Of these three candidates, who would you vote for??
 

This is an interesting email......

You pick the guy you would vote for:





It is time to elect a new world leader, and only your vote counts. Here are the facts about the three leading candidates.

Candidate A - Associates with crooked politicians, and consults with astrologists. He's had two Mistresses. He also chain smokes and drinks 8 to 10 martinis a day.

Candidate B - He was kicked out of office twice, sleeps until noon, used opium in college and drinks a quart of whiskey every evening.

Candidate C - He is a decorated war hero. He's a vegetarian, doesn't smoke, drinks an occasional beer and never cheated on his wife.





Which of these candidates would be your choice? Decide first, no peeking, then scroll down for the answer.



-------------------------------------------------------------








Candidate A is Franklin D. Roosevelt.
Candidate B is Winston Churchill.
Candidate C is Adolph Hitler.

Ah, yes, I recall this old thing. Interesting indeed.

I just hope people get the intended message that casting one's vote based on so little information would be folly.

That was lame. I knew there was a catch. You can say a nice thing about any asshole and something bad about every nice person.
*shrug*

Heh, I wouldn't vote for FDR regardless. He was a socialist.

I think we should have preserved FDR's brain and made it President in perpetuity. Best president of the 20th century, hands down.

Candidate D - He used Cocaine in College, was AWOL from the National Guard, has several failed Businesses and gets his wealth from his Daddy

you can never trust a perfect candidate

Candidate C fucked his niece too.:D

There is no way I would be voting knowing only those few facts about the candidates.

Actually, i have to agree with Sixate on this one.

I just didn't know this about churchill or fdr, not that that changes my mind about either of them being great leaders though.

Though supposedly, some of churchill's famous WW2 speaches were written by the canadian guy who wrote winnie the pooh

Re: Of these three candidates, who would you vote for??
 

not true, hitler wasn't a vegetarian. This was made up to support him as great, "nordic", ascetic warlord.

But, still funny:
http://outside.gothicunderground.de/hitler.jpg

Canidate C also had one ball (one had not dropped)

Good old one ball.

i wasnt going to vote till i knew their job qualifications.

that's my #1 priority

I found out that FDR and Eleanor were somehow distant cousins as well.

5th Cousins.

Whos says inbreeding only goes on in West Virginia?

It's not like you get much more information on modern politicians, though.

Hitler had good PR.

Fifth cousins? First cousins means one of your parents is a sibling of one of their parents. Second means grandparents, third means great-grandparents. Fifth means great-great-great-grandparents. Could you name your great-great-great-grandfather? I certainly couldn't. My great grandmother was born in 1890. I can only assume my great-great-great-grandmother was born at least 40 years before that. The original blood tie was 150 years ago. Or how about this? Your parents each represent half your genes. Grandparents one quarter. Great-great-great-grandparents represent 1/32 of your genes. Not nearly enough to be a problem.
I say inbreeding only goes on south of the Mason-Dixon line. Of course, those great greats I'm talking about for myself come from down that way...crap.

Kirk... A.A.Milne was born and raised in the UK... the bear he based the stories on was from Winnipeg...



I don't think the point of this list is to say... damn that FDR and Churchill were freaks and Hitler was a gem.

I think the point is that, in this day and age we tend to judge our politician by their surface activities and shouldn't.

So what if Bush did cocaine in college... So what if Clinton got head in the Oval office (antechamber whatever)...

The media (and by association us) spend too much time judging politicians private lives or what they did in the past. These are not neccessarily what defines the man (or woman as the case may be).

They should be judged on their political record.

As someone pointed out above, would you really choose your leader based on the provided information alone? I would hope not. Unfortunately, the media that provides us with the information we require to make this decision focus increasingly on the surface and seldom look beyond.

You can't really cuss Roosevelt for keeping a mistress - his ugly wife had one too! Was Roosevelt really great? Or were we lucky to have survived his dictatorship. There was a reason for the 22nd. Ammendment - a much better reason than what they are using for keeping Pete Rose out of the Hall of Fame!

I can think of another decorated war hero that i would have voted for....Eisenhower

Well, this is a fine, if rhetorical question. I mean rhetorical in the proper way, not just "you're not supposed to answer it" which is what it apparently means to most people.
The man got us out of the Great Depression. It wasn't a dictatorship, people elected him four times. FOUR! Can you imagine GW being so enduringly popular that people would keep him in office four times? Hell, Clinton wouldn't have been reelected for a third term if it were allowed. So tell me, LD, what were Roosevelt's flaws, aside from the all-important infidelity issue?

I'm not LD, but I'll answer anyhow: FDR was a socialist.

Maybe he was just trying to secure the "Trailer-Trash / Jerry Springer" vote?

Mike.

That would be A.A.Milne.

Anyway, I've seen this before.

There is no way you can take a handful of fact snips and make an informed judgement on anyone, not only politicians.

And...? How did this negatively affect the nation? Why did it make us lucky to escape his presidency? Just labeling him with a title I'm supposed to recognize as "bad" doesn't tell me anything.

this is kinda funny

the problem with socialism is that it runs contrary to the constitution. Since the gov. is supposed to be run according to that document, it would seem that fdr did what was politically expediant instead of what was legally right. the great depression was a natural phenomenon that was a result of the poor practice of allowing people to by stock on margin, and then breaking the trust of the people causing a run on the banks. when it looks bad, people like having cash on hand. if the government had allowed business to feel the pain, the likelyhood of ever having to go thru that again would have been minimal. this country is built on the idea of strong, compassionate individuals, appealing to the best in mankind, not the socialist marxist idea of redistribution of wealth. free money just makes a man weak. fdr was the king of free money, and fathered the modern socialist state we are now drowning in.