Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Richardson & Kucinich - The ET candidates?

  1. Jan 21, 2007 #1

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/21/u...&en=7e45b2bbd7d4a4ba&ei=5094&partner=homepage

    I can't help but wonder if this will play a significant role - the ET candidate? In fact he has been friendly with the conspiracy crowd.

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/08/16/MNGAK88OQQ1.DTL

    Of course he is a lead pipe cinch for the UFO vote. :biggrin:
     
    Last edited: Jan 21, 2007
  2. jcsd
  3. Jan 22, 2007 #2

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    :rofl: What a quiet thread...

    Can you imagine what Rove would do with this?
    .
     
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2007
  4. Jan 22, 2007 #3
    I live in NM and think its a waste of time for him to join this election, taxpayer money goes to all these candidates and its a total waste. The money would be much better spent on most anything else.
     
  5. Jan 22, 2007 #4

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Why? Is it that he has no chance of winning, or has he been that bad of a Governer? If so, how?
     
  6. Jan 23, 2007 #5
    I dont think he has been a bad governor, For the time Ive been here he's been ok. The only thing I have to complain about is he spends too much time out of state. Im not sure why I dont think he has a chance. But I guess for one he'll most likely be running against giants(clinton,obama,dean...and others) Sorry I cant really think of anything at the moment but ill post back if i think of some others. Although one reason isnt that good. Although I dont think it was right for him to rerun for governor if he was going to run for president, that just means that we basically wont have an elected official in office for much of his term.(I understand that nearly all candidates do this though) Im personally hoping for obama or mccain to get the nomination for either of the parties.
     
  7. Jan 23, 2007 #6
    I live in New Mexico as well. I think Richardson has done a decent job here, but as trajan said, I don't think he has much of a shot against the big guns.

    Also, this governor re-election ad a few months back was pretty lame :rofl::
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 25, 2014
  8. Jan 23, 2007 #7

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    There is always the fact that by running he can help bring issues important to him and New Mexico - like immigration - to the national discussion. Often this is the real intent of candidates who could likely not win.

    But you never know... Carter virtually came out of nowhere. At first no one believed that an unknown peanut farmer from Georgia could possibly get elected.
     
  9. Jan 23, 2007 #8
    heh, thats true, I thought of a few more any how not that I in any way judge people by this but since the era of the television has come about no president comes to mind that had a poor public image, I think him being overweight could be a liability. Ive heard of studies where many women vote purely on looks and I cant imagine this not being true. He also doesnt appeal to a major demographic. Texas will always go republican with basically only the city of El Paso being democrat, California always goes democrat. The two major hispanic states will go that direction regardless of who's running. ( unless perhaps arnold was somehow able to run, I guess that could swing california)


    I agree that sometimes it is to bring important issues up but immigration has plenty of publicity, it isnt necessary to run for president to bring up the issue. I know presidents can come from nowhere but this really seems like a longshot.

    and matt is right about the election adds, they were pretty funny
     
    Last edited: Jan 23, 2007
  10. Jan 23, 2007 #9

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    We still don't have a workable immigration policy. He may well have his sights on helping to shape that discussion in ways that he couldn't otherwise; even as Governer.

    Just out of curiosity, how often does the Roswell stuff come up; if ever? Do people give him a bad time about this or has it remained under the RADAR? I know of at least two UFO [really I should say Roswell, not UFO] press events in which he was highly visible.
     
  11. Jan 23, 2007 #10

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Hey, I like it!!! It's positive [no attacks], it appears that he has accomplished a few things of significance, and it's humorous. And, as a politician he's allowed to be lame. :biggrin:

    And with the commercial space port opening at Roswell, I got the space movie joke. :biggrin:
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 25, 2014
  12. Jan 23, 2007 #11
    True our immigration policy has been a disastor for some time, if you could say we even have one.

    I actually havent heard of anything Roswell related with him, I have only been here for about 2 years though. Plus I generally stay away from all the news stations except the news hour and sometimes bbc. So this might have slipped past me. What happened in Roswell concerning him?

    And your right I have to give him credit that he didnt have many if any attack ads. Although there wasnt much of a race anyway, he basically won by a landslide.
     
  13. Jan 23, 2007 #12

    Gokul43201

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Shush, you people...I used to come to this thread for some peace and quiet! Now look what y'all've done! :grumpy:
     
  14. Jan 23, 2007 #13

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Sure, but just think of how exciting it is that I was able to reference to "the UFO vote". This must be a first - historic. I wonder how the demographics will play out! :biggrin:
     
  15. Jan 23, 2007 #14

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    ....the alleged crashed flying saucer? When I say Roswell, that's what I mean.
     
  16. Jan 23, 2007 #15
    Sorry, I had just barely looked over the articles you posted about Roswell. In answer to your question no I had not heard anything concerning the crash in 46. At least nothing concerning him wanting answers.
     
  17. Jan 23, 2007 #16

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    This was really the point of the thread: I would expect this to be a huge political liablity when the mud slinging starts.
     
  18. Jan 23, 2007 #17
    I suppose, although like I said earlier Im not sure the candidates will be mudslinging against a candidate that doesnt have a big chance in winning.
     
  19. Jan 23, 2007 #18

    Math Is Hard

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    An ET Candidate? Well, I guess just based on campaign slogans, I like "Nanu Nanu" better that "Let's Chat".
     
  20. Jan 26, 2007 #19

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    :rofl: "Read my orifices..."
     
  21. Oct 28, 2007 #20

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2007/10/bill_richardson_would_reinvest.html

    But wait! Just in, Kucinich is good buddies with Shirley MacLaine, who writes:
    http://www.myfoxcleveland.com/myfox...n=1&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=TSTY&pageId=3.2.1

    Who will win the battle for hearts and minds?
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Richardson & Kucinich - The ET candidates?
  1. Questions for Candidates (Replies: 20)

Loading...