Sign in to wowOwow

Enter the email address that you used when registering at wowOwow.
The password field is case sensitive. Click here if you have forgotten your password.

Please register for wowOwow

Newsletter subscriptions
Sign up to receive wowOwow's weekly newsletter and get our best picks delivered right to your inbox. Our newsletter content is hand-picked by the wowOwow editorial team and provides the top features, news, and commentary from our site. Subscribing to our newsletter is free and safe. We will never share your email or other information with a third-party without your direct consent.
By registering, you indicate that you have read and agree
with our privacy policy and terms of service.

Poll | 09/11/2008 12:00 am

What election was the most important in U.S. history?

Read more about: Election, History, Presidents, U.S.

47 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

K O
I agree with Rocky. This one. But, I am concerned that both sides are so entrenched that they can’t see the shortcomings in their candidate’s campaigns - and issues are sidelined in favor of discussing nonsense. It has been ever thus.
By K O on 09/11/2008 11:26 am
phyllis Doyle Pepe
Kitty: Thought of you last night as I was watching Summers and Rubin on Charlie Rose. Did you see it? You are aware, I’m sure, that they are both advising Obama.
By phyllis Doyle Pepe on 09/11/2008 1:43 pm
K O
Hi Phyllis, I sure did. Mr. Kitty wanted to watch Letterman, so I hid the remote. Brilliant, both of them. Rubin is an extraordinary economist, and Summers? well, as I said before, he’s the James Carville of economics. Yes, I know they are both advising Obama, whom I put a little ahead in the economics platform. With him, you pay more now and get a smaller - but signifiant ($3.4b) - increase in the national debt. With McCain, you pay less now and get a higher ($5 b) increase in the national debt. Neither is a great idea, but Obama’s is less bad - and he has superior advisors, in my opinion.
By K O on 09/11/2008 2:01 pm
phyllis Doyle Pepe
And keep in mind about doing something short term, but at the same time planning for the long term. It’s all very complicated, and I suspect whatever Obama does––if he gets to do––will not satisfy many, but feel really good about having these two wizards helping him. Poor Mr. Kitty––
By phyllis Doyle Pepe on 09/11/2008 3:10 pm
K O
As I’ve said before, Phyllis, you are very smart. It is the long term planning that gives this particular view of economic policy the edge; i.e., the potential for change over the next quarter century vs. short term fixes. Poor Mr. Kitty, another smart cookie said, “Is there any way of saying this in a way people can understand?” I’m not the one to answer that, but if Senator Obama can do it, then it would be enough for me to vote for him. There’s a lot a stake here.
By K O on 09/11/2008 4:06 pm
James the Game
True enough, Kit. I actually like both candidates, personally. They both seem like good, wholesome people with a deep love of country and fear for the future of it. There are differences in their views, but as always, each side exaggerates those differences, and paints the other as the anti-Christ, in order to draw distinctions and capture votes. Truth be told, I’m guessing that McCain will want to keep the troops in Iraq two or three years, whereas Obama would pull them out in about 1-1/2 years. Neither side really explains fully how they would pay for their health plans, other than general terms (which may be valid explanations, but still typify the political tradition of talking a good game on the campaign trail). Both guys are throwing darts in the wind with their energy plans, because, after all, who - other than God Himself - really knows what the ultimate solution is? So, I take it all with a grain of salt. I like Obama’s plan to incentivize the auto industry, I prefer we pull the troops out a little quicker than McCain is proposing, and I like the idea of providing universal health insurance. But I’m under no delusion that either of these candidates is Houdini.
By James the Game on 09/11/2008 6:21 pm
K O
Hi James, You take it with a grain of salt and I take it with a big fat salt lick. I’m hoping not to be a cynical old lady by the end of the election process, but don’t bet all your money against it.
By K O on 09/11/2008 10:06 pm
Rainbow Power
I have to agree with Frank. Abraham Lincoln was a pretty great president. He was said to change a lot in office. His eloquent writings have gone down in history as some of the best to ever have been penned by an American. He believed in God’s divine power although he didn’t attend church. He had no military knowledge at the start of the civil war, but he studied it and became what people called something of a military genius and with his ideas of reoganization the war ended. His Emanicipation Proclamation was eventually used to end slavery. He worked hard. He studied hard. He took nothing for granted. We indeed would be blessed with a man like him in today’s world. I believe the most important president to date.
By Rainbow Power on 09/11/2008 2:34 pm
Susan Gabriel
I think every generation is consumed with their own self-importance, so it is with a dash of humility that I suggest that the election before us is a critical one because of the issues at stake. Will this election be part of that list of most important a hundred years from now?
By Susan Gabriel on 09/11/2008 3:44 pm
Elyse Beaudaux
Hmmm the question is what was the most important election which suggests that we know the issues of the campaign leading up to the election - at first it was too easy for me to think to use the history of their presidency as the yardstick - I agreed with earlier posters who suggested that because Lincoln kept this nation as one he was the greatest. However, when I researched the issues during the 1860 election, the questions of the day were the rights of slave holders and slave states along with measures to encourage industry, a homestead act, and a transcontinental railroad. Upon reading it appears to me that the election itself moved along the ideas of a North and a South seceding from that union. From this site - http://www.tulane.edu/~latner/Background/BackgroundElection.html “The campaign of 1860 demonstrated that a national political system was no longer operating. The contest was actually two elections, one in the North and one in the South. In the North, the Lincoln and Douglas forces vied for victory; in the South the contest was between Breckinridge and Bell. The sections were insulated from each other. Lincoln did not even appear on the ballot in most southern states, and only in a few northern states did Breckinridge muster any discernible support. In the end, Lincoln won the election by carrying seventeen free states, while Breckinridge triumphed in eleven slave states. Neither candidate captured a single state in the opposite section. Bell and Douglas trailed far behind.”
By Elyse Beaudaux on 09/11/2008 3:46 pm
Jennifer Dooley
This ONE!!! SARAH PALIN WARNS WAR MAY BE NECESSARY IF RUSSIA INVADES ANOTHER COUNTRY.Source: ABC News THIS IS YOUR WAKE UP CALL!!! DO YOU WANT MORE WARSPLEASE THINK ABOUT WHO YOU VOTE FOR VERY CAREFULLY
By Jennifer Dooley on 09/11/2008 4:30 pm
N P
This one. We need Obama to be Bold, as FDR was bold. This country has been ruined. We are no longer a democracy. We have lost our civil liberties, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights. Even if Obama gets elected, there has been so much damage. We need “Democrats With Balls” - no one else need apply.
By N P on 09/11/2008 4:55 pm
Jozie Lee
Susan Gabriel asked: “Will this election be part of that list of most important a hundred years from now?” Yes, either because we did or didn’t vote Barak Obama into office. As he said in his DNC Acceptance Speech, “We are standing at a defining moment in history.” We’ll either let the country continue to slide into an abyss or we’ll elect new leadership to guide us into a new century with limitless possibilities. The choice is ours. Obama/Biden ‘08
By Jozie Lee on 09/11/2008 5:34 pm
Susan B
I think back on other elections over my lifetime, and this one definitely stands out as a non-snooze. In my youth, I recall a general ambivalence from the mainstream folks in many elections. Of course, there are always people who get worked up in general elections, but this one seems precipitous at best. I hate to use this pop term, but the “culture war” often seems more heated than the one we’re fighting overseas. I think the world is moving too fast for some people in this country. The resistance to critical progress on so many fronts is appalling.
By Susan B on 09/11/2008 5:51 pm