recover some shred of your dignity.

How much dignity does it take to call a someone names anonymously?

Oh, and the actual topic was that Bush was ultrarich and that he used daddy's influence to get into the guard despite his mediocre rating, which you tried to change and is something you have yet to disprove.

But hey, at least you're still trying to make it personal rather that trying to say something intelligent.

Soon he will ask you where you live as if he is going come and get you. What can you say? The poor obfuscated guy loves Bush.