View Full Version : The Obama Thread (Merged x6)
Tag279
05-31-2008, 06:47 PM
Pfleiger, was not wrong Hillary Clinton thought and thinks she is entitled to the nomination. She did not take Obama seriously and dismissed him. And she is banking on white fear to try to hijack the nomination the "black guy can't win" is her argument...She said as much, although not in so many words.
Pfleiger, chose his words badly but so did Hillary Clinton with that 3-time assasination statement and he hard working voters (white voters).
Pfleiger and Wright are not Barack Obama, Hillary made her own statements.
Leaving a church that has done more good that the ill concived statements of a preacher is not easy.
If he would have left as soon as the Wright statements broke people would have said he would have done it for political reasons and now that he has left it is the same thing.
kainedamo
05-31-2008, 06:52 PM
He would have been criticized either way, no doubt. I guarantee that very quickly we're going to see a bunch of people calling Obama out for leaving a church.
IMO Obama and Clinton deserve each other, Im going for Mccain, he is actually acting like a mature adult. while I don't dislike Obama and clinton, their little battle showed to many of thier childlike flaws IMO.
Childlike or senility, make your choice!
personally i dont see how Obama acted imature on this issue. If hillary was givin what she asked for then the precedent it would set would be chaos for any states who want to move their primaries and caucases in the future. some punishment was laid down... and it set the right precedent.
the sad part is, there is an element of disenfranchisement that goes along with it... but democrats should suck it up and take the decisions like the republicans did when they decided to seat the delegates in half measure.
im impressed that Obama has navigated this as well as he has. McCain could NOT have weathered this storm and hillary has shown that she cannot either. Like it or not... genuine or not... Obama is Skilled. i think thats one of the many things a president needs.
Obama could have proven that he was as magnanimous as he tries to portend by fighting to seat florida and michigan in full. it would have been a riskier strategy, but it would have erased alot of doubt. instead he went with the safer route which politically is understandable. just not as daring. of course if he went with what with seating them in full when i originally posted the idea... it could have and would have still been seen as a political move.
because lets be honest, as a nation we are too goddamn cynical to beleive anyone is genuine for anything, unless we are completely in the tank for the person.
Your welcome to elaborate though on what you mean by childlike and what the battle showed to you exactly. :oldrazz:
Tag279
05-31-2008, 07:48 PM
"because lets be honest, as a nation we are too goddamn cynical to beleive anyone is genuine for anything, unless we are completely in the tank for the person."
Well said Zen.
I personally think Obama was regarded with contempt and a joke when he came on the scene. Heck I didn't give him even odds for the Democratic Party nomination at first.
When he spoke at the DNC in 2004 after winning his senate seat he was impressive then.
Hillary underestimated him and now she is looking at NOT being the Democratic nominee this November and because of some of her own statements she may not be on the ticket as VP.
hippie_hunter
05-31-2008, 07:49 PM
He would have been criticized either way, no doubt. I guarantee that very quickly we're going to see a bunch of people calling Obama out for leaving a church.
Of course he's going to get called out on it. He only left that church because it was hurting his Presidential campaign. If he weren't running for President, he'd still be a member.
SuperT
05-31-2008, 08:05 PM
Psh, he shouldn't have to apologize for what his pastor said. Hell, being an African-American myself, the things his pastor said, the African-American community has said for years and years and years.
Nothing to apologize for.
BlackLantern
05-31-2008, 08:07 PM
^^^he associated with a man spouting hate speech, and coming from an African-American, he damn well should apologize....
Tag279
05-31-2008, 08:18 PM
Of course he's going to get called out on it. He only left that church because it was hurting his Presidential campaign. If he weren't running for President, he'd still be a member.
There may be some truth to your statement Hippie. However the church has been a political hotbed for the past year. When Heggie said that 911 was America's fault no one was outraged. When Heggie called the Catholic Church a whore no one was outraged.
McCain sought Heggie's endorsement. Heggie made his 911 statements before this presidential selecion process also. But McCain has not had the guilt by association collar hung on his neck.
I have been to Trinity in Chicago more than twice in the late 80s. Wright was the pastor wen I went at the time. There is an assumption that every sermon that is delivered in that church is about racial issues. That assumption would be inacurate.
When I went racial issues never came up. Wright spoke of working toward excellence and loving thy neighbor.
Pleiger and Wright have tapped into the fear and negative perceptions of some whites.
When Wright said that Hillary Clinton did not know what it means to be a black man in America or be called a N***** he was not wrong.
When Pfleiger said that Hillary had a sense of entitlement and that the black man was interfering with her easy ride to the nomination he wasn't wrong either.
SuperT
05-31-2008, 08:23 PM
^ Exactly.
Spider-Bite
05-31-2008, 08:27 PM
About damn time, that church was nothing but trouble for his campaign. Though the RNC is still going to have a field day with it, he let it draw out for way too long.
congratulations on being a mod hippie.
yes he did, and his other mistake was distancing himself by talking to the media about how he disagreed with Wright. What he should have done was talk through the media, directly to Wright, and provided an inspiring counter argument to Wright's rhetoric.
hippie_hunter
05-31-2008, 09:14 PM
congratulations on being a mod hippie.
Thanks.
yes he did, and his other mistake was distancing himself by talking to the media about how he disagreed with Wright. What he should have done was talk through the media, directly to Wright, and provided an inspiring counter argument to Wright's rhetoric.
If Obama went that route, I doubt that Wright's comments would have been a problem as they are now.
hippie_hunter
05-31-2008, 09:24 PM
There may be some truth to your statement Hippie. However the church has been a political hotbed for the past year. When Heggie said that 911 was America's fault no one was outraged. When Heggie called the Catholic Church a whore no one was outraged.
McCain sought Heggie's endorsement. Heggie made his 911 statements before this presidential selecion process also. But McCain has not had the guilt by association collar hung on his neck.
There's a big difference between Hagee and Wright.
Hagee was not McCain's pastor, despite what some of the most extreme left wing media says. There really was no link between McCain and Hagee asides from McCain wanting Hagee's endorsement so he could try and capture the evangellical vote. McCain also played it smart, he distanced himself right away from Hagee's comments and before Hagee became an issue for McCain ditched him like a knocked-up prom date. He did the same thing with Parsley.
Wright on the other hand was Obama's pastor. He was also Obama's spiritual advisor on his campaign. Obama first tried to say that he didn't know that Wright made such comments which was an obvious lie. Then he tried to defend Wright as a person which was a dumb move. Then he tried to distance himself from Wright by saying that he disagreed with his comments, which was a good move but Wright just couldn't keep his mouth shut. And finally when Wright became too big of an issue, Obama had to get rid of him because it was hurting his campaign badly. He dragged it out far too long to the point where it became an issue and now it looks like he just simply ditched Wright for political purposes than actual disagreements with what Wright has said. I mean, it's rather convienient that he breaks with Wright when he's running for President instead of say earlier.
I have been to Trinity in Chicago more than twice in the late 80s. Wright was the pastor wen I went at the time. There is an assumption that every sermon that is delivered in that church is about racial issues. That assumption would be inacurate.
When I went racial issues never came up. Wright spoke of working toward excellence and loving thy neighbor.
Pleiger and Wright have tapped into the fear and negative perceptions of some whites.
When Wright said that Hillary Clinton did not know what it means to be a black man in America or be called a N***** he was not wrong.
When Pfleiger said that Hillary had a sense of entitlement and that the black man was interfering with her easy ride to the nomination he wasn't wrong either.
I'm not saying that Wright or Pfleiger were right or wrong, I'm just saying that since they're Obama supporters who would deliver attention, they should have just kept their mouths shut.
The Chairman
05-31-2008, 09:48 PM
Wright on the other hand was Obama's pastor. He was also Obama's spiritual advisor on his campaign. Obama first tried to say that he didn't know that Wright made such comments which was an obvious lie.
Obama claimed he didn't know Wright made the comments he was reported to have made. He did claim he knew Wright was controversial, however. I'm guessing that Obama didn't know the extent of the controversy, because 'controversial' has a slew of connotations.
Then he tried to defend Wright as a person which was a dumb move.
Agreed, but you have to remember that regardless of the comments, Obama owes Wright a lot, and I imagine Obama still felt indebted for helping him and had a hard time letting go, which is understanadable. I have many friends and relatives who've said insatiably retarted things about race, religion and politics and even this country that would probably derail my campaign if I was president, yet they've helped get through some really personal issues and gave me some great personal advice, so I couldn't get rid of them like that. Wright was a friend as much as a preacher.
Then he tried to distance himself from Wright by saying that he disagreed with his comments, which was a good move but Wright just couldn't keep his mouth shut.
That was Wright's fault.
And finally when Wright became too big of an issue, Obama had to get rid of him because it was hurting his campaign badly. He dragged it out far too long to the point where it became an issue and now it looks like he just simply ditched Wright for political purposes than actual disagreements with what Wright has said. I mean, it's rather convienient that he breaks with Wright when he's running for President instead of say earlier.
I agree that Obama waited too long, but better later than never. Like I said, Obama more than likely had a hard time letting go. Obama owes a good chunk of his success in life to Wright, who helped him get started, and gave him guidance. Also, Obama wasn't aware of the comments about AIDS, Italians, and Israel that had come out a few days before. The only ones he knew about were the ones were Wright blamed America for 9 / 11 because of our involvement in The Middle East, which, to be honest, isn't entirely inaccurate (though Wright's phrasing of it was quite stupid).
BlackLantern
05-31-2008, 09:49 PM
Better late than never doesn't apply in this situation....its a problem that should have been addressed right away....now it looks like its being done for the sake of votes, not because its the right thing to do....
The Chairman
05-31-2008, 10:02 PM
Better late than never doesn't apply in this situation....its a problem that should have been addressed right away....now it looks like its being done for the sake of votes, not because its the right thing to do....
Like I said, I think Obama just had a hard time letting go. If someone who had helped a great deal in life and helped get where I was today said something like what Obama's pastor's said, I'd still really uncomfortable about letting him go.
Obama's rejection of the church is about 19.5 years late. Leaving at this point (after not doing it right off the bat when this scandal first broke) is basically an admission of guilt.
Knives
05-31-2008, 11:06 PM
Clinton is in just as bad of a catch 22 as Obama is, in all reality.
Obama and his "above it all" attitude put himself tremendously high up on a pedestal (as we have discussed before) making it damn near impossible to even slightly go negative without compromising his "message of change" campaign.
Clinton was ridiculed by everyone and their brother for being too tough and not womanly. Then, she choked up before NH (never actually shedding a tear) and was ridiculed even worse for showing emotion.
That fact right there is what cost Obama so many states in this damn primary. Frankly, he shouldn't be so ****ing naive. I fully support him, but I can't count how many times i grew so increasingly frustrated with that mind set. I know its the "right" thing to do, and everybody says they hate the negative campaigns, but, THEY WORK. They ALWAYS work. Hillary started making ground when she went all out on him. He could have easily burried her by bringing up her scandals and shady deals, and therefore throwing attention off himself. He didn't do it. That above it all attitude put him into a corner and has cost him major damage. I'm glad to see he seems to have learned from it, since he isn't holding back on McCain nearly as much.
As for Hillary crying, that bit of emotion, and then being criticized for it, won her New Hampshire. Women rallied to her since that date and have never looked back. Smartest move she could have done. Of course, after that, she went right back to being the ice princess and lost 11 contests in a row.
Both candidates ran good, but heavily flawed campaigns. One just did it better then the other. Read Tags points, he pretty much nails why Clinton lost.
Knives
05-31-2008, 11:09 PM
Which is why (YET AGAIN) the Democrats have potentially screwed up another election. http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon13.gif
EXACTLY!!! I've pretty much ALREADY lost faith int he democratic party. I don't even know WHY the **** i remain a democrat. Nobody, NOBODY, can grasp defeat better from the jaws of victory then the ****ing democrats. Happens every goddamn presidential election. At this point, I saw the two of them jsut run together and hope for the best, cuase I don't see any other way to unify the party.
terry78
05-31-2008, 11:09 PM
Being the good guy doesn't always pay off in the real world. This life is not like the movies and tv where being the better man always works for you, sad to say.
Knives
05-31-2008, 11:23 PM
Being the good guy doesn't always pay off in the real world. This life is not like the movies and tv where being the better man always works for you, sad to say.
Exactly. I personally ****ing HATE the negative ********, but I'm not foolish enough to think it doesn't work wonders. This whole crap witht he pastors and Ferraro and what not, its all so ****ing POINTLESS and doesnt amount to jack ****. But it always works. So,e very damn election people say "oh this year will be different!" It never is, and usually its the democrats who fall for it, while the republicans pull out every rabbit out of the hat. I'll NEVER forget John Kerry and his idiotic decision NOT to go negative on Bush in the early part of the election, and tell everyone at the convention NOT to go negative. Why? Cuase the republicans were complaining that they would go negative and run a mean spirited campaign. So the democrats fell for it, Kerry fell for it, and they ran a fluff piece of a convention. SURE ENOUGH, the republican convention was SCATHING, and by the end of it, John Kerry was a gutless coward with no testicles who would arm soldiers with toothpicks and spitballs. Then we had the swift boat crap which he let go uncheck for nearly a MONTH. That was why he lost. I swear, if the democrats fall into that SAME ****ing trap, if they don't hammer the piss out of McCain, and thereby LOSE what should be the easiest election they've ever won, i'm leaving the goddamn party and never voting for anybody again. Obama, after Tuesday, after the primaries are "officially" over, better go full steam ahead on him and the rest of the republicans.
Obama's rejection of the church is about 19.5 years late. Leaving at this point (after not doing it right off the bat when this scandal first broke) is basically an admission of guilt.
i heard there was another pastor saying scathing things at that church, and that became the straw that broke the camels back. i dont think hes leaving the church directly because of wright. though im sure hes glad to -think- hes washed his hands of it.
Better late than never doesn't apply in this situation....its a problem that should have been addressed right away....now it looks like its being done for the sake of votes, not because its the right thing to do....
Obama's rejection of the church is about 19.5 years late. Leaving at this point (after not doing it right off the bat when this scandal first broke) is basically an admission of guilt.
I agree guys.
EXACTLY!!! I've pretty much ALREADY lost faith int he democratic party. I don't even know WHY the **** i remain a democrat. Nobody, NOBODY, can grasp defeat better from the jaws of victory then the ****ing democrats. Happens every goddamn presidential election. At this point, I saw the two of them jsut run together and hope for the best, cuase I don't see any other way to unify the party.
It's just frustrating when this should have been a relatively easy election to win. Now McCain (who is virtually the same as Bush) is making this competitive. It just makes me want to scream! But alas, that's politics. :whatever:
souvlaki
06-01-2008, 02:44 AM
Okay, now if any of this is true, this doesn't sound half bad. I really dislike the Clinton VP slot compromise, but this I would be happy with:
Hillary Clinton will be offered a dignified exit from the presidential race and the prospect of a place in Barack Obama's cabinet under plans for a "negotiated surrender" of her White House ambitions being drawn up by Senator Obama's aides.
The former First Lady would get the chance to pilot Mr Obama’s reforms of the American healthcare system if she agrees to clear the path to his nomination as Democratic presidential candidate.
Senior figures in the Obama camp have told Democrat colleagues that the offer to Mrs Clinton of a cabinet post as health secretary or to steer new legislation through the Senate will be a central element of their peace overtures to the New York senator.
This part also intrigued me:
Another Democrat who has discussed strategy with friends in the Obama inner circle said that Mr Obama was openly considering asking Mrs Clinton to join his cabinet, alongside two other former presidential rivals: John Edwards, who is seen as a likely attorney general; and Joe Biden, who is a leading contender to become Secretary of State.
Mr Obama hinted at the plan last week. “One of my heroes is Abraham Lincoln,” he said. “Lincoln basically pulled in all the people who had been running against him into his cabinet because whatever personal feelings there were, the issue was 'how can we get this country through this time of crisis?’ And I think that has to be the approach that one takes.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/democrats/2058907/US-Elections-Hillary-Clinton-to-be-offered-dignified-exit.html
souvlaki
06-01-2008, 03:14 AM
After thinking about it, that also makes me wonder if you take Obama's quote at face value if that adds more credence to the Richardson VP slot a lot of people have suggested. I find it odd he's not mentioned among the names on that list considering he's been Obama's strongest advocate out of his former rivals.
VP Richardson, Secretary of State Biden, Attorney General Edwards, and Secretary of Health Clinton actually sounds pretty good to me. I'd be very happy with all of those choices.
i want to believe clinton would take that job.
:grin::grin:
my surprise would force me to instantly lay a glistening brown steamer right in the middle of my living room if she did.
Tag279
06-01-2008, 05:05 AM
After thinking about it, that also makes me wonder if you take Obama's quote at face value if that adds more credence to the Richardson VP slot a lot of people have suggested. I find it odd he's not mentioned among the names on that list considering he's been Obama's strongest advocate out of his former rivals.
VP Richardson, Secretary of State Biden, Attorney General Edwards, and Secretary of Health Clinton actually sounds pretty good to me. I'd be very happy with all of those choices.
I like Richardson as a VP but I honestly am concerned that there would be blocks of voters that would not vote for a Hispanic and an African American on the same ticket. As this campaign has progressed negative perceptions based on a persons' color keep popping up. It is very discouraging.:csad:
Richardson IMO would be the best VP for Obama.
BlackLantern
06-01-2008, 08:27 AM
Richardson is a brown person.....America is hesitant about Obama as it is, and they won't vote to put two brown people in the White House
Tag279
06-01-2008, 08:34 AM
Richardson is a brown person.....America is hesitant about Obama as it is, and they won't vote to put two brown people in the White House
BL for a guy that has never directly experienced racism your statement idicates a bit of insight. :cwink:
BlackLantern
06-01-2008, 08:37 AM
BL for a guy that has never directly experienced racism your statement idicates a bit of insight. :cwink:
You don't need to experience something to know it's there....
Tag279
06-01-2008, 08:44 AM
You don't need to experience something to know it's there....
Very true, sad but true...:csad:
I think the Clinton campaign and others were looking for whatever they could find to stunt Obama's canadacy.
Bump the issues let's egage in character assasination and use guilt by association to destroy someone. And earn a pyrric Victory.
Very true, sad but true...:csad:
I think the Clinton campaign and others were looking for whatever they could find to stunt Obama's canadacy.
Bump the issues let's egage in character assasination and use guilt by association to destroy someone. And earn a pyrric Victory.
Its politics dude, don't hesitate to think Obama and his crew would of not done the same. The common misconception appears to be Obama is so nice and hoenst, and can do no wrong, he's an amazing liar, better then his rival Hilary in fact, but not as good as McCain.
Tag279
06-01-2008, 10:23 AM
Its politics dude, don't hesitate to think Obama and his crew would of not done the same. The common misconception appears to be Obama is so nice and honest, and can do no wrong, he's an amazing liar, better then his rival Hilary in fact, but not as good as McCain.
I disagree to a certain extent, He did not attack Hillary for her sniper fire comments, he did not attack Hillary for her working voters (white voters) comments, he did not attack her for her assasination comements she made on 3 different occasions.
These are statements she actually made not her pastor or a guest speaker at the church.
I disagree to a certain extent, He did not attack Hillary for her sniper fire comments, he did not attack Hillary for her working voters (white voters) comments, he did not attack her for her assasination comements she made on 3 different occasions.
These are statements she actually made not her pastor or a guest speaker at the church.
Its all part of the game, Hilary comes off as the *****, Obama makes sure comes off as some kind of messiah. Like I said hes much better at lies and playing to the media then incompotent Clintons. His Team is much better at their jobs, nothing more.
Kelly
06-01-2008, 12:10 PM
Its all part of the game, Hilary comes off as the *****, Obama makes sure comes off as some kind of messiah. Like I said hes much better at lies and playing to the media then incompotent Clintons. His Team is much better at their jobs, nothing more.
I see this democrat race as the "Cold War II", its a war by proxy.
Its all part of the game, Hilary comes off as the *****, Obama makes sure comes off as some kind of messiah. Like I said hes much better at lies and playing to the media then incompotent Clintons. His Team is much better at their jobs, nothing more.
who (if anyone) do you support... ?
if no one, who would you rather see in office?
who (if anyone) do you support... ?
if no one, who would you rather see in office?
I support none of them, My only option is to chooe the lesser of 3 evils. Obama is laughably idealistic and way to phony, Clinton is to power hungry for my likeing and a bad liar, and McCain is a bush clone with a higher IQ.
I support none of them, My only option is to chooe the lesser of 3 evils. Obama is laughably idealistic and way to phony, Clinton is to power hungry for my likeing and a bad liar, and McCain is a bush clone with a higher IQ.
You've joined a great group of "outcasts" for not falling all over Barack Obama Eros!
On behalf of Hippie Hunter, Matt, BlackLantern, Jmanspice, and myself...I say "Welcome to the dark side!"
:yay:
You've joined a great group of "outcasts" for not falling all over Barack Obama Eros!
On behalf of Hippie, Matt, BlackLantern, Jmanspice, and myself...I say "Welcome to the dark side!"
:yay:
Its good to be part of something!:yay:
souvlaki
06-01-2008, 02:12 PM
You've joined a great group of "outcasts" for not falling all over Barack Obama Eros!
On behalf of Hippie Hunter, Matt, BlackLantern, Jmanspice, and myself...I say "Welcome to the dark side!"
:yay:
How can you guys be outcasts when you guys probably outnumber the Obama supporters on this board (or at least the Obama supporters that post regularly)?
Nivek
06-01-2008, 02:14 PM
Or Obama supporters who would think to post here.
Doomed_hero
06-01-2008, 02:23 PM
You've joined a great group of "outcasts" for not falling all over Barack Obama Eros!
On behalf of Hippie Hunter, Matt, BlackLantern, Jmanspice, and myself...I say "Welcome to the dark side!"
:yay:
Just cause you support Obama does not mean you have fallen all over him. I belive he is a great canidate, but also can see his flaws. By comparing these two aspects is how I came to choose him as my canidate. I ,like many others, do not just follow blindly as people seem to think all Obama supporters do.
Just cause you support Obama does not mean you have fallen all over him. I belive he is a great canidate, but also can see his flaws. By comparing these two aspects is how I came to choose him as my canidate. I ,like many others, do not just follow blindly as people seem to think all Obama supporters do.
I completely respect that Doomed. I think it's great that you see his flaws. Everyone needs to remember that I have never generalized all Obama supporters as "mindless drones who fall all over him." As I've said numerous times, there are those who can intelligently debate and discuss (who can see his flaws and missteps,) and then there are those who blindly support him no matter what the crisis or scandal.
I can completely support the first grouping, not the latter. You seem to be among the first grouping. :cwink:
Doomed_hero
06-01-2008, 02:35 PM
Well I belive there are blind supporters in all camps, I mean Saturday showed alot of them for both sides. But I like Obama and belive he is the best for the country. He can give a great speech, but I belive he has shown he can back it up. He is still young and will need help, but I belive he will pull a Abe Lincoln and gather a "Team Of Rivals" to help him through. If he is as smart as choosing his cabinet as he is choosing his election team, then he should be fine.
As for you geralizing, I did not mean to attack so much you, but alot of people who belive Obama supporters only support him cause where in some idealistic bubble. I belive you should be idealist, it brings hope to the country and do not think its a bad term. Its why Jefferson, for all his flaws, will always be more famious the realist Adams. But at point you have to get those things done, and Barak will do that.
I thank you for you respect sir and apologies for any insult.
Well I belive there are blind supporters in all camps, I mean Saturday showed alot of them for both sides. But I like Obama and belive he is the best for the country. He can give a great speech, but I belive he has shown he can back it up. He is still young and will need help, but I belive he will pull a Abe Lincoln and gather a "Team Of Rivals" to help him through. If he is as smart as choosing his cabinet as he is choosing his election team, then he should be fine.
I couldn't agree with you more. All campaigns have their respective pockets of "blind supporters." I just think it's great that you have genuinely researched him.
I would love to see a "Team of Rivals" cabinet.
As for you geralizing, I did not mean to attack so much you, but alot of people who belive Obama supporters only support him cause where in some idealistic bubble. I belive you should be idealist, it brings hope to the country and do not think its a bad term. Its why Jefferson, for all his flaws, will always be more famious the realist Adams. But at point you have to get those things done, and Barak will do that.
It's all cool Doomed. I've gotten quite used to being attacked for my stance on Obama and some of his supporters. :oldrazz:
I thank you for you respect sir and apologies for any insult.
You're quite welcome.
hippie_hunter
06-01-2008, 03:42 PM
Richardson is a brown person.....America is hesitant about Obama as it is, and they won't vote to put two brown people in the White House
I dunno, Richardson as VP would be a good move because it would assure New Mexico's electoral votes going to Obama. Without Richardson on the ticket, the state will most likely end up being competitive.
Tag279
06-01-2008, 06:08 PM
As a non-blind Obama supporter I think he would be the best choice for President. I know he is relatively inexperienced I know his name is not what many would like for a President.
I have been listening to his rhetoric as long as he has been on the scene and IMO it has been fairly consistent. I am tired of dogmatist I like his message of hope and his ability to inspire, and that he works personally to not be a negative campaigner.
hippie_hunter
06-01-2008, 06:24 PM
I have been listening to his rhetoric as long as he has been on the scene and IMO it has been fairly consistent.
How is he consistent? He says that he'll pull all the troops out of Iraq, yet he says that he'll leave a couple of brigades there and if al-Qaeda is there, he'll put troops back in (ironically al-Qaeda is in Iraq). He says he's opposed to the war, yet he continually votes to support it.
He says that he's a uniter and all that there are no red states or blue states crap, yet he continually attacks the Republican Party. He says taht people who don't vote for him are bitter xenophobes who cling to their guns and bibles. That isn't unifying language.
He says that he'll conduct a clean campaign yet he's also done attack ads and distorts John McCain's words and making a rather absurd claim that he's a third term for Bush.
He calls for more multilateral approaches, rejecting unilateralism of the Bush Administration yet he calls for attacking Pakistan.
I am tired of dogmatist I like his message of hope and his ability to inspire, and that he works personally to not be a negative campaigner.
I'd be all for his message of hope and what not if he actually backed it up with his actions and wasn't such a damn hypocrite.
Tag279
06-01-2008, 06:44 PM
How is he consistent? He says that he'll pull all the troops out of Iraq, yet he says that he'll leave a couple of brigades there and if al-Qaeda is there, he'll put troops back in (ironically al-Qaeda is in Iraq). He says he's opposed to the war, yet he continually votes to support it.
He says that he's a uniter and all that there are no red states or blue states crap, yet he continually attacks the Republican Party. He says taht people who don't vote for him are bitter xenophobes who cling to their guns and bibles. That isn't unifying language.
How has he said that? The bittergate crap is taking something out of context. Obama was correct in saying that several economically deteriorating communities in the Rust Belt were “bitter” about politicians’ failure to address their plight, his throwaway comments about “religion” and “guns” sounded like a typical stereotyping of “red state” working-class communities by “blue state” urban liberals. Hillary and McCain jumped on them and put a negative spin on them.
His statements were not a dig on religion as Hill and McCain painted it. He was pointing out that he was not known by a lot of people in rural America and they cling to the familiar. Yes he said the wrong thing but malice was not intended and he only made such statements once.
On the Situation room Wolf Blitzer played some of Clinton’s reaction and criticism to Obama’s comments. It was after this that Toobin and Cafferty came to Obama’s defense. Borger then explained that "in this case, the Hillary Clinton campaign and the John McCain campaign have the same goal -- and that is to portray Obama as this sort of effete elitist who doesn't understand the real working class people or independent voters. And so they're both on the same side on this one and it's obvious why."
He says that he'll conduct a clean campaign yet he's also done attack ads and distorts John McCain's words and making a rather absurd claim that he's a third term for Bush.
You must be a Republican. McCain is almost in Lock-step with Bush on Foregn policy and it is apparent that Bush was and is wrong. Those ads you are referring to were produced and paid for by the DNC not Obama.
He calls for more multilateral approaches, rejecting unilateralism of the Bush Administration yet he calls for attacking Pakistan.
Attacking Pakistan where AlQueda trains...what is the problem with that. We have no business in Iraq. Afghanistan should be a sheet of glass and Binladen should be behind bars. Bush-2 wanted to get Saddam because his daddy couldn't do it That's why we are in Iraq.
I'd be all for his message of hope and what not if he actually backed it up with his actions and wasn't such a damn hypocrite.
He is not being hypocritical and he has not flip flopped. And if he did IYO he did not do so anywhere near as much as McCain.
Knives
06-01-2008, 10:27 PM
Just cause you support Obama does not mean you have fallen all over him. I belive he is a great canidate, but also can see his flaws. By comparing these two aspects is how I came to choose him as my canidate. I ,like many others, do not just follow blindly as people seem to think all Obama supporters do.
I agree with you. I like Obama a lot. I am very enthusiastic about voting for him in November. Especially over McCain who I can't tolerate anymore. I like his message, i like what he has to say, i like his policies and i like the man. That being said, i'm nowhere NEAR as god aweful as those brain dead supporters who run rampant and EAT anybody who says anything bad about him. The blind as bats Clinton loyalists are just as fierce, just as annoying, and just as stupid. I personally HATE that crap. Those people put the person BEFORE the party. I don't. I would be perfectly fine if he put Hillary as the VP. Yet the ravenous supporters would then turn on him!
Whatever, in any case, I just ignore them and go about my business. I look foward to voting for him in November and I hope he wins(i doubt he will though), but I look foward to seeing how his campaign goes. People just need to seriously chill out a bit and think of the party first, person second. I know that's asking a lot. Would be nice though if one could have a well spoken opinion that wasn't dissected or disrespected by nutjobs.
How can you guys be outcasts when you guys probably outnumber the Obama supporters on this board (or at least the Obama supporters that post regularly)?
:lmao: We both know that is a load.
:lmao: We both know that is a load.
That was my reaction too Matt.
Knives
06-02-2008, 12:32 AM
I'm fairly new posting here, i used to post a bit back in the 04' election but grew sick of politics after Kerry's moronic campaign and Bush's horrid re-election. I just started posting again, so I havent noticed much. Are there those rabid Obama supporters on here? I haven't seen much of them since I started posting. Did they leave? I'm a big Obama supporter but I don't chew people out for differing opinions(unless they talk out of thier ass, which nobody here seems to do). Most of the time, when I read some dislike of Obama here, it seems to be well spoken and with valid, if not debatable points. It doesnt bother me any, someone's dislike of my candidate isn't going to effect my judgment on him lol. I find it funny people get so worked up. Especially with these two candidates. It's like a bunch of rabid chihuahua's or something. Crap like that makes me fear this upcoming election. I just can't see how the party can unite anymore. People are all ego these days. Pathetic.
Tag279
06-02-2008, 12:54 AM
Knives your right there aren't a whole lot of Obama supporters on this forum but I have to tell you most of the posters here are civil and actually try to use logic. On my hometown forum we have some real hostility present toward Obama's canadacy. It is really frightening from my standpoint.
souvlaki
06-02-2008, 01:09 AM
:lmao: We both know that is a load.
That post here regularly? There are definitely people that come and go, but out of regular posters the only ones that come to mind are myself, Excel, ComicGrrl, BlackLightning, and Mr. Sparkle, and I hardly see any of them post here anymore for that matter.
Nonetheless, you guys post here far more consistently than Obama supporters, so it definitely gives the appearance of there being fewer Obama supporters on here than there probably are. Personally, I think you guys scare all the Obama supporters away. :cwink:
Excel
06-02-2008, 01:23 AM
The Obama Haters are far more vocal then the Obama lovers, even they are outnumbered.
How is he consistent? He says that he'll pull all the troops out of Iraq, yet he says that he'll leave a couple of brigades there and if al-Qaeda is there, he'll put troops back in (ironically al-Qaeda is in Iraq). He says he's opposed to the war, yet he continually votes to support it.
He says that he's a uniter and all that there are no red states or blue states crap, yet he continually attacks the Republican Party. He says taht people who don't vote for him are bitter xenophobes who cling to their guns and bibles. That isn't unifying language.
He says that he'll conduct a clean campaign yet he's also done attack ads and distorts John McCain's words and making a rather absurd claim that he's a third term for Bush.
He calls for more multilateral approaches, rejecting unilateralism of the Bush Administration yet he calls for attacking Pakistan.
I'd be all for his message of hope and what not if he actually backed it up with his actions and wasn't such a damn hypocrite.
al-Qaeda is not in Iraq... there is a group called "al-Qaeda in iraq" but they are not the same group that was under Osama Bin laden. they have declared allegiance to al-Qaeda, but for all rights and purposes they merely changed there name...
they are estimated at anywhere from 2-5% of the insurgency. AQI is a joke, a strawman.
he never said people who dont vote for him are xenophobes. i think its widely accepted what his intention during "bittergate" was... taq has it
McCain is following every policy Bush has... explain the differences between bush and McCains proposed policies.
Iraq war, same
Economy, Same. though he showed a glimmer of revolt on voting against the bush tax cuts for the rich in 2003... he is now back in the tank for that
policy.
LGBT rights, same. civil unions same
Healthcare, same.
Tortue... McCain has drifted over to bush's stance
GI bill... McCain has drifted over to bush's stance
the only thing i can find where McCain differs is on issues with bush:
campaign finance, immigration, and stem cells.
...McCain has said he will revisit his stance on immigration. a comment meant to appease repubs, which is what hes been doing alot of lately.
Rock solid though that Stemcells are probably on their way back into focus. with or without McCain.
and bombing pakistan... a position Obama has often been criticized for, turned out to be one of the most successfull anti-terrorists actions this administration has taken during the ENTIRE war on terrorism.
thats where they are... right on the boarder. not in Iraq.
kainedamo
06-02-2008, 07:52 AM
Another dumb person giving their view on Obama...
mfrivs1sOEw
"I believe his Dad is a terrorist", lol.
I dunno why I like looking up these videos. I wonder if they should make me concerned. I thought the video was parody at points, but other points make me think not. This is what people think about Obama and they don't even research it.
That post here regularly? There are definitely people that come and go, but out of regular posters the only ones that come to mind are myself, Excel, ComicGrrl, BlackLightning, and Mr. Sparkle, and I hardly see any of them post here anymore for that matter.
Nonetheless, you guys post here far more consistently than Obama supporters, so it definitely gives the appearance of there being fewer Obama supporters on here than there probably are. Personally, I think you guys scare all the Obama supporters away. :cwink:
i've been slow to post as of late because theres honestly nothing to post on.
right when you started to get prolific on here i was seeing a cyclical pattern to the criticisms from people who did not like obama at all.
its been a drought for intellectual debate because ive already engaged many of the intelligent opposition to barack on many of the prevalent issues.
Im waiting now... for a Obama v. McCain discusion after their first debate.
we will have 2 candidates... or 3 if an indie shows up... and i want to begin to talk about the meat and potatoes between the choices, not bicker about how they both suck, cause i have to agree... there are better choices out there.
but reality is, this is what we got.
Another dumb person giving their view on Obama...
mfrivs1sOEw
"I believe his Dad is a terrorist", lol.
I dunno why I like looking up these videos. I wonder if they should make me concerned. I thought the video was parody at points, but other points make me think not. This is what people think about Obama and they don't even research it.
11% of people believe hes a muslim.
crd1682
06-02-2008, 10:00 AM
All this talk about Obama haters and supporters is funny. What is also funny is that Obama seems to be a much more interesting candidate (on this board at least) than either Clinton or McCain. Just goes to show that even if you like or dislike Obama, you guys sure do love talking about him.
Hell, half the guys who don't support Obama now will probably vote for him in the general election. Wait and see.
Tron5000
06-02-2008, 10:08 AM
All this talk about Obama haters and supporters is funny. What is also funny is that Obama seems to be a much more interesting candidate (on this board at least) than either Clinton or McCain. Just goes to show that even if you like or dislike Obama, you guys sure do love talking about him.
Hell, half the guys who don't support Obama now will probably vote for him in the general election. Wait and see.
What on Earth have you seen from posters here that would make you think that "half the guys who don't support Obama now will probably vote for him in the general election"? What basis is there for such a statement? I'd be willing to bet the opposite will be true; that more Obama supporters will change their position that the other way around. What makes you think otherwise?
crd1682
06-02-2008, 10:16 AM
What on Earth have you seen from posters here that would make you think that "half the guys who don't support Obama now will probably vote for him in the general election"? What basis is there for such a statement? I'd be willing to bet the opposite will be true; that more Obama supporters will change their position that the other way around. What makes you think otherwise?
There is no basis for my statement. Just personal opinion. Besides, like I said, those guys who don't support Obama sure do love talking about him. I just wouldn't be surprised is all. Don't take it too literally.
BlackLantern
06-02-2008, 10:19 AM
I won't be voting for Obama this year.....sorry
Tron5000
06-02-2008, 10:24 AM
There is no basis for my statement. Just personal opinion. Besides, like I said, those guys who don't support Obama sure do love talking about him. I just wouldn't be surprised is all. Don't take it too literally.
Well, he just keeps giving us things to talk about. Provide the material, and people will run with it. And he certainly has provided us with no shortage of material.
Well, he just keeps giving us things to talk about. Provide the material, and people will run with it. And he certainly has provided us with no shortage of material.
That's true. There always seems to be a new crisis or scandal every week or so to discuss.
That post here regularly? There are definitely people that come and go, but out of regular posters the only ones that come to mind are myself, Excel, ComicGrrl, BlackLightning, and Mr. Sparkle, and I hardly see any of them post here anymore for that matter.
Nonetheless, you guys post here far more consistently than Obama supporters, so it definitely gives the appearance of there being fewer Obama supporters on here than there probably are. Personally, I think you guys scare all the Obama supporters away. :cwink:
:hehe:
All this talk about Obama haters and supporters is funny. What is also funny is that Obama seems to be a much more interesting candidate (on this board at least) than either Clinton or McCain. Just goes to show that even if you like or dislike Obama, you guys sure do love talking about him.
Hell, half the guys who don't support Obama now will probably vote for him in the general election. Wait and see.
I wouldn't be so sure of that.
kainedamo
06-02-2008, 11:35 AM
Could that maybe have something to do with the primaries closing up and the media scroutinising things closer than ever, twisting things out of al proportion?
Tron5000
06-02-2008, 11:35 AM
That's true. There always seems to be a new crisis or scandal every week or so to discuss.
He just keeps setting 'em up, we'll keep knocking 'em down.
The same could be said about George Bush. "Well, it doesn't matter if you like him or not. At least he's interesting, because people who like him and people who don't still talk about him all the time."
Yeah, and people talked a lot about Hitler, Chamberlain, Stalin, Truman...Lots of people are "interesting." Doesn't qualify them for the presidency of the USA.
He just keeps setting 'em up, we'll keep knocking 'em down.
The same could be said about George Bush. "Well, it doesn't matter if you like him or not. At least he's interesting, because people who like him and people who don't still talk about him all the time."
Yeah, and people talked a lot about Hitler, Chamberlain, Stalin, Truman...Lots of people are "interesting." Doesn't qualify them for the presidency of the USA.
That's very true Tron.
crd1682
06-02-2008, 11:50 AM
He just keeps setting 'em up, we'll keep knocking 'em down.
The same could be said about George Bush. "Well, it doesn't matter if you like him or not. At least he's interesting, because people who like him and people who don't still talk about him all the time."
Yeah, and people talked a lot about Hitler, Chamberlain, Stalin, Truman...Lots of people are "interesting." Doesn't qualify them for the presidency of the USA.
Correct. So isn't it amazing that those who appear more interesting in the public eyes also end being the ones to be elected into office? Whether someone is 'qualified' or not is a matter of personal opinion. The simple fact is that Obama supporters and non-supporters are feeding into the growing 'interest' the nation has in him. That's all I'm saying.
Besides, when was the last time ANYONE had something interesting to say about McCain?
BlackLantern
06-02-2008, 11:56 AM
Interest does not equate to votes....
kane9321
06-02-2008, 12:01 PM
I won't be voting for Obama this year.....sorry
:wow:
Tron5000
06-02-2008, 12:01 PM
Correct. So isn't it amazing that those who appear more interesting in the public eyes also end being the ones to be elected into office? Whether someone is 'qualified' or not is a matter of personal opinion. The simple fact is that Obama supporters and non-supporters are feeding into the growing 'interest' the nation has in him. That's all I'm saying.
Besides, when was the last time ANYONE had something interesting to say about McCain?
So you are of the belief that there is nothing interesting about John McCain?
("Interesting," incidentally, is also "a matter of public opinion.")
Here's what I find interesting about him: He has more experience in a leadership role than the other 2 candidates. When he was offered a release from the Hanoi Hilton after 6 months, he refused, stating that the men were to be released in the order of their capture (this resulted in an extra 5-year stay for McCain). He refuses to vote down the party line and will cross the aisle if he believes it to be the correct move. He believes that the American people are generally hard-working, industrious and intelligent, and should have a greater responsibility for their lives than should the federal government. He stood against President Bush at the outset of the war, saying that we needed a stronger, more counterinsurgency-based battle plan (which, once eventually adopted, proved to be the correct tactic). He has authored more legislation than the other 2 candidates combined.
And he doesn't take s*** from anyone.
That's a few things I find "interesting" about John McCain.
BlackLantern
06-02-2008, 12:05 PM
Not that it matters....but unlike a lot of politicians who try to be "fake fans" of things to garner votes...McCain is a serious baseball fan, almost every time I have seen a weekend D-Backs game, he is there in the stands....
Tron5000
06-02-2008, 12:08 PM
Not that it matters....but unlike a lot of politicians who try to be "fake fans" of things to garner votes...McCain is a serious baseball fan, almost every time I have seen a weekend D-Backs game, he is there in the stands....
...just like Hillary, who has always been a Yankees fan...
Varient
06-02-2008, 12:09 PM
Interest does not equate to votes....
Queasy feeling.
Might just hurl.
:whatever:
Tsk,... I'm pretty clear where I stand,.. but there is "none of the above" available.
But I don't see McCain as a lesser evil,.. Just like I don't see Hilliary as a trustworthy canidate.
Obama rubs me the wrong way on policies,... he rubs me the wrong way on the touchie-feelies toward those who would hurt us.
I've given it almost four months of reading you yahoo's and think that I'll Pick something (anything!) other than Dem or Rep.
Peace.
At the moment, no interest is good for McCain. The interest in Obama is revolving around his inability to capture the nomination, his losing primaries by huge margins despite being declared the persumptive nominee by the media, and scandals. Meanwhile, McCain is keeping his head low and letting Clinton tear Obama apart.
Mr Sparkle
06-02-2008, 12:12 PM
Well, he just keeps giving us things to talk about. Provide the material, and people will run with it. And he certainly has provided us with no shortage of material.
yeah, about that.
I think there's material out there for like...talking about the issues.
wonder why there's not a lot of talk about that?:huh:
Tron5000
06-02-2008, 12:13 PM
At the moment, no interest is good for McCain. The interest in Obama is revolving around his inability to capture the nomination, his losing primaries by huge margins despite being declared the persumptive nominee by the media, and scandals. Meanwhile, McCain is keeping his head low and letting Clinton tear Obama apart.
Oh, yeah. The longer people go talking about Obama and not about McCain, the better it is for McCain. He's just laying low, raising money, forming his team and building his platform.
Another reason for the lack of "interest" regarding McCain is that he is a known commodity. You want to know about him, check out his record in Congress. Look at the legislation he has pushed. Take a glance at his military service history. While I agree with some of his actions and disagree with others, they are out there for all to see. You can track the last 40 years of the man's life in great detail without much effort.
The same can not be said about Obama. There is much "interest" in him because he is an unknown commodity. We don't know much about him. And unfortunately for him, the more people learn about him, the more likely they are to shy away from him.
crd1682
06-02-2008, 12:14 PM
So you are of the belief that there is nothing interesting about John McCain?
("Interesting," incidentally, is also "a matter of public opinion.")
Here's what I find interesting about him: He has more experience in a leadership role than the other 2 candidates. When he was offered a release from the Hanoi Hilton after 6 months, he refused, stating that the men were to be released in the order of their capture (this resulted in an extra 5-year stay for McCain). He refuses to vote down the party line and will cross the aisle if he believes it to be the correct move. He believes that the American people are generally hard-working, industrious and intelligent, and should have a greater responsibility for their lives than should the federal government. He stood against President Bush at the outset of the war, saying that we needed a stronger, more counterinsurgency-based battle plan (which, once eventually adopted, proved to be the correct tactic). He has authored more legislation than the other 2 candidates combined.
And he doesn't take s*** from anyone.
That's a few things I find "interesting" about John McCain.
So how come you're talking about how interesting McCain is in an Obama thread?
So how come you're talking about how interesting McCain is in an Obama thread?
Because you brought him up? :huh:
Mr Sparkle
06-02-2008, 12:17 PM
So how come you're talking about how interesting McCain is in an Obama thread?
Because you will notice that McCain was awesome...uh...six years ago.
now he has been forced to vote WITH the party in order to secure a nom.
so much so he voted AGAINST the GI Bill.
AGAINST?
he also oposses a tax raise even though in EVERY war ( those of you so eager to compare Iraq to WWII should know) there has been a tax hike.
weird.
moraldeficiency
06-02-2008, 12:17 PM
So how come you're talking about how interesting McCain is in an Obama thread?
cause you raised the point?
crd1682
06-02-2008, 12:20 PM
At the moment, no interest is good for McCain. The interest in Obama is revolving around his inability to capture the nomination, his losing primaries by huge margins despite being declared the persumptive nominee by the media, and scandals. Meanwhile, McCain is keeping his head low and letting Clinton tear Obama apart.
The interest is also about how he's about to receive the nomination.
crd1682
06-02-2008, 12:24 PM
Because you brought him up? :huh:
Exactly.
When was the last time any of you guys posted anything in McCain's thread?
moraldeficiency
06-02-2008, 12:27 PM
Exactly.
When was the last time any of you guys posted anything in McCain's thread?
He's not exactly front and center the way obama and hillary are right now, I'm sure after the primaries we'll all be talking more about him. Besides you brought him up in this thread, shouldn't you be admonishing yourself?
Tron5000
06-02-2008, 12:29 PM
He's not exactly front and center the way obama and hillary are right now, I'm sure after the primaries we'll all be talking more about him. Besides you brought him up in this thread, shouldn't you be admonishing yourself?
Exactly.
"How come no one talks about McCain?"
"OK, since you brought it up..."
"Wait a minute...Why are you talking about McCain in an Obama thread?"
"WTF?"
Exactly.
When was the last time any of you guys posted anything in McCain's thread?
We post in McCain's thread when there is something to talk about. The focus of the nation is currently on who is going to be the Democratic nominee. The Republican nominee has been decided for a little while now. Trust me, we will all address McCain the next time that he screws up. Whether it be a misstatement, crisis, or scandal.
Exactly.
When was the last time any of you guys posted anything in McCain's thread?
But that is the point. What are we talking about Obama for? Because of scandals? Because he is losing elections by 30 points despite the media declaring him the nominee for a month now? In politics, any publicity is not necessarily good publicity. Obama is getting talked about, but not for the right reason. Meanwhile, McCain can let Clinton do his job for him, while he sits back in the shadows and raises the big bucks.
But that is the point. What are we talking about Obama for? Because of scandals? Because he is losing elections by 30 points despite the media declaring him the nominee for a month now? In politics, any publicity is not necessarily good publicity. Obama is getting talked about, but not for the right reason. Meanwhile, McCain can let Clinton do his job for him, while he sits back in the shadows and raises the big bucks.
With some help from George W. Bush. http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon13.gif
crd1682
06-02-2008, 12:54 PM
He's not exactly front and center the way obama and hillary are right now, I'm sure after the primaries we'll all be talking more about him. Besides you brought him up in this thread, shouldn't you be admonishing yourself?
Pal, if I had posted my comments in the McCain thread, I don't think I would have gotten half as many replies as I have. That's my point.
Besides, I basically just wanted all of your assessments on Obama getting more attention than both Clinton and McCain combined. Your answers are interesting.
And surely this Obama thread has talked about much more than scandals and how he hardly campaigned in a country that doesn't even vote in the general election, nor is needed for him to clinch the nomination at this point.
Tron5000
06-02-2008, 12:56 PM
With some help from George W. Bush. http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon13.gif
And some help from Mitt Romney, and Joe Lieberman, and Mike Huckabee, and Steve Forbes, and Rush Limbaugh...
So what if Bush helps McCain raise money? A large percentage of McCain voters likely will have been Bush backers in the previous elections. I think Bush is one of the best campaign assets McCain can exploit, especially among hard-core Republican voters.
Hey, it's not like he took any money from Tony Rezko or anything...
And some help from Mitt Romney, and Joe Lieberman, and Mike Huckabee, and Steve Forbes, and Rush Limbaugh...
So what if Bush helps McCain raise money? A large percentage of McCain voters likely will have been Bush backers in the previous elections. I think Bush is one of the best campaign assets McCain can exploit, especially among hard-core Republican voters.
Hey, it's not like he took any money from Tony Rezko or anything...
It's become widely known in this forum that I do not support Obama. His dealings with Rezko, Wright, etc.
I don't have a problem with Bush raising money for McCain. I have a problem with it being done in secret behind closed doors all the while McCain tries to act like he doesn't associate with Bush. It's incredibly hypocritical.
moraldeficiency
06-02-2008, 01:10 PM
Pal, if I had posted my comments in the McCain thread, I don't think I would have gotten half as many replies as I have. That's my point.
I'm not your pal, buddy.
Besides, I basically just wanted all of your assessments on Obama getting more attention than both Clinton and McCain combined. Your answers are interesting.
And surely this Obama thread has talked about much more than scandals and how he hardly campaigned in a country that doesn't even vote in the general election, nor is needed for him to clinch the nomination at this point.
I'd say Clinton get's the most attention actually, by the newspapers I read at least.
There's been a lot of political discusion here, there's also been several off point topics addressed and every once and a while a little humor even finds it's way into a topic, much to the horror of certian posters. While this is mainly an Obama thread, if you bring up another person chances are someone will address that, and if you do ask a question and get it answered you really shouldn't then ask why it's not being answered in another thread. That would just be very confusing.
Tron5000
06-02-2008, 01:14 PM
It's become widely known in this forum that I do not support Obama. His dealings with Rezko, Wright, etc.
I don't have a problem with Bush raising money for McCain. I have a problem with it being done in secret behind closed doors all the while McCain tries to act like he doesn't associate with Bush. It's incredibly hypocritical.
He doesn't act like that. The day after he wrapped up the nom, he held a press conference with Bush in which Bush said he would do anything he could within his hectic schedule to aid McCain, and McCain said he would welcome any assistance from the president.
McCain and Bush have their differences, but they are also very close. Not in terms of ideologies (they differ greatly on a number of issues), but in a personal sense. And I don't see McCain turning his back on someone for political expediency.
He doesn't act like that. The day after he wrapped up the nom, he held a press conference with Bush in which Bush said he would do anything he could within his hectic schedule to aid McCain, and McCain said he would welcome any assistance from the president.
McCain and Bush have their differences, but they are also very close. Not in terms of ideologies (they differ greatly on a number of issues), but in a personal sense. And I don't see McCain turning his back on someone for political expediency.
He's a politician. If turning his back becomes necessary, he will do it.
Tron5000
06-02-2008, 01:20 PM
He's a politician. If turning his back becomes necessary, he will do it.
I don't know. He didn't turn his back on his country during 5.5 years in the Hanoi Hilton. Don't think he'd do it in this instance.
The man has something that is hard to replace once it is gone: honor.
hippie_hunter
06-02-2008, 01:26 PM
I dunno, I personally have the feeling that McCain hates Bush.
I don't know. He didn't turn his back on his country during 5.5 years in the Hanoi Hilton. Don't think he'd do it in this instance.
The man has something that is hard to replace once it is gone: honor.
To me, withstanding torture for the sake of one's country is a little different than turning your back on someone for political gain.
Tron5000
06-02-2008, 01:49 PM
To me, withstanding torture for the sake of one's country is a little different than turning your back on someone for political gain.
I think it's a lot different. The parallel I was drawing is that I believe McCain to be a man of the utmost integrity and honor. He says he is seeking the presidency not because he wants it for personal reasons, but because he feels that he is uniquely qualified for the job (at least given the competition). If his words are truthful (which I believe them to be), I believe is a man humbled by his current status. I don't think he is the type of person to throw someone under the bus for political gain. He has often gone against the grain in the Senate, pushing for his beliefs rather than for agendas that may prove to benefit him in the political arena. He's a "maverick." He says and does what he wants, admits so, and offers no apologies for it.
I just don't see him being the type of man to turn his back on someone for political expediency. Of course, I could be totally wrong, but that is far from the impression that I get from McCain.
crd1682
06-02-2008, 01:55 PM
I'm not your pal, buddy.
Then why are you calling me buddy, pal?
I'd say Clinton get's the most attention actually, by the newspapers I read at least.
There's been a lot of political discusion here, there's also been several off point topics addressed and every once and a while a little humor even finds it's way into a topic, much to the horror of certian posters. While this is mainly an Obama thread, if you bring up another person chances are someone will address that, and if you do ask a question and get it answered you really shouldn't then ask why it's not being answered in another thread. That would just be very confusing.
Hmmm. I see you might have missed the point of my argument. I can see how it can be confusing though. Thanks for contributing anyway.
kainedamo
06-02-2008, 01:59 PM
I think it's a lot different. The parallel I was drawing is that I believe McCain to be a man of the utmost integrity and honor. He says he is seeking the presidency not because he wants it for personal reasons, but because he feels that he is uniquely qualified for the job (at least given the competition). If his words are truthful (which I believe them to be), I believe is a man humbled by his current status. I don't think he is the type of person to throw someone under the bus for political gain. He has often gone against the grain in the Senate, pushing for his beliefs rather than for agendas that may prove to benefit him in the political arena. He's a "maverick." He says and does what he wants, admits so, and offers no apologies for it.
I just don't see him being the type of man to turn his back on someone for political expediency. Of course, I could be totally wrong, but that is far from the impression that I get from McCain.
Honor or no honor, McCain knows jack **** about the economy.
BlackLantern
06-02-2008, 02:02 PM
neither does Obama....he just makes it sound like he does
Tron5000
06-02-2008, 02:19 PM
Honor or no honor, McCain knows jack **** about the economy.
And what is the basis for this statement?
moraldeficiency
06-02-2008, 02:20 PM
Then why are you calling me buddy, pal?
That was a south park reference joke that you did not get.
Hmmm. I see you might have missed the point of my argument. I can see how it can be confusing though. Thanks for contributing anyway.
The point, come on now. You asked a question about McCain then questioned the topic when someone answered you. It's an old and crappy debate tactic and you weren't making some grand point about how people over analyze Obama, you just got carried away and forgot what you had originally brought up or at least didn't articulate your point well enough for anyone else on here other than yourself to understand.
I'm glad you like my contributions though, it makes my life just that much more meaningful knowing that in some small way I've made someone, somewhere really really really need a beer.
kainedamo
06-02-2008, 02:21 PM
The Problem
Wages are Stagnant as Prices Rise: While wages remain flat, the costs of basic necessities are increasing. The cost of in-state college tuition has grown 35 percent over the past five years. Health care costs have risen four times faster than wages over the past six years. And the personal savings rate is now the lowest it's been since the Great Depression.
Tax Cuts for Wealthy Instead of Middle Class: The Bush tax cuts give those who earn over $1 million dollars a tax cut nearly 160 times greater than that received by middle-income Americans. At the same time, this administration has refused to tackle health care, education and housing in a manner that benefits the middle class.
Barack Obama's Plan
Provide Middle Class Americans Tax Relief
Obama will cut income taxes by $1,000 for working families to offset the payroll tax they pay.
Provide a Tax Cut for Working Families: Obama will restore fairness to the tax code and provide 150 million workers the tax relief they need. Obama will create a new "Making Work Pay" tax credit of up to $500 per person, or $1,000 per working family. The "Making Work Pay" tax credit will completely eliminate income taxes for 10 million Americans.
Simplify Tax Filings for Middle Class Americans: Obama will dramatically simplify tax filings so that millions of Americans will be able to do their taxes in less than five minutes. Obama will ensure that the IRS uses the information it already gets from banks and employers to give taxpayers the option of pre-filled tax forms to verify, sign and return. Experts estimate that the Obama proposal will save Americans up to 200 million total hours of work and aggravation and up to $2 billion in tax preparer fees.
Trade
Obama believes that trade with foreign nations should strengthen the American economy and create more American jobs. He will stand firm against agreements that undermine our economic security.
Fight for Fair Trade: Obama will fight for a trade policy that opens up foreign markets to support good American jobs. He will use trade agreements to spread good labor and environmental standards around the world and stand firm against agreements like the Central American Free Trade Agreement that fail to live up to those important benchmarks. Obama will also pressure the World Trade Organization to enforce trade agreements and stop countries from continuing unfair government subsidies to foreign exporters and nontariff barriers on U.S. exports.
Amend the North American Free Trade Agreement: Obama believes that NAFTA and its potential were oversold to the American people. Obama will work with the leaders of Canada and Mexico to fix NAFTA so that it works for American workers.
Improve Transition Assistance: To help all workers adapt to a rapidly changing economy, Obama would update the existing system of Trade Adjustment Assistance by extending it to service industries, creating flexible education accounts to help workers retrain, and providing retraining assistance for workers in sectors of the economy vulnerable to dislocation before they lose their jobs.
Technology, Innovation and Creating Jobs
Obama will encourage the deployment of the most modern communications infrastructure to reduce the costs of health care, help solve our energy crisis, create new jobs, and fuel our economic growth.
Support Job Creation: Barack Obama believes we need to double federal funding for basic research and make the research and development tax credit permanent to help create high-paying, secure jobs. Obama will also make long-term investments in education, training, and workforce development so that Americans can leverage our strengths - our ingenuity and entrepreneurialism - to create new high-wage jobs and prosper in a world economy.
Invest in U.S. Manufacturing: The Obama comprehensive energy independence and climate change plan will invest in America's highly-skilled manufacturing workforce and manufacturing centers to ensure that American workers have the skills and tools they need to pioneer the first wave of green technologies that will be in high demand throughout the world. Obama will also provide assistance to the domestic auto industry to ensure that new fuel-efficient vehicles are built by American workers.
Create New Job Training Programs for Clean Technologies: The Obama plan will increase funding for federal workforce training programs and direct these programs to incorporate green technologies training, such as advanced manufacturing and weatherization training, into their efforts to help Americans find and retain stable, high-paying jobs. Obama will also create an energy-focused youth jobs program to invest in disconnected and disadvantaged youth.
Boost the Renewable Energy Sector and Create New Jobs: The Obama plan will create new federal policies, and expand existing ones, that have been proven to create new American jobs. Obama will create a federal Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) that will require 25 percent of American electricity be derived from renewable sources by 2025, which has the potential to create hundreds of thousands of new jobs on its own. Obama will also extend the Production Tax Credit, a credit used successfully by American farmers and investors to increase renewable energy production and create new local jobs.
Deploy Next-Generation Broadband: Obama believes we can get broadband to every community in America through a combination of reform of the Universal Service Fund, better use of the nation's wireless spectrum, promotion of next-generation facilities, technologies and applications, and new tax and loan incentives.
Protect the Openness of the Internet: Obama supports the basic principle that network providers should not be allowed to charge fees to privilege the content or applications of some web sites and Internet applications over others. This principle will ensure that the new competitors, especially small or nonprofit speakers, have the same opportunity as big companies to innovate and reach large audiences.
Invest in Rural Areas: Obama will invest in rural small businesses and fight to expand high-speed Internet access. He will improve rural schools and attract more doctors to rural areas.
Labor
Obama will strengthen the ability of workers to organize unions. He will fight for passage of the Employee Free Choice Act. Obama will ensure that his labor appointees support workers' rights and will work to ban the permanent replacement of striking workers. Obama will also increase the minimum wage and index it to inflation to ensure it rises every year.
Ensure Freedom to Unionize: Obama believes that workers should have the freedom to choose whether to join a union without harassment or intimidation from their employers. Obama cosponsored and is strong advocate for the Employee Free Choice Act, a bipartisan effort to assure that workers can exercise their right to organize. He will continue to fight for EFCA's passage and sign it into law.
Fight Attacks on Workers' Right to Organize: Obama has fought the Bush National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) efforts to strip workers of their right to organize. He is a cosponsor of legislation to overturn the NLRB's "Kentucky River" decisions classifying hundreds of thousands of nurses, construction, and professional workers as "supervisors" who are not protected by federal labor laws.
Protect Striking Workers: Obama supports the right of workers to bargain collectively and strike if necessary. He will work to ban the permanent replacement of striking workers, so workers can stand up for themselves without worrying about losing their livelihoods.
Raise the Minimum Wage: Barack Obama will raise the minimum wage, index it to inflation and increase the Earned Income Tax Credit to make sure that full-time workers earn a living wage that allows them to raise their families and pay for basic needs.
Protect Homeownership and Crack Down on Mortgage Fraud
Obama will crack down on fraudulent brokers and lenders. He will also make sure homebuyers have honest and complete information about their mortgage options, and he will give a tax credit to all middle-class homeowners.
Create a Universal Mortgage Credit: Obama will create a 10 percent universal mortgage credit to provide homeowners who do not itemize tax relief. This credit will provide an average of $500 to 10 million homeowners, the majority of whom earn less than $50,000 per year.
Ensure More Accountability in the Subprime Mortgage Industry: Obama has been closely monitoring the subprime mortgage situation for years, and introduced comprehensive legislation over a year ago to fight mortgage fraud and protect consumers against abusive lending practices. Obama's STOP FRAUD Act provides the first federal definition of mortgage fraud, increases funding for federal and state law enforcement programs, creates new criminal penalties for mortgage professionals found guilty of fraud, and requires industry insiders to report suspicious activity.
Mandate Accurate Loan Disclosure: Obama will create a Homeowner Obligation Made Explicit (HOME) score, which will provide potential borrowers with a simplified, standardized borrower metric (similar to APR) for home mortgages. The HOME score will allow individuals to easily compare various mortgage products and understand the full cost of the loan.
Create Fund to Help Homeowners Avoid Foreclosures: Obama will create a fund to help people refinance their mortgages and provide comprehensive supports to innocent homeowners. The fund will be partially paid for by Obama's increased penalties on lenders who act irresponsibly and commit fraud.
Close Bankruptcy Loophole for Mortgage Companies: Obama will work to eliminate the provision that prevents bankruptcy courts from modifying an individual's mortgage payments. Obama believes that the subprime mortgage industry, which has engaged in dangerous and sometimes unscrupulous business practices, should not be shielded by outdated federal law.
Address Predatory Credit Card Practices
Obama will establish a five-star rating system so that every consumer knows the risk involved in every credit card. He also will establish a Credit Card Bill of Rights to stop credit card companies from exploiting consumers with unfair practices.
Create a Credit Card Rating System to Improve Disclosure: Obama will create a credit card rating system, modeled on five-star systems used for other consumer products, to provide consumers an easily identifiable ranking of credit cards, based on the card's features. Credit card companies will be required to display the rating on all application and contract materials, enabling consumers to quickly understand all of the major provisions of a credit card without having to rely exclusively on fine print in lengthy documents.
Establish a Credit Card Bill of Rights to Protect Consumers: Obama will create a Credit Card Bill of Rights to protect consumers. The Obama plan will:
Ban Unilateral Changes
Apply Interest Rate Increases Only to Future Debt
Prohibit Interest on Fees
Prohibit "Universal Defaults"
Require Prompt and Fair Crediting of Cardholder Payments
Reform Bankruptcy Laws
Obama will reform our bankruptcy laws to protect working people, ban executive bonuses for bankrupt companies, and require disclosure of all pension investments.
Cap Outlandish Interest Rates on Payday Loans and Improve Disclosure: Obama supports extending a 36 percent interest cap to all Americans. Obama will require lenders to provide clear and simplified information about loan fees, payments and penalties, which is why he'll require lenders to provide this information during the application process.
Encourage Responsible Lending Institutions to Make Small Consumer Loans: Obama will encourage banks, credit unions and Community Development Financial Institutions to provide affordable short-term and small-dollar loans and to drive unscrupulous lenders out of business.
Reform Bankruptcy Laws to Protect Families Facing a Medical Crisis: Obama will create an exemption in bankruptcy law for individuals who can prove they filed for bankruptcy because of medical expenses. This exemption will create a process that forgives the debt and lets the individuals get back on their feet.
Work/Family Balance
Obama will double funding for after-school programs, expand the Family Medical Leave Act, provide low-income families with a refundable tax credit to help with their child-care expenses, and encourage flexible work schedules.
Expand the Family and Medical Leave Act: The FMLA covers only certain employees of employers with 50 or more employees. Obama will expand it to cover businesses with 25 or more employees. He will expand the FMLA to cover more purposes as well, including allowing workers to take leave for elder care needs; allowing parents up to 24 hours of leave each year to participate in their children's academic activities; and expanding FMLA to cover leave for employees to address domestic violence.
Encourage States to Adopt Paid Leave: As president, Obama will initiate a strategy to encourage all 50 states to adopt paid-leave systems. Obama will provide a $1.5 billion fund to assist states with start-up costs and to help states offset the costs for employees and employers.
Expand High-Quality Afterschool Opportunities: Obama will double funding for the main federal support for afterschool programs, the 21st Century Learning Centers program, to serve a million more children. Obama will include measures to maximize performance and effectiveness across grantees nationwide.
Expand the Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit: The Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit provides too little relief to families that struggle to afford child care expenses. Obama will reform the Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit by making it refundable and allowing low-income families to receive up to a 50 percent credit for their child care expenses.
Protect Against Caregiver Discrimination: Workers with family obligations often are discriminated against in the workplace. Obama will enforce the recently-enacted Equal Employment Opportunity Commission guidelines on caregiver discrimination.
Expand Flexible Work Arrangements: Obama will create a program to inform businesses about the benefits of flexible work schedules; help businesses create flexible work opportunities; and increase federal incentives for telecommuting. Obama will also make the federal government a model employer in terms of adopting flexible work schedules and permitting employees to request flexible arrangements.
Barack Obama's Record
Housing: In the U.S. Senate, Obama introduced the STOP FRAUD Act to increase penalties for mortgage fraud and provide more protections for low-income homebuyers, well before the current subprime crisis began.
Predatory Lending: In the Illinois State Senate, Obama called attention to predatory lending issues. Obama sponsored legislation to combat predatory payday loans, and he also was credited with lobbying the state to more closely regulate some of the most egregious predatory lending practices.
American Jobs: Barack Obama introduced the Patriot Employer Act of 2007 to provide a tax credit to companies that maintain or increase the number of full-time workers in America relative to those outside the US; maintain their corporate headquarters in America; pay decent wages; prepare workers for retirement; provide health insurance; and support employees who serve in the military.
Tron5000
06-02-2008, 02:22 PM
That was a south park reference joke that you did not get.
The point, come on now. You asked a question about McCain then questioned the topic when someone answered you. It's an old and crappy debate tactic and you weren't making some grand point about how people over analyze Obama, you just got carried away and forgot what you had originally brought up or at least didn't articulate your point well enough for anyone else on here other than yourself to understand.
I'm glad you like my contributions though, it makes my life just that much more meaningful knowing that in some small way I've made someone, somewhere really really really need a beer.
Send them to my bar. Shawty got bills to pay.
moraldeficiency
06-02-2008, 02:24 PM
Send them to my bar. Shawty got bills to pay.
You own a bar? We should hang out.
BlackLantern
06-02-2008, 02:26 PM
Unions are antiquated....giving unions more power is a horrible mistake....
Tron5000
06-02-2008, 02:29 PM
You own a bar? We should hang out.
Don't own it, but I rock the hell out of it. 39 beers on tap, 200+ bottles of liquor...it's a fun place.
moraldeficiency
06-02-2008, 02:32 PM
Don't own it, but I rock the hell out of it. 39 beers on tap, 200+ bottles of liquor...it's a fun place.
Not bad, throw in a mechanical bull or a dwarf tossing station and I'm in.
Varient
06-02-2008, 03:12 PM
meh.
for me it's like having to choose between Jason, Freddy, and N. Bates.
One kills you after you have bittersweet teenaged sex,... One kills you once you fall asleep,... and one kills you in the shower.
Dead is dead.
jaguarr
06-02-2008, 03:13 PM
meh.
for me it's like having to choose between Jason, Freddy, and N. Bates.
One kills you after you have bittersweet teenaged sex,... One kills you once you fall asleep,... and one kills you in the shower.
Dead is dead.
If I'm gonna die, let it be after bittersweet teenaged sex. I'd rather have gotten some wet on my wick before I go, personally. :up:
jag
BlackLantern
06-02-2008, 03:16 PM
Premarital Sex FTW
jaguarr
06-02-2008, 03:17 PM
Premarital Sex FTW
ANY kind of sex FTW!
jag
BlackLantern
06-02-2008, 03:18 PM
ANY kind of sex FTW!
jag
It's better when it defies the Bible.....:yay:
jaguarr
06-02-2008, 03:19 PM
It's better when it defies the Bible.....:yay:
Lots of ways to do that, then. Premarital is only but one of many! :hehe:
jag
Varient
06-02-2008, 03:21 PM
If I'm gonna die, let it be after bittersweet teenaged sex. I'd rather have gotten some wet on my wick before I go, personally. :up:
jag
Great.
Now YOU just have to figure out which of the three canidates is Jason,.... The Guy that lets you have sex before killing you.
jaguarr
06-02-2008, 03:24 PM
Great.
Now YOU just have to figure out which of the three canidates is Jason,.... The Guy that lets you have sex before killing you.
I think Obama is down with the Wild Thing, personally, and is a proponent. Hillary is asexual and McCain can't get it up anymore, so there ya go. :hehe:
jag
BlackLantern
06-02-2008, 03:29 PM
Hilary hasn't had an "O" since college...probably
I think it's a lot different. The parallel I was drawing is that I believe McCain to be a man of the utmost integrity and honor. He says he is seeking the presidency not because he wants it for personal reasons, but because he feels that he is uniquely qualified for the job (at least given the competition). If his words are truthful (which I believe them to be), I believe is a man humbled by his current status. I don't think he is the type of person to throw someone under the bus for political gain. He has often gone against the grain in the Senate, pushing for his beliefs rather than for agendas that may prove to benefit him in the political arena. He's a "maverick." He says and does what he wants, admits so, and offers no apologies for it.
I just don't see him being the type of man to turn his back on someone for political expediency. Of course, I could be totally wrong, but that is far from the impression that I get from McCain.
That being said, I think that anyone who is running for office that potentially comes across a "threat" to their campaign, would deal with that threat. When it comes right down to it, if someone is presenting a problem for a campaign (whether the candidate really wants to disassociate themselves with that person or not) they will throw them under the bus. It's all about survival.
I think you may have more faith in politicians than I do. (Not saying that there is anything wrong with that.)
jaguarr
06-02-2008, 03:43 PM
Hilary hasn't had an "O" since college...probably
I don't think she's ever had one, personally (Bill strikes me as a pretty selfish lover), and that's probably a big part of why she's such a crabby b***h.
jag
And how does Hillary and Bill's sex life have anything to do with the conversation that we're all trying to have..?
Come on, guys.
hippie_hunter
06-02-2008, 03:49 PM
I don't think she's ever had one, personally (Bill strikes me as a pretty selfish lover), and that's probably a big part of why she's such a crabby b***h.
jag
Personally, I don't think that she's gotten any since the 80's.
If she got some good ol' loving I bet we'd see a different Hillary. A kinder and gentler Hillary. A Hillary that isn't a *****.
I'll volunteer.
jaguarr
06-02-2008, 03:52 PM
And how does Hillary and Bill's sex life have anything to do with the conversation that we're all trying to have..?
Come on, guys.
Clearly the mods don't have an issue with it because they are participating in the conversation. :)
Personally, I don't think that she's gotten any since the 80's.
If she got some good ol' loving I bet we'd see a different Hillary. A kinder and gentler Hillary. A Hillary that isn't a *****.
I'll volunteer.
Well, lessee.....how old is Chelsea? She was born in February of 1980, I believe. Unless Hillary reproduced asexually (as I still suspect) that could put her last round of intercourse out into the late 1970's and even then there's no guarantee that she gushed.
jag
BlackLantern
06-02-2008, 03:53 PM
Personally, I don't think that she's gotten any since the 80's.
If she got some good ol' loving I bet we'd see a different Hillary. A kinder and gentler Hillary. A Hillary that isn't a *****.
I'll volunteer.
Better you than me.....my political lady lovin' is reserved for Ann Coulter and Michelle Malkin...either separately or at the same time...I don't care as they are getting kicked out afterwards anyway
Clearly the mods don't have an issue with it because they are participating in the conversation. :)
jag
Yeah...I just noticed that. :huh:
jaguarr
06-02-2008, 03:57 PM
Yeah...I just noticed that. :huh:
It's just a bit of fun. Relax. It will all be okay. :)
jag
It's just a bit of fun. Relax. It will all be okay. :)
jag
I realize that it's all in good fun...but I fail to see how bashing or making fun of Hillary somehow always has to come back to her sex life and relationship will Bill...like it's acceptable in some way to consistently bring the affair up.
Making fun of infidelity just isn't my cup of tea.
Blows my mind.
jaguarr
06-02-2008, 04:03 PM
I realize that it's all in good fun...but I fail to see how bashing or making fun of Hillary somehow always has to come back to her sex life and relationship will Bill...like it's acceptable in some way to consistently bring the affair up.
Making fun of infidelity just isn't my cup of tea.
Blows my mind.
Learn to laugh. It will be less stressful. I promise Especially when it's clearly just jokes, like this conversation has been.
jag
Learn to laugh. It will be less stressful. I promise Especially when it's clearly just jokes, like this conversation has been.
jag
I thoroughly enjoy a good laugh. This just isn't funny to me. I'll hover till the conversation changes. :cwink:
jaguarr
06-02-2008, 04:10 PM
I thoroughly enjoy a good laugh. This just isn't funny to me. I'll hover till the conversation changes. :cwink:
So, what size bra do you think Hillary wears?
jag
Varient
06-02-2008, 04:21 PM
So, what size bra do you think Hillary wears?
jag
(chuckle) - Stop it.
Somewhat on topic,..... I really can't see a big enough difference between the three - it's like three diffrent versions of the same Dish.
meh (trying to find a good anology)
Redbeans and rice, Dirty rice, and plain white rice,... And you are allergic to rice.
V.
hippie_hunter
06-02-2008, 04:27 PM
Better you than me.....my political lady lovin' is reserved for Ann Coulter and Michelle Malkin...either separately or at the same time...I don't care as they are getting kicked out afterwards anyway
If I bone Hillary, I should get Malkin :cmad:. I have a thing for Asians :yay:
Superman
06-02-2008, 05:34 PM
This is cute. :woot: :supes:
http://img216.imageshack.us/img216/6127/barack20obama20is20not2hw9.jpg
Superman
06-02-2008, 05:51 PM
^...and people wonder how he is portrayed as some kind of saviour. :whatever:Oh good god, It's just a picture. He's not the first to pose like that in front of that thing and he won't be the last. It has NOTHING to do with seeing him as some kind of "saviour". It's just a cute little picture, Nothing more.:whatever:
jaguarr
06-02-2008, 05:53 PM
^...and people wonder how he is portrayed as some kind of saviour. :whatever:
Dude. You take this thread WAY too seriously. Seriously.
jag
Oh good god, It's just a picture. He's not the first to pose like that in front of that thing and he won't be the last. It has NOTHING to do with seeing him as some kind of "saviour". It's just a cute little picture, Nothing more.:whatever:
Dude. You take this thread WAY too seriously. Seriously.
jag
EDIT
kainedamo
06-02-2008, 05:58 PM
^...and people wonder how he is portrayed as some kind of saviour. :whatever:
And people wonder why I think people nitpick every action of Obama :huh:
EDIT: That was a joke? Lame.
jaguarr
06-02-2008, 06:00 PM
Oh good grief, now I can't even joke around. Seriously.
Sorry. There was no discernible difference between your earlier b**ching and moaning and your apparent switch to joking mode. *shrug*
jag
Sorry. There was no discernible difference between your earlier b**ching and moaning and your apparent switch to joking mode. *shrug*
jag
My earlier b*tching? I fall to see how joking about someone's marital problems is funny. I just don't. To me, something like that has no place on these forums. That's just my opinion.
As for the Super-Barack comment, I digress. Actually I'll go back and edit it. That work for you?
BlackLantern
06-02-2008, 06:04 PM
My earlier b*tching? I fall to see how joking about someone's marital problems is funny. I just don't. To me, something like that has no place on these forums. That's just my opinion.
I've noticed your fidelity thing.....I respect it, but I just don't get it....
Tron5000
06-02-2008, 06:06 PM
I don't think she's ever had one, personally (Bill strikes me as a pretty selfish lover), and that's probably a big part of why she's such a crabby b***h.
jag
Of course she has. Why do you think Huma has been hanging around so long?
jaguarr
06-02-2008, 06:10 PM
My earlier b*tching? I fall to see how joking about someone's marital problems is funny. I just don't. To me, something like that has no place on these forums. That's just my opinion.
As for the Super-Barack comment, I digress. Actually I'll go back and edit it. That work for you?
Seriously. Do you think she's like, maybe a C Cup?
Of course she has. Why do you think Huma has been hanging around so long?
:lmao:
jag
kainedamo
06-02-2008, 06:25 PM
My earlier b*tching? I fall to see how joking about someone's marital problems is funny. I just don't. To me, something like that has no place on these forums. That's just my opinion.
As for the Super-Barack comment, I digress. Actually I'll go back and edit it. That work for you?
Someone needs a neck rub :(
BlackLantern
06-02-2008, 06:25 PM
Someone needs a neck rub :(
Hilary?
souvlaki
06-02-2008, 06:28 PM
Seriously. Do you think she's like, maybe a C Cup?
:lmao:
jag
While I can honestly say I've never had a strong desire to stare at her chest long enough to make an accurate assessment, there is no way in hell she is a C-cup. If she is, she hides it well.
Arkady Rossovich
06-02-2008, 08:01 PM
I'll be the first to say it. Obama won,I think..he won from that 10 state victory streak. That is what put him over the top,and the fact that the American people are tired of Bush and want someone new.
hippie_hunter
06-02-2008, 08:18 PM
Obama didn't win from that 10 state victory streak. He won because Clinton underperformed in Indiana and North Carolina. That day was the knockout day for her campaign.
souvlaki
06-02-2008, 09:16 PM
This is cute. :woot: :supes:
http://img216.imageshack.us/img216/6127/barack20obama20is20not2hw9.jpg
I have always loved that picture. It's nice to see a politician not constantly taking themselves too seriously.
Wonder if he's a comic book fan? I'd laugh my ass off if he's a closet comic book nerd.
Tag279
06-02-2008, 09:26 PM
Obama didn't win from that 10 state victory streak. He won because Clinton underperformed in Indiana and North Carolina. That day was the knockout day for her campaign.
Actually it was a 12-state victory streak :cwink:
She lost becase from the beginning she thought she had it wrapped up and she under-estimated her opponent.
souvlaki
06-02-2008, 10:01 PM
Actually it was a 12-state victory streak :cwink:
She lost becase from the beginning she thought she had it wrapped up and she under-estimated her opponent.
Actually, both of you are wrong... it was an 11-contest victory streak.
He won 10 states, and one of the territories.
Tag279
06-02-2008, 10:16 PM
Actually, both of you are wrong... it was an 11-contest victory streak.
He won 10 states, and one of the territories.
I stand corrected :woot:
I forgot about the fact that he came in second in the 12TH contest and won the 13TH succeeding contest
souvlaki
06-02-2008, 10:21 PM
I stand corrected :woot:
I forgot about the fact that he came in second in the 12TH contest and won the 13TH succeeding contest
Well, now that you mention it, it depends on how you look at Texas. I guess, if you want to be fair, he won 11 1/2 primaries in a row.
Tag279
06-02-2008, 10:26 PM
Souvlaki I was thinking contest not so much primaries proper He came in second in the Texas primary and then won the caucus that night.
Didn't he end up with more delegates than Hill by the time the two step was over?
souvlaki
06-02-2008, 10:45 PM
Souvlaki I was thinking contest not so much primaries proper He came in second in the Texas primary and then won the caucus that night.
Disn't he end up with more delegates than Hill by the time the two step was over?
Yeah, that's why I said 11 1/2 primaries in a row. When everything was said and done, Hillary won the popular vote, but Barrack ended up with more delegates.
Spider-Bite
06-03-2008, 04:18 AM
Yeah, that's why I said 11 1/2 primaries in a row. When everything was said and done, Hillary won the popular vote, but Barrack ended up with more delegates.
she only wins the popular vote when you include two debacle elections, and Hillary gets all the votes from MI and Obama gets none, as if that's how the elction would have played out, had it been done correctly in the first place.
Superman
06-03-2008, 06:49 AM
Just wondering, Have you guys talked about this already?
BjYpkvcmog0
:huh:
Tag279
06-03-2008, 07:03 AM
Supes, I think it was mentioned but not really discussed; and I think it's interesting that Pfleiger got constant replay and this didn't.
But then again it's Fox. :whatever:
Fox makes pretty good movies but sucky news :woot:
kainedamo
06-03-2008, 08:19 AM
Just wondering, Have you guys talked about this already?
BjYpkvcmog0
:huh:
Did she say "both if we could"?? :huh:
kane9321
06-03-2008, 08:30 AM
mmmm
kane9321
06-03-2008, 08:32 AM
This is cute. :woot: :supes:
http://img216.imageshack.us/img216/6127/barack20obama20is20not2hw9.jpg
Even though I hate superman....I want this as a poster to put on my wall at home
Darthphere
06-03-2008, 08:51 AM
Do you hate Superman because he can kick Goku's ass?
kane9321
06-03-2008, 11:03 AM
Oh Darth lets not get into a supes/goku battle. I just dont like superman. Know what would be even better..if obama was posing in front of spidey...nothing would be cooler than that
Just wondering, Have you guys talked about this already?
BjYpkvcmog0
:huh:
You've got to love the ignorance that is FOX News. :whatever:http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon13.gif
Excel
06-03-2008, 12:56 PM
The Associated Press: Obama has "effectively clinched"
the nomination
Yesssssss!!!!
http://joshsmithonwpf.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/celebrate.jpg
Its happened! Obama has WON the nomination! But we only half way there and aint even entereted the real fight. Love him or hate him, you have to be relieved this entire thing is over. Look for a Clinton concession speech first followed by an Obama victory speech.
AP is both right and wrong at the moment. For all intents and purposes, Obama has clinched the nomination. That being said, Terry McAullife claims Clinton will not suspend her campaign tonight. Pledged super delegates are not official until the convention. They can say who they intend to vote for, but it means nothing until they vote ion August. Therefore, I do not think Clinton will suspend her campaign. Especially if she does continue to lead in the popular vote (which as of now, she does). She has an argument to make at the convention. So long as the argument is there, I doubt she will drop out.
Darthphere
06-03-2008, 01:10 PM
It ain't over til the lady in the pantsuit sings.
Darthphere
06-03-2008, 01:11 PM
On another note, gotta love how "effectively clinched" translates into Obama is the official candidate to Excel. How sad.
Darthphere
06-03-2008, 01:16 PM
it never ends.
This is just the beginning....
This has to end!!! Please god, let it end!!!
On another note, gotta love how "effectively clinched" translates into Obama is the official candidate to Excel. How sad.
That's Ex for you! :oldrazz:
Excel
06-03-2008, 01:22 PM
That's Ex for you! :oldrazz:
It aint "official" till Agust, but this is as close as itll get.
Comicfilmer
06-03-2008, 01:28 PM
I'm going to go out on a limb and say that Hillary actually will conceed defeat at some point within the next few days, if not tonight, following the results. She needs to save face at this point if she hopes to run again in a future presidential election. To drag out this fight (which she doesn't really have any realistic chance of winning) all the way to the convention and cause that much of an uproar is really going to hurt her political future. She's already pushing the limits. It's time to step down and step back. Barack Obama has bested her.
kainedamo
06-03-2008, 01:29 PM
What's the latest delegate numbers? How many delegates till Obama gets the nomination?
PS: If Hillary doesn't drop out after this primary surely everyone should see her for the selfish ass she is.
souvlaki
06-03-2008, 01:40 PM
AP is both right and wrong at the moment. For all intents and purposes, Obama has clinched the nomination. That being said, Terry McAullife claims Clinton will not suspend her campaign tonight. Pledged super delegates are not official until the convention. They can say who they intend to vote for, but it means nothing until they vote ion August. Therefore, I do not think Clinton will suspend her campaign. Especially if she does continue to lead in the popular vote (which as of now, she does). She has an argument to make at the convention. So long as the argument is there, I doubt she will drop out.
I really am seeing more and more evidence to the contrary. She asked all of her fundraisers to attend her speech tonight in NY, she has cancelled all plans after tomorrow, she's supposedly been in talks with Obama the last few days concerning paying off her debt, Bill Clinton's comments yesterday, and just the fact that it is very uncommon to give an election night speech anywhere outside of the states voting, especially given it's being given in her home state... not saying she WILL concede. But I wouldn't be shocked if she does. Besides, Terry McAullife, if I remember correctly, said that over the weekend. My guess is they had a change of heart since Sunday. Probably because after talks with Obama, she's getting whatever it is she was after. Or Bill finally had a heart to heart with her and told her it was time for her to concede. Or maybe she just wanted to see this through until the end. If the true answer is that last one, then I completely respect that. I'd like to think Hillary just stayed in because she wanted every vote counted.
souvlaki
06-03-2008, 01:45 PM
What's the latest delegate numbers? How many delegates till Obama gets the nomination?
PS: If Hillary doesn't drop out after this primary surely everyone should see her for the selfish ass she is.
He needs 28.5
What's the latest delegate numbers? How many delegates till Obama gets the nomination?
PS: If Hillary doesn't drop out after this primary surely everyone should see her for the selfish ass she is.
Obama only needs 31, Clinton needs 202.
It aint "official" till Agust, but this is as close as itll get.
Ain't isn't a word and it is hard to take you seriously in any kind of intelligent debate when you cannot even use proper English.
souvlaki
06-03-2008, 01:49 PM
So also, apparently a person that was privy to a conversation between Harold Ickes and a Clinton super delegate today quotes Harold Ickes as saying, "It's over. Her end will be gracious". Or something to that effect.
I really would like to see her bow out gracefully instead of fighting to the convention. I would gain a lot of respect for her that I lost the last few months if she bowed out gracefully as opposed to being dragged out of the convention kicking and screaming.
Comicfilmer
06-03-2008, 01:50 PM
Jimmy Carter is now stating that he will be officially endorsing Barack Obama this evening.
souvlaki
06-03-2008, 01:51 PM
Obama only needs 31, Clinton needs 202.
Nah... the number just changed. A few more people came out today. I know Barbara Boxer, the California Senator was one of them.
Ha, edit... just got another one. 27.5 delegates to go.
Comicfilmer
06-03-2008, 01:52 PM
Ain't isn't a word and it is hard to take you seriously in any kind of intelligent debate when you cannot even use proper English.
"Ain't" has been recognized in every major dictionary for some time now, so I would contend that it is indeed a word. How is it not?
I've been hearing that he needs 35 all day today. Hmm...
So also, apparently a person that was privy to a conversation between Harold Ickes and a Clinton super delegate today quotes Harold Ickes as saying, "It's over. Her end will be gracious". Or something to that effect.
I really would like to see her bow out gracefully instead of fighting to the convention. I would gain a lot of respect for her that I lost the last few months if she bowed out gracefully as opposed to being dragged out of the convention kicking and screaming.
An Obama supporter suggesting he would gain respect if he bowed out. Suprise, suprise. :cwink:
I see her going to the convention as a smart move. Especially if she maintains a lead in the popular vote, no matter how small. Plus she has the blue collar and elderly vote which are the most important demographics in this election. For her to quit now is like a football team who is down by 6 just taking a knee with 3 seconds on the clock as opposed to trying their last desperate pass. Hillary should try her final hail mary. Like her or hate her, one must concede that she has a valid claim as to why she is more electable. She isn't going to get another chance. She has nothing to lose. You can say that "mess up her legacy" crap all you want, but no one will remember or care about this in 4 years. She isn't going to lose her senate seat over this, it won't taint Slick Willy's legacy. She should make her last pass.
An Obama supporter suggesting he would gain respect if he bowed out. Suprise, suprise. :cwink:
I see her going to the convention as a smart move. Especially if she maintains a lead in the popular vote, no matter how small. Plus she has the blue collar and elderly vote which are the most important demographics in this election. For her to quit now is like a football team who is down by 6 just taking a knee with 3 seconds on the clock as opposed to trying their last desperate pass. Hillary should try her final hail mary. Like her or hate her, one must concede that she has a valid claim as to why she is more electable. She isn't going to get another chance. She has nothing to lose. You can say that "mess up her legacy" crap all you want, but no one will remember or care about this in 4 years. She isn't going to lose her senate seat over this, it won't taint Slick Willy's legacy. She should make her last pass.
I couldn't agree with you more Matt.
"Ain't" has been recognized in every major dictionary for some time now, so I would contend that it is indeed a word. How is it not?
It is considered nonstandard English, and is not appropriate for any kind of intellectual discussion. Furthermore, ain't is a contraction of "am not," therefore Excel said "It am not over til August." Bad English.
kainedamo
06-03-2008, 02:04 PM
You're both nuts :huh:
souvlaki
06-03-2008, 02:04 PM
An Obama supporter suggesting he would gain respect if he bowed out. Suprise, suprise. :cwink:
I see her going to the convention as a smart move. Especially if she maintains a lead in the popular vote, no matter how small. Plus she has the blue collar and elderly vote which are the most important demographics in this election. For her to quit now is like a football team who is down by 6 just taking a knee with 3 seconds on the clock as opposed to trying their last desperate pass. Hillary should try her final hail mary. Like her or hate her, one must concede that she has a valid claim as to why she is more electable. She isn't going to get another chance. She has nothing to lose. You can say that "mess up her legacy" crap all you want, but no one will remember or care about this in 4 years. She isn't going to lose her senate seat over this, it won't taint Slick Willy's legacy. She should make her last pass.
No, I would gain respect for her for knowing bowing out gracefully, and knowing when the fight is over.
Let's be honest here, Matt... you want this to go to the convention because it extends this back and forth bickering, gives McCain a better chance in November, and means one of your preferences can run in 2012. You know as well as I that regardless of whatever argument she has, she likely will not win even if she does take it to the convention, and if anything, it will just make matter worse, and it will lead to the Democrats likely losing this year.
You're both nuts :huh:
How are Matt and I crazy because we think she should remain in the race if she holds onto the popular vote lead? :huh:
No, I would gain respect for her for knowing bowing out gracefully, and knowing when the fight is over.
Let's be honest here, Matt... you want this to go to the convention because it extends this back and forth bickering, gives McCain a better chance in November, and means one of your preferences can run in 2012. You know as well as I that regardless of whatever argument she has, she likely will not win even if she does take it to the convention, and if anything, it will just make matter worse, and it will lead to the Democrats likely losing this year.
She has a valid argument. The election is in the hands of the super delegates. If the convention is meant to be a place where candidates make their arguments to the SDs (and it is, atleast theoretically), then she should go to August. If she does maintain the popular vote lead and is winning the two most important demographics, then why should she not go to the convention? Why shouldn't the super delegates make the more electable candidate their nominee? I think your biases are blinding you here souv, because it seems to me you are saying she should quit, for the sake of quitting even if her argument is right.
kainedamo
06-03-2008, 02:09 PM
I keep hearing the Clinton campaign claim they have the popular vote. On what dimension do they have the popular vote? It's not a legitamite claim. Even if figures somewhere can be twisted to say she has the "popular vote", it doesn't matter - Obama is ahead in delegates and could possibly reach the magic number very soon.
Hillary cannot win. To say it is a smart move on her part to keep things going is sheer lunacy.
I keep hearing the Clinton campaign claim they have the popular vote. On what dimension do they have the popular vote? It's not a legitamite claim. Even if figures somewhere can be twisted to say she has the "popular vote", it doesn't matter - Obama is ahead in delegates and could possibly reach the magic number very soon.
Hillary cannot win. To say it is a smart move on her part to keep things going is sheer lunacy.
Actually Hippie presented the numbers that pretty much proved that she does in fact have the popular vote lead. It's a page or so back.
(It all depends on how tonight turns out.)
I keep hearing the Clinton campaign claim they have the popular vote. On what dimension do they have the popular vote? It's not a legitamite claim. Even if figures somewhere can be twisted to say she has the "popular vote", it doesn't matter - Obama is ahead in delegates and could possibly reach the magic number very soon.
Because she does. :huh: Look at Hippie_Hunter's numbers. Right now, she has the lead in the popular vote of about 200 thousand votes.
Hillary cannot win. To say it is a smart move on her part to keep things going is sheer lunacy.
It is a smart move to argue her case at the convention if she has a valid argument, and at this current juncture, she does.
kainedamo
06-03-2008, 02:14 PM
Trying to find Hippie_Hunter's numbers. What page they on?
kainedamo
06-03-2008, 02:15 PM
I've looked three pages back can't find anything. Maybe he posted it in a different thread?
moraldeficiency
06-03-2008, 02:16 PM
I keep hearing the Clinton campaign claim they have the popular vote. On what dimension do they have the popular vote? It's not a legitamite claim. Even if figures somewhere can be twisted to say she has the "popular vote", it doesn't matter - Obama is ahead in delegates and could possibly reach the magic number very soon.
Hillary cannot win. To say it is a smart move on her part to keep things going is sheer lunacy.
Check out slate's video about that, it's pretty damn funny:
http://www.slatev.com/
kainedamo
06-03-2008, 02:20 PM
Check out slate's video about that, it's pretty damn funny:
http://www.slatev.com/
Yeah thats what I thought. "If we exclude this, if we count the state where Obama wasn't on the ballot, and the state where no one was allowed to campaign, and exclude these other things, then I have the popular vote! YAY!"
Trying to find Hippie_Hunter's numbers. What page they on?
That's a good question. I really thought that they were in this thread. But alot of the threads have become quite blended over the course of the last few weeks. You could always look through Hippie's post history. It might be less of a hunt that way.
moraldeficiency
06-03-2008, 02:22 PM
Yeah thats what I thought. "If we exclude this, if we count the state where Obama wasn't on the ballot, and the state where no one was allowed to campaign, and exclude these other things, then I have the popular vote! YAY!"
and count puerto rico, don't forget that demographic, it's a lynchpin to the popular vote theory. 17 million strong and growing, probably more once the canadian votes are tallied.
It has nothing to do with excluding anyone.
If you count all the states (including Florida and Michigan, which have now been included by the DNC...so the "they aren't relevant" argument is now moot), all of the territories, and even include the 30 thousand Obama write-ins for Michigan, than Clinton leads by 200 thousand votes.
and count puerto rico, don't forget that demographic, it's a lynchpin to the popular vote theory. 17 million strong and growing, probably more once the canadian votes are tallied.
Puerto Rico votes in the primary - therefore IT COUNTS MD.
souvlaki
06-03-2008, 02:24 PM
She has a valid argument. The election is in the hands of the super delegates. If the convention is meant to be a place where candidates make their arguments to the SDs (and it is, atleast theoretically), then she should go to August. If she does maintain the popular vote lead and is winning the two most important demographics, then why should she not go to the convention? Why shouldn't the super delegates make the more electable candidate their nominee? I think your biases are blinding you here souv, because it seems to me you are saying she should quit, for the sake of quitting even if her argument is right.
She has what she considers a valid argument, but I don't think any of the super delegates will buy the argument. If they were, she'd still be getting super delegates. And the numbers posted yesterday don't prove anything as I've seen probably five different popular vote tallies in the last few days. This just isn't a good election to make a popular vote argument as there is no way to truly know what the popular vote was. Blame caucuses and Michigan for that.
And I am saying she should quit for the good of the party. Personally, I care far more about McCain not winning in November than I care for either candidate, so in that respect, no, I'm not necessarily blinded by my support for Obama. I may support Obama, but the idea of four years of a Republican in the White House is of far more concern to me than who the Democratic nominee is. And in the end I think Hillary feels the same way, even if her supporters may not.
You may not believe me when I say this, but if the roles were reversed, and Obama were in the same position as Clinton right now I'd be saying the same thing, especially if Obama was talking about taking it to the convention. Just trust me on this one, Clinton is not going to take it to the convention. She's too smart of a politician to make a move like that. Even if she has a winning argument, sways over 200 superdelegates toward her, or wins on a second ballot, she's effectively destroyed her chances of winning in November and alienated half the party. I think the same will be true if she takes it to the convention and still loses, she will kill Obama's chances. I really think all of the candidates realize the only way the Democrats will win in November is if this ends now, so in the end it comes down to whether this race for Clinton is more about her, or her party. I would like to give her the benefit of the doubt and say it's the latter.
kainedamo
06-03-2008, 02:25 PM
It has nothing to do with excluding anyone.
If you count all the states (including Florida and Michigan, which have now been included by the DNC...so the "they aren't relevant" argument is now moot), all of the territories, and even include the 30 thousand Obama write-ins for Michigan, than Clinton leads by 200 thousand votes.
What part of "Obama was not on the ballot" do you not understand? :huh: If you're making the point that Clinton is more electable, then you have to take that into consideration. Why? Because people will point it out reglardless of the DNC decision.
kainedamo
06-03-2008, 02:26 PM
Puerto Rico votes in the primary - therefore IT COUNTS MD.
They don't vote in the presidential election though. That needs to be taken into consideration, seeing as both you and Matt are making the case Clinton is more electable.
moraldeficiency
06-03-2008, 02:28 PM
Puerto Rico votes in the primary - therefore IT COUNTS MD.
Yes, but if your case is for this popular vote and how it lines up with how the US citizens will vote then no it does not.
If we're actually going by primary rules then you have to go by all of them which clinton kinda picks and chooses. That 17 million number is a pure fabrication, that's why she can't find any staticians to back up her claim. When you have to rely on one of her talking heads to explain magical math to you, and you choose to believe that then really you've already made up your mind, and you're desperately clinging to anything other than the obvious.
Well Souv, we've once again reached one of our classic agree to disagree situations. I personally think the good of the party argument is a load. The party should simply be a tool in which to serve the people. Not an entity in and of itself. 50 % of the party who are Clinton's supporters should not be expected to just fall in line and vote D. That is what has led to both parties becoming corrupt institutions.
souvlaki
06-03-2008, 02:31 PM
And considering that Clinton said today she is open to being Obama's VP leads me to believe she knows it's over. She would never had made that concession a week ago.
What part of "Obama was not on the ballot" do you not understand? :huh: If you're making the point that Clinton is more electable, then you have to take that into consideration. Why? Because people will point it out reglardless of the DNC decision.
By choice. Obama for all intents and purposes forfeited Michigan. He took his name off the ballot and then used political allies and campaign workers to block a re-vote (a re-vote which was approved by the DNC). That is his fault, plain and simple.
They don't vote in the presidential election though. That needs to be taken into consideration, seeing as both you and Matt are making the case Clinton is more electable.
I realize that, hopefully that will be remedied. But the point remains, they do have a say in choosing the nominee. Just because they cannot vote for president doesn't mean that their say is any less valid.
Yes, but if your case is for this popular vote and how it lines up with how the US citizens will vote then no it does not.
If we're actually going by primary rules then you have to go by all of them which clinton kinda picks and chooses. That 17 million number is a pure fabrication, that's why she can't find any staticians to back up her claim. When you have to rely on one of her talking heads to explain magical math to you, and you choose to believe that then really you've already made up your mind, and you're desperately clinging to anything other than the obvious.
My point is that when you count everything she is in the lead by 200,000 votes. That's just a fact. That's not me desperately clinging to anything. I've never said who I support.
Well Souv, we've once again reached one of our classic agree to disagree situations. I personally think the good of the party argument is a load. The party should simply be a tool in which to serve the people. Not an entity in and of itself. 50 % of the party who are Clinton's supporters should not be expected to just fall in line and vote D. That is what has led to both parties becoming corrupt institutions.
And considering that Clinton said today she is open to being Obama's VP leads me to believe she knows it's over. She would never had made that concession a week ago.
I'm growing more and more convinced that the only way to truly unite the party is to have them both on the ticket. I'm not seeing any other way to resolve this.
kainedamo
06-03-2008, 02:37 PM
By choice. Obama for all intents and purposes forfeited Michigan. He took his name off the ballot and then used political allies and campaign workers to block a re-vote (a re-vote which was approved by the DNC). That is his fault, plain and simple.
The people to blame for the mess are the people in Michigan that decided to break the rules. :huh:
And guess what, come election time, there will be TWO names on the Michigan ballot :wow:
souvlaki
06-03-2008, 02:38 PM
Well Souv, we've once again reached one of our classic agree to disagree situations. I personally think the good of the party argument is a load. The party should simply be a tool in which to serve the people. Not an entity in and of itself. 50 % of the party who are Clinton's supporters should not be expected to just fall in line and vote D. That is what has led to both parties becoming corrupt institutions.
If the Republicans were still fighting for the nomination, or if the bickering back and forth was actually helping, and not hurting the Democratic candidate's chances I wouldn't have a problem in the least with it going to the convention. There are serious flaws in this election just simply due to how early it started, how long it dragged on, and how fast McCain received the nomination. If this primary started in June, and ended in August right before the convention I'd be all for a final decision at the convention. But in this particular election taking it to the convention will make it more difficult, not less, for Obama to convinced Clinton's supporters to support him. I don't think they should just fall in line and vote for the candidate with a D next to them. But I think Obama should at least be given the chance to win their vote, same as how McCain was given the chance to win back the people that refused to vote for him back in March. John McCain has been saying whatever wacky thing pops into his head for the last two months now, and he's gotten away with it because the Democratic Party is too busy bickering back and forth. That needs to end.
kainedamo
06-03-2008, 02:39 PM
I realize that, hopefully that will be remedied. But the point remains, they do have a say in choosing the nominee. Just because they cannot vote for president doesn't mean that their say is any less valid.
True. But as it stands, the people of Puerto Rico don't make Hillary more electable.
If the Republicans were still fighting for the nomination, or if the bickering back and forth was actually helping, and not hurting the Democratic candidate's chances I wouldn't have a problem in the least with it going to the convention. There are serious flaws in this election just simply due to how early it started, how long it dragged on, and how fast McCain received the nomination. If this primary started in June, and ended in August right before the convention I'd be all for a final decision at the convention. But in this particular election taking it to the convention will make it more difficult, not less, for Obama to convinced Clinton's supporters to support him. I don't think they should just fall in line and vote for the candidate with a D next to them. But I think Obama should at least be given the chance to win their vote, same as how McCain was given the chance to win back the people that refused to vote for him back in March. John McCain has been saying whatever wacky thing pops into his head for the last two months now, and he's gotten away with it because the Democratic Party is too busy bickering back and forth. That needs to end.
John McCain will get his fair share of Democratic face time, trust me on that one.
souvlaki
06-03-2008, 02:43 PM
I'm growing more and more convinced that the only way to truly unite the party is to have them both on the ticket. I'm not seeing any other way to resolve this.
Possibly. Personally, I think it might hurt him as much as help him. I still don't know how I'd feel if he picks her. I liked the rumor floating around of her being Secretary of Health. That's been her big thing this whole election, and she'd be a great choice for that position.
souvlaki
06-03-2008, 02:44 PM
John McCain will get his fair share of Democratic face time, trust me on that one.
But Obama will not get the chance to win over his opponent's supporters in the same way McCain had the chance to do so if this goes to the convention. Going to the convention helps neither candidate.
Possibly. Personally, I think it might hurt him as much as help him. I still don't know how I'd feel if he picks her. I liked the rumor floating around of her being Secretary of Health. That's been her big thing this whole election, and she'd be a great choice for that position.
I see it only hurting him among the die-hards who absolutely loathe Clinton. Point is, she has to get something substantial out of this or her supporters (aka the other 50 percent of the Democratic Party) are going to feel slided.
But Obama will not get the chance to win over his opponent's supporters in the same way McCain had the chance to do so if this goes to the convention. Going to the convention helps neither candidate.
I'm just saying that McCain will get his due. He hasn't really been getting away with a whole lot though. The DNC has been airing their own fair share of ads attacking him. And many have called McCain on things that he has said or done recently.
moraldeficiency
06-03-2008, 02:52 PM
I realize that, hopefully that will be remedied. But the point remains, they do have a say in choosing the nominee. Just because they cannot vote for president doesn't mean that their say is any less valid.
My point is that when you count everything she is in the lead by 200,000 votes. That's just a fact. That's not me desperately clinging to anything. I've never said who I support.
I agree, and that's why I'm really waiting to see how the canadians vote as well.
I wasn't actually considering whom you're supporting, I was speaking as to the craziness that sticking to these magical numbers that require a planetary alignment and can only be calculated using ancient secret mayan techniques. People actually saying clinton won this, through sorcery mainly, are kinda kidding themselves because they want it to be true. Whatever your reasons, there isn't a analyst, pollster or mathmatician not on clinton's payroll that agrees she's won anything.
Now I don't count Michigan or Florida at all because quite frankly they cheated, defied the DNC rules and just did whatever they wanted. It takes a special place like the US to actually cry foul and say it's unfair that people who cheated don't get to count. I'm sure almost (I said almost!) everyone upset over Michigan and Florida not being counted wouldn't be saying **** if it was the other way around. In my personal and most humble opinion if you break the rules and cheat, what you did shouldn't count. And Puerto Rico does count but not in the general election so if you want to count delegates as per DNC rules then I agree, but you really can't count them in the popular vote with a straight face.
hippie_hunter
06-03-2008, 02:55 PM
What part of "Obama was not on the ballot" do you not understand? :huh: If you're making the point that Clinton is more electable, then you have to take that into consideration. Why? Because people will point it out reglardless of the DNC decision.
Obama took himself off that ballot and you just can't discredit people who took the time and voted for Hillary Clinton. Excluding people who voted for her in Michigan is the same as Hillary Clinton excluding people who voted for Barack Obama in caucus states and other contests she lost.
With all the contests put together with no exclusions whatsoever that both the Clinton and Obama camps like to do, Clinton has a .5% lead in the popular vote over Barack Obama.
And Michigan's contest was legitimized by the DNC as well despite the fact that Obama took his name off the ballot. Not only that but he also blocked the Michigan revote that force the DNC to recognize the faulty contest that didn't have his name on the ballot.
Chris B
06-03-2008, 02:59 PM
I'm growing more and more convinced that the only way to truly unite the party is to have them both on the ticket. I'm not seeing any other way to resolve this.
I think he would be better off going with one of her supporters. Someone who represents her wing of the party, but doesn't have the baggage that Hillary would bring.
hippie_hunter
06-03-2008, 03:01 PM
The people to blame for the mess are the people in Michigan that decided to break the rules. :huh:
No they aren't. Michigan's government decided to hold the election against DNC rules, not Michigan's people.
However, there was going to be a re-do primary in Michigan that followed the exact terms the DNC demanded for them to be seated normally in the convention. Obama however sent his lackies to prevent this from happening because it was a contest he was going to lose and would have increased the number of delegates necessary to win the nomination. His campaign was also very uncooperative with Michigan to set a new primary.
Because of that the DNC was forced to recognize the results of Michigan's faulty primary.
And guess what, come election time, there will be TWO names on the Michigan ballot :wow:
There was more than just Hillary Clinton on the ballot. Chris Dodd and Dennis Kucinich were on the ballot as well.
souvlaki
06-03-2008, 03:03 PM
I see it only hurting him among the die-hards who absolutely loathe Clinton. Point is, she has to get something substantial out of this or her supporters (aka the other 50 percent of the Democratic Party) are going to feel slided.
I'm just saying that McCain will get his due. He hasn't really been getting away with a whole lot though. The DNC has been airing their own fair share of ads attacking him. And many have called McCain on things that he has said or done recently.
Do you think her supporters would feel slighted if she were to come out in complete support of Obama tomorrow, and campaigned for him, and said he earned the nomination?
Yeah, McCain has, of late been called on his dumb statements, but thats because Obama, for the first time, has been in a position to actually look beyond the primary. But the negatives about McCain in the media do not even come close to getting the same coverage as the negatives discussed about both the Democratic candidates because they've been in the spotlight as long as they have.
Y'know, screw it... I was against it at first, but I am fine with Clinton as a VP choice now if it means all the bickering ends. I'm sick of democrats fighting with democrats. It's getting old, and I just dont want this fighting to continue, especially if Clinton supporters feel entitled to continue supporting Clinton because of the popular vote tally. I'd much rather risk Clinton being the Jim Prescott to his David Palmer (I know you a 24 fan Matt, so before you say anything, no, I'm not comparing Obama to David Palmer... I dont like him THAT much) if it means I don't have to worry about dealing with four more years with a Bush sympathizer, or a VP choice that may take over for McCain at some point that might once again push their religious right agenda.
Nivek
06-03-2008, 03:04 PM
I'm just happy this nonsence is over with. Go Obama.
souvlaki
06-03-2008, 03:07 PM
Haha, although I can just imagine the horror on Matt and JMan's face if an Obama/Clinton ticket were to win in 2008.
kane9321
06-03-2008, 03:11 PM
I'm growing more and more convinced that the only way to truly unite the party is to have them both on the ticket. I'm not seeing any other way to resolve this.
ITS THE ONLY WAY:woot:
GO OBAMA/HILLARY
kainedamo
06-03-2008, 03:12 PM
What website is most up to date with the current delegate positions?
rdh007
06-03-2008, 03:12 PM
By choice. Obama for all intents and purposes forfeited Michigan. He took his name off the ballot and then used political allies and campaign workers to block a re-vote (a re-vote which was approved by the DNC). That is his fault, plain and simple.
Or, he followed the rules and she was trying to pick up cheap votes which she did in the end.
souvlaki
06-03-2008, 03:20 PM
What website is most up to date with the current delegate positions?
MSNBC has a counter up on their screen right now saying 27.5 away for Obama, and 198 for Clinton. We know he will pick up at least one more after the primary tonight as Jimmy Carter said he will endorse Obama after those contests this evening.
souvlaki
06-03-2008, 03:22 PM
Or, he followed the rules and she was trying to pick up cheap votes which she did in the end.
To play devils advocates, because I hate to see Matt repeat himself again, he pulled his name from the ballot by choice.
I still think that because Hillary was the only choice on the ballot it voids that popular vote as there is no true way of knowing the popular vote in that state had Obama been on the ballot... but I'm personally sick to death of that argument. We've been arguing it for like three pages now, and at this point the argument is just going nowhere.
Do you think her supporters would feel slighted if she were to come out in complete support of Obama tomorrow, and campaigned for him, and said he earned the nomination?
I think her supporters would largely not buy into it. Both campaigns have very passionate supporters. And while I think her "endorsement" of Obama wouldn't help ease the tensions, a VP spot certainly would.
Yeah, McCain has, of late been called on his dumb statements, but thats because Obama, for the first time, has been in a position to actually look beyond the primary. But the negatives about McCain in the media do not even come close to getting the same coverage as the negatives discussed about both the Democratic candidates because they've been in the spotlight as long as they have.
The DNC has done their fare share of attacking him.
Y'know, screw it... I was against it at first, but I am fine with Clinton as a VP choice now if it means all the bickering ends. I'm sick of democrats fighting with democrats. It's getting old, and I just dont want this fighting to continue, especially if Clinton supporters feel entitled to continue supporting Clinton because of the popular vote tally. I'd much rather risk Clinton being the Jim Prescott to his David Palmer (I know you a 24 fan Matt, so before you say anything, no, I'm not comparing Obama to David Palmer... I dont like him THAT much) if it means I don't have to worry about dealing with four more years with a Bush sympathizer, or a VP choice that may take over for McCain at some point that might once again push their religious right agenda.
I was about call for everyone to grabd some rocks and prepare for a stoning. Obama is now where near being in the same league as David Palmer! I'm just think Clinton as VP is the only viable option for Obama to unite the party. They both cater to opposite ends of the party.
Haha, although I can just imagine the horror on Matt and JMan's face if an Obama/Clinton ticket were to win in 2008.
That would be quite amusing, after everything that has happened.
ITS THE ONLY WAY:woot:
GO OBAMA/HILLARY
I honestly believe that Kane.
kainedamo
06-03-2008, 03:27 PM
Are there more votes to be counted from today?
souvlaki
06-03-2008, 03:47 PM
I was about call for everyone to grabd some rocks and prepare for a stoning. Obama is now where near being in the same league as David Palmer!
Nah... David Palmer is my favorite fictional President. I'm not about to make comparisons between any modern politician and the awesomeness that is David Palmer.
Nah... David Palmer is my favorite fictional President. I'm not about to make comparisons between any modern politician and the awesomeness that is David Palmer.
I would certainly hope not! I wouldn't have to call everyone to arms for a stoning! :hehe:
souvlaki
06-03-2008, 03:51 PM
I would certainly hope not! I wouldn't have to call everyone to arms for a stoning! :hehe:
How about Wayne Palmer? Relatively inexperienced, but overall he had good intentions.
Hopefully an Obama presidency would be better than season 6 of 24 though.
Tron5000
06-03-2008, 03:51 PM
Nah... David Palmer is my favorite fictional President. I'm not about to make comparisons between any modern politician and the awesomeness that is David Palmer.
Best fictional president ever? Not even close.
http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f206/harrelson2131/006819_41.jpg
Tron5000
06-03-2008, 03:52 PM
How about Wayne Palmer? Relatively inexperienced, but overall he had good intentions.
Hopefully an Obama presidency would be better than season 6 of 24 though.
Yeah. Hopefully we won't have any nukes exploded on US soil. Wouldn't bet against that, though.
How about Wayne Palmer? Relatively inexperienced, but overall he had good intentions.
Hopefully an Obama presidency would be better than season 6 of 24 though.
That's probably fair.
(I didn't particularly care for Wayne Palmer though! :cwink:)
kainedamo
06-03-2008, 03:53 PM
Yeah. Hopefully we won't have any nukes exploded on US soil. Wouldn't bet against that, though.
Come on. Get out of that cave, frightened one. What logical reason do you have for thinking Obama in power puts the US in danger? Believe me, Bush puts your country in danger. That man is the most hated man in the world right now.
kal-el2006
06-03-2008, 03:54 PM
Anyone else think Blitzer is gonna cry when obama reaches the magic number?
souvlaki
06-03-2008, 03:54 PM
Best fictional president ever? Not even close.
http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f206/harrelson2131/006819_41.jpg
I'm pretty fond of this fictional president personally:
http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/simpsons/images/thumb/5/55/Kang.jpg/140px-Kang.jpg
But my vote still goes for David Palmer.
Anyone else think Blitzer is gonna cry when obama reaches the magic number?
I wouldn't be surprised at all if that happened on all the major networks except FOX.
The media's love affair with Obama will have finally paid off! http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon13.gif
kal-el2006
06-03-2008, 03:57 PM
25.5 to go according to msnbc
jaguarr
06-03-2008, 03:58 PM
No one is going to buy an Obama/Clinton ticket. There's far too much bad blood between the two and way too much damage done from Clinton's camp to make that work let alone make it believable to the voting public. Besides, I don't think Obama is willing to let her have that; she clearly does not fit with his vision of how things should roll and he, possibly rightfully so, would be wondering every single moment when she'd find a way to have him bumped off so she could take over the Oval Office.
jag
souvlaki
06-03-2008, 03:59 PM
That's probably fair.
(I didn't particularly care for Wayne Palmer though! :cwink:)
I went back and forth with him. I didn't like him in season 3, but thought he kicked ass in season 5. I didn't mind him in season 6. Personally, I didn't like any of the recurring characters in season 6 with exception to Jack and Bill Buchanon. All of the other characters from past seasons pissed me off for the most part.
kal-el2006
06-03-2008, 04:00 PM
its really sickning how the media is still pushing for obama/clinton ticket...jesus let the man make up his OWN mind
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.