Dem front runners -
Hillary Clinton - Obviously never in the service
John Edwards - College deferment during Viet Nam era
Bill Richardson - College deferment during Viet Nam era
Barrack Obama - Too young for Viet Nam, no service
Repub front runners -
John McCain - POW in Viet Nam, distinguished service record
Rudy Giuliani - Several deferments during Viet Nam era
Mitt Romney - College deferments during Viet Name era
Now, after two elections in which the stellar service records of the Democratic nominees were contrasted with the abominable record of George Bush, how much do you want to bet that if McCain gets the Republican nomination, military service will suddenly be relegated to the Clinton era status and be declared a non-factor by the Dems and the media?
2007-03-23 04:59:27 · 9 answers · asked by thegubmint 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
No, you won't hear a peep out of it from the Democrat side. And you certainly won't hear a Democrat praising McCain for having "reported for duty".
This is pretty obvious. The Dems have always been quite tranparent in their banality to anybody who has opened their eyes.
2007-03-23 05:15:53 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
It's already a non-factor for most people. Military service is not required for Presidents, and most people understand this. If it were, Bush would never have been elected, with his ummm....questionable military record, or Clinton, with his deferments. It becomes a mudslinging fest sometimes, like the swiftboating of Kerry, but I think overall when someone steps into that voting booth, the first question they are asking themselves is not "what was their military service record?"
2007-03-23 05:51:55 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
that's a shame that businesses i the US can not have multiple sources of earnings and not be contain in some form of conspiracy thought. even with the undeniable fact that that's fairly authentic that the US is ruled by using an elite group of splendid wing persons that seek for to regulate each and every ingredient of human possibilities. until the clandestine acts of those persons have been uncovered and eradicated that's an fairly massive conflict to have protection tension contractors administration the elector technique. yet in the tip the votes of man or woman do no longer count type besides . we could continuously all be frightened related to the gang understand by way of fact the electoral college that are truthfully people who placed the president in workplace. they do no longer could carry on with the vote of the extensive-unfold in the event that they %, meaning somebody could win the extensive-unfold vote and nevertheless no longer while the Presidency!
2016-12-15 07:12:43 · answer #3 · answered by kleckner 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Unlikely, for the reasons you state. Aside from McCain none of the front-runners have a strong military record.
2007-03-23 05:18:44 · answer #4 · answered by coragryph 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It could be an issue if the world gets more violent in nature, We are in a time of War and if we get our troops out of Iraq this won't be too much of an issue, but Bush keeps sending more troops we might have a problem.
2007-03-23 05:22:47 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
By this logic, John Mc Cain is the only one fit to be president, but the liberal media and the democratic party will spin it so it will not be an issue.
2007-03-23 05:19:51 · answer #6 · answered by earl justice 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think the bigger issue will be the war itself. We are slowly starting to have politicians like Obama who are too young for Vietnam. The world is changing and we are changing with it.
2007-03-23 05:03:55 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
as long as they don't lie and cover-up their lack of service (like bush), it should be a non-issue
2007-03-23 06:10:33 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think so
2007-03-23 05:43:37 · answer #9 · answered by chuck h 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋