Obama Thread (Merged x6)

[Matt]

Why do you support him? Really, I want to know. This entire Obama craze has been totally lost on me and I am curious as to what the appeal is. In all honesty, I also wonder, how many Obama supporters will come out and say they are voting for him on the grounds of him being black? (which I consider that just as bad as not voting for him on the grounds of his being black.) I ask because it seems he has taken a substantial lead in Iowa and it seems to that he lacks any kind of platform (sure, he will give vague ideas, but has never given a practical way to fund or carry out these grand schemes of his). He has no experience outside of 3 years in national politics, so that seems to me to be the equivilant of handing the reigns of a fortune 500 company to a CEO who has spent a few years in marketing. I can give a list of reasons why I support Richardson...I really wonder how many Obama voters can do the same (without using words like "He is fresh blood" or "He's an honest respectable guy....I know even though I've never met him"...y'know, using pseudo-reasons to cover up the fact that they are voting for him to show how 'liberal' they are)?

Note: I am not saying all Obama supporters are voting for him because he is charasmatic or black or trendy. I am simply asking to know why most people are supporting him.

[Kel]

I think (and I'm not a Obama supporter, I'm still watching and listening) but I think the main reason is, out of all of the candidates (whether they are Republican, Democrat, whatever) he is the one that truly looks to bring "change" to Washington.......I'm not sure how much that will play out if he does in fact become president......BUT he is the one that tends to give that feeling to people......AND RIGHT NOW......above the war, above the economy, above foreign relations....PEOPLE WANT MASSIVE CHANGE......

They are not happy with the Legislative Branch, they are not happy with the Executive Branch, and they aren't sure about the Judicial Branch of our government at the moment.....they see him as being the one to bring a positive change to all of those things.........he hasn't given specifics to that change, but apparently people aren't needing specifics right now.

[Matt]

Assuming you are right Kel (and you may very well be)...I must ask, why hasn't Paul's candidacy picked up more steam. Or Kucinich. I mean, they seem like the two most likely to actually change things.

[Kel]

Assuming you are right Kel (and you may very well be)...I must ask, why hasn't Paul's candidacy picked up more steam. Or Kucinich. I mean, they seem like the two most likely to actually change things.


He is in the wrong party.....and that has been, and will be his downfall....that speaks louder than anything he has to say......

[Matt]

If Ron Paul were a democrat, do you believe he would be winning?

[\S/JcDc\S/]

I don't think it's just a matter of the party, in simplest terms Paul lacks charisma.

[bored]

Assuming you are right Kel (and you may very well be)...I must ask, why hasn't Paul's candidacy picked up more steam. Or Kucinich. I mean, they seem like the two most likely to actually change things.

Because neither of them has convinced more than a handful of people that they could truly lead a country.

[Kel]

If Ron Paul were a democrat, do you believe he would be winning?


No, he does not follow the platform of either of the solid 2 parties.....

[Wilhelm-Scream]

It would be nice to have a President who's articulate for a change?

[bored]

If Ron Paul were a democrat, do you believe he would be winning?

He'd be just as unsuccesful. Much as Paul has tried to win over college students with his anti-war stance, he's also an unabashed conservative (the anti-war thing comes from his isolationist beliefs, not a moral objection specificly to going into Iraq).

[Kel]

I don't think it's just a matter of the party, in simplest terms Paul lacks charisma.



And yet, he has one of the largest (if not the largest by now) internet following of any of the candidates.....

[\S/JcDc\S/]

So you would say the general public finds Paul charismatic :confused:

[Kel]

So you would say the general public finds Paul charismatic :confused:

I do not see internet users as the general public persay....but apparently there are quite a few that do find him so......

[bored]

Success on the internet doesn't do it for me. Howard Dean had success on the internet, then Kerry wiped the floor with him (and I don't blame it all on his "Yeargh!" speech).

[Kel]

I agree with you bored, to a certain extent.......it does nothing for me either....BUT if you look at graphs of his popularity.....he took a MASSIVE dive after that little aaarrrggghhh.....situation.....and I'm talking a MASSIVE dive....

[Matt]

I don't think it's just a matter of the party, in simplest terms Paul lacks charisma.

So in other words, charisma qualifies an unqualified man who has no platform to be president?

[Matt]

I agree with you bored, to a certain extent.......it does nothing for me either....BUT if you look at graphs of his popularity.....he took a MASSIVE dive after that little aaarrrggghhh.....situation.....and I'm talking a MASSIVE dive....

Only because the media killed his campaign afterwards.

[\S/JcDc\S/]

He asked for a reason and I gave a pretty simple reason...With that said, why is Obama picking up steam with less experience than some of the other candidates? I don't believe it's simply him being part black causing interest, I believe there is a certain charisma he has that is starting to catch on with people. That's why he can pull ahead of more experienced candidates and some of which with the same said agenda/initiatives that he has. I don't believe Paul exudes enough of a personality. His message may get across to some but the masses are going to pay JUST as much attention to attitude, personality, warmth, etc... All in my opinion of course :o Just a simple opinion.

[Kel]

Only because the media killed his campaign afterwards.


True....but you don't pull stupid stuff like that in your campaign....BECAUSE the media of today will crucify you.....thats just the nature of campaigning today....

[\S/JcDc\S/]

Btw Matt, funny thing in making my comments in this thread. HONESTLY never saw your little note at the bottom of original post for thread :) In terms of the note you have, you may not be saying it... But that doesn't mean it's existance is any less apparent. It would be ridiculous to say he isn't picking up some votes simply because of having some black in him, though in fairness he may be missing some votes because of this as well. The charisma though certainly is helping his campaign. Oh and Clinton (Hilary not Bill he had it in spades) does not have enough of it either imo to sustain. She just doesn't come off well. That and she only wears pant suits. Kind of odd, like she's afraid to wear a dress and admit to being a woman. She should lose some weight, put a dress on, some nylons, and smile every once in a while :up: Note: that may help her, but would certainly not help Obama *shudders*

[Kel]

Btw Matt, funny thing in making my comments in this thread. HONESTLY never saw your little note at the bottom of original post for thread :) In terms of the note you have, you may not be saying it... But that doesn't mean it's existance is any less apparent. It would be ridiculous to say he isn't picking up some votes simply because of having some black in him, though in fairness he may be missing some votes because of this as well. The charisma though certainly is helping his campaign. Oh and Clinton (Hilary not Bill he had it in spades) does not have enough of it either imo to sustain. She just doesn't come off well. That and she only wears pant suits. Kind of odd, like she's afraid to wear a dress and admit to being a woman. She should lose some weight, put a dress on, some nylons, and smile every once in a while :up: Note: that may help her, but would certainly not help Obama *shudders*


LMAO, thats the most sexist thing I've read around here in a long time.......

[\S/JcDc\S/]

LMAO, thats the most sexist thing I've read around here in a long time.......

LOL that was the point :D

Just kidding ladies :p hee hee

[terry78]

Obama is a breath of fresh air, that's what it comes down to. Most people under 30 that aren't repubs say they would vote for him more than likely, and he he has garnered quite a bit of female attention as well, two groups that have been ignored for the most part.

[Erzengel]

Charisma and "likability" go a long way with voters. See Kennedy vs. Nixon or even Bush vs. Gore. It also helps that Obama seems to be the "trendy" especially with people like Oprah backing him. On the other side, Hillary even with more experience than Obama has 0 charisma or likability.

[Darthphere]

If Ron Paul were a democrat, do you believe he would be winning?

I doubt it. I think most of us just look at him and see the equivalent of that crazy homeless guy on the street corner telling us all we're all going to hell.

[Kel]

Obama is a breath of fresh air, that's what it comes down to. Most people under 30 that aren't repubs say they would vote for him more than likely, and he he has garnered quite a bit of female attention as well, two groups that have been ignored for the most part.


The thing is......most in that age group are not primary voters....your primary voter is average age of 40 -- 60.....so come primary voting day, we will truly see if the polls equal to wins for him, looking back on the history of these polls.........more often than not, they are incorrect.....and that goes both for Democrats and Republicans. Its weird, primary voters usually will go with the "usual vote" so to speak and not what they said in a phone poll on the spur of the moment..........and the usual vote in this instance is Clinton...(THE NAME)....

Its going to be a very interesting primary season on both sides.......

[jaguarr]

Oh, another "Matt Hates Obama" thread. :oldrazz:

jag

[Kel]

Oh, another "Matt Hates Obama" thread. :oldrazz:

jag

I don't think its so much Matt hates Obama, as it is, he can't figure out why anyone likes him......lol:hehe:

[jaguarr]

I don't think its so much Matt hates Obama, as it is, he can't figure out why anyone likes him......lol:hehe:

No, Matt hates Obama with the searing white heat of a billion suns. It's true.

jag

[Kel]

LOL, well even as an independent.....I might would vote for the guy if I knew that he could bring the change that he says he desires........I just don't see that happening, with ANY PRESIDENT. I also don't know enough of the details about his tax reform, social security reform, or medical care reform.....to really know where he stands fiscally.....and that would be the major push for me, because in those areas, I would actually be considered conservative, except maybe in the area of social security, and as far as MY TAXES, I'm conservative...lol

[jaguarr]

Well, the thing with Obama is that he IS charismatic and he does give people hope for some change, which they are really wanting right now. His policies aren't very well fleshed out, I agree. However, he hasn't said anything that's really turned me OFF of his policies, either, which most of the candidates have managed to do at one point or another. I'm an independent voter myself and, frankly, I'm not really happy with this crop of candidates we have to choose from. All the Republicans are dirty, dirty, dirty and will continue Bushco business as usual. The Dem's....well, Hillary is just as bad as any Bushie and Obama hasn't really nailed down his platforms. Richardson is the only one I'd vote for, to be honest, but he'll never get the shot at the big chair.

jag

[Varient]

Why do you support him? Really, I want to know. This entire Obama craze has been totally lost on me and I am curious as to what the appeal is. In all honesty, I also wonder, how many Obama supporters will come out and say they are voting for him on the grounds of him being black? (which I consider that just as bad as not voting for him on the grounds of his being black.) I ask because it seems he has taken a substantial lead in Iowa and it seems to that he lacks any kind of platform (sure, he will give vague ideas, but has never given a practical way to fund or carry out these grand schemes of his). He has no experience outside of 3 years in national politics, so that seems to me to be the equivilant of handing the reigns of a fortune 500 company to a CEO who has spent a few years in marketing. I can give a list of reasons why I support Richardson...I really wonder how many Obama voters can do the same (without using words like "He is fresh blood" or "He's an honest respectable guy....I know even though I've never met him"...y'know, using pseudo-reasons to cover up the fact that they are voting for him to show how 'liberal' they are)?

Note: I am not saying all Obama supporters are voting for him because he is charasmatic or black or trendy. I am simply asking to know why most people are supporting him.

Still not Pro - Obama,.. but the longer I sit in my corner and let this mess wash over me in passing,.. the closer I come to going with him as the lesser of eight evils.

I don't like his stand on the war,.. but appreciate most of his domestic "policies".

I don't like how he strums the public,.. But can appreciate that he does have answers when cornered.

It also helps his case when MOST of his detractors cite silly stuff like "He was a smoker" as reason enough not to elect him.

Tsk.

V.

[jaguarr]

Still not Pro - Obama,.. but the longer I sit in my corner and let this mess wash over me in passing,.. the closer I come to going with him as the lesser of eight evils.

I don't like his stand on the war,.. but appreciate most of his domestic "policies".

I don't like how he strums the public,.. But can appreciate that he does have answers when cornered.

It also helps his case when MOST of his detractors cite silly stuff like "He was a smoker" as reason enough not to elect him.

Tsk.

V.

Can't disagree with any of this and I certainly have heard your sentiments echoed by many others. We KNOW the other candidates are dirty and have a history of raping the system and their constituents. At least with Obama, we aren't quite sure and MAYBE he might consider the possibility of potentially thinking about doing the right things with his power. Seems to be the gist of what some folks are thinking, anyway.

jag

[lazur]

It's quite funny that the question posed in the subject line of this thread hasn't actually been answered by anyone so far, except to say, "Obama is charismatic or articulate."

So was Kerry.

Obama, imo, seems to have no position on the core issues.

As for 'change' - all candidates promise change, but very few (once elected) provide it. And when they do, it's usually rejected.

Where's Clinton when we need him ... and NO, not his wife!

Seriously, where's our Reagan or Clinton in this upcoming election?

[jaguarr]

We aren't getting a Reagan or a Bill Clinton in this election, lazur. Closest thing we've got in terms of experience and ability to get the right things done is Richardson and he's fat, Mexican and ugly so there's no way he's getting elected.

jag

[Varient]

Can't disagree with any of this and I certainly have heard your sentiments echoed by many others. We KNOW the other candidates are dirty and have a history of raping the system and their constituents. At least with Obama, we aren't quite sure and MAYBE he might consider the possibility of potentially thinking about doing the right things with his power. Seems to be the gist of what some folks are thinking, anyway.

jag

Going one step further:

One guess who's out of the running completly by me because of the "mud-slinging via proxy" that canidate is officially not supporting "Yet" isn't doing too much damage control about accept "after the fact?"

Meh.

[jaguarr]

Going one step further:

One guess who's out of the running completly by me because of the "mud-slinging via proxy" that canidate is officially not supporting "Yet" isn't doing too much damage control about accept "after the fact?"

Meh.

Yeah, there's been a lot more "politics as usual" going on than someone's been willing to admit, hasn't there?

jag

[Kel]

It's quite funny that the question posed in the subject line of this thread hasn't actually been answered by anyone so far, except to say, "Obama is charismatic or articulate."

So was Kerry.

Obama, imo, seems to have no position on the core issues.

As for 'change' - all candidates promise change, but very few (once elected) provide it. And when they do, it's usually rejected.

Where's Clinton when we need him ... and NO, not his wife!

Seriously, where's our Reagan or Clinton in this upcoming election?


LMFAO......

[lazur]

LMFAO......

I don't think anyone can argue that Kerry wasn't articulate and somewhat charismatic. He was completely full of ****, but none-the-less.

In fact, when he was campaigning against Bush, there were tons of people on this very forum who gave him accolades for those very qualities.

I wasn't one of them, mind you, because I couldn't stand him, but I also couldn't deny that people 'liked' his personality.

[Kel]

Well, the thing with Obama is that he IS charismatic and he does give people hope for some change, which they are really wanting right now. His policies aren't very well fleshed out, I agree. However, he hasn't said anything that's really turned me OFF of his policies, either, which most of the candidates have managed to do at one point or another. I'm an independent voter myself and, frankly, I'm not really happy with this crop of candidates we have to choose from. All the Republicans are dirty, dirty, dirty and will continue Bushco business as usual. The Dem's....well, Hillary is just as bad as any Bushie and Obama hasn't really nailed down his platforms. Richardson is the only one I'd vote for, to be honest, but he'll never get the shot at the big chair.

jag

He is the only one with true, legitmate, domestic and foreign policy knowledge.......

It is VERY SAD, that he has no chance in hell at getting elected. MAYBE.....MAYBE.......MAYBE......he will be chosen as a running mate, which means there is a chance later on.......but for 2008, no chance.:csad:

[jaguarr]

He is the only one with true, legitmate, domestic and foreign policy knowledge.......

It is VERY SAD, that he has no chance in hell at getting elected. MAYBE.....MAYBE.......MAYBE......he will be chosen as a running mate, which means there is a chance later on.......but for 2008, no chance.:csad:

Our culture has been conditioned to vote for whoever is "popular" with the media rather than for the people who are most qualified to do the job at hand. As long as our country continues to run it's politics like a high school class election, we'll forever be in a tailspin.

jag

[hippie_hunter]

Since Richardson is obviously not going to get the nomination, I'm really hoping that he'll end up in an Administration as Secretary of State.

[cookiva]

I don't think it's just a matter of the party, in simplest terms Paul lacks charisma.

You are right. Not to look like a horrible person, but compare Paul and Kucinich to Obama. Visually, Obama is a god compared to Paul and Kucinich.

Granted, I hope people look past that for Kucinich....

And look to his wife. She will win it for him

[cookiva]

I don't think anyone can argue that Kerry wasn't articulate

Yeah, you are right about that one....



and somewhat charismatic.


HAHAHAHAHAHA. REALLY?

[jaguarr]

Kucinich and Paul's downfall isn't their looks, it's some of the things they say that overshadow any good ideas they may have to offer. They come off as flakes or even a little bit strange to the average American.

jag

[raybia]

Why do you support him? Really, I want to know. This entire Obama craze has been totally lost on me and I am curious as to what the appeal is. In all honesty, I also wonder, how many Obama supporters will come out and say they are voting for him on the grounds of him being black? (which I consider that just as bad as not voting for him on the grounds of his being black.) I ask because it seems he has taken a substantial lead in Iowa and it seems to that he lacks any kind of platform (sure, he will give vague ideas, but has never given a practical way to fund or carry out these grand schemes of his). He has no experience outside of 3 years in national politics, so that seems to me to be the equivilant of handing the reigns of a fortune 500 company to a CEO who has spent a few years in marketing. I can give a list of reasons why I support Richardson...I really wonder how many Obama voters can do the same (without using words like "He is fresh blood" or "He's an honest respectable guy....I know even though I've never met him"...y'know, using pseudo-reasons to cover up the fact that they are voting for him to show how 'liberal' they are)?

Note: I am not saying all Obama supporters are voting for him because he is charasmatic or black or trendy. I am simply asking to know why most people are supporting him.

I'm voting for him because he is so articulate.

[raybia]

Our culture has been conditioned to vote for whoever is "popular" with the media rather than for the people who are most qualified to do the job at hand. As long as our country continues to run it's politics like a high school class election, we'll forever be in a tailspin.

jag

QFT

Have I ever told you that I think you are really smart?

[jaguarr]

QFT

Have I ever told you that I think you are really smart?

You're pretty sharp yourself, lady. :up:

jag

[Erzengel]

Shouldnt' you, I don't know look into his based on his platform, his policies, his history, something other than being articulate?

[raybia]

You're pretty sharp yourself, lady. :up:

jag

http://ervilhokinha.no.sapo.pt/han.JPG

Who you calling scruffy-looking?

[raybia]

Shouldnt' you, I don't know look into his based on his platform, his policies, his history, something other than being articulate?

Yeah,yeah you are right. He is also bright and clean and a nice-looking guy,

[jaguarr]

http://ervilhokinha.no.sapo.pt/han.JPG

Who you calling scruffy-looking?

I just wanted to give you a flashback to a time when a bunch of us thought you were a woman. :flashback:

jag

[raybia]

I just wanted to give you a flashback to a time when a bunch of us thought you were a woman. :flashback:

jag

http://www.eeggs.com/images/items/509.full.jpg

Nope, definitely not a woman. :hehe:

[Steve Rogers]

We aren't getting a Reagan or a Bill Clinton in this election, lazur. Closest thing we've got in terms of experience and ability to get the right things done is Richardson and he's fat, Mexican and ugly so there's no way he's getting elected.

jag
Which is sad. We tend to vote people in for all the wrong reasons in this country and looks tend to be a big part of it. I think Richardson is the best candidate out there and I would love to see him in office. But sadly you are right. He's of Mexican descent and his a bit pudgy around the edges. People see that instead of his work in the UN, his work in New Mexico, or his ability to make a fine diplomat. But yeah, he's fat and brown, so all those points go out the window. Makes me wonder though...if FDR were alive today in an age with television, would the American people vote for a man in wheelchair? Could Richardson get elected in the 19th Century?

[raybia]

Which is sad. We tend to vote people in for all the wrong reasons in this country and looks tend to be a big part of it. I think Richardson is the best candidate out there and I would love to see him in office. But sadly you are right. He's of Mexican descent and his a bit pudgy around the edges. People see that instead of his work in the UN, his work in New Mexico, or his ability to make a fine diplomat. But yeah, he's fat and brown, so all those points go out the window. Makes me wonder though...if FDR were alive today in an age with television, would the American people vote for a man in wheelchair? Could Richardson get elected in the 19th Century?

Also wasn't FDR a widow?

[Steve Rogers]

Also wasn't FDR a widow?A widower? Maybe, but I know at some point while in office he was married to Elenor Roosevelt.

[SoulManX]

A widower? Maybe, but I know at some point while in office he was married to Elenor Roosevelt.

Who was his cousin:csad:

[raybia]

A widower? Maybe, but I know at some point while in office he was married to Elenor Roosevelt.

Yeah widower. Damn there goes my "smart poster" status. :csad:


It was a great point you made though.

Many historians think that it was T.V. that help JFK to beat Nixon.

[bunk]

Clinton and Obama have the money to go all the way. I hate Clinton and presto! Obama supporter. It doesn't hurt that agree with almost everything I hear him say.

[Steve Rogers]

Who was his cousin:csad:Yeah, I always wondered if the American public knew about that way back in the day.

[SoulManX]

Yeah, I always wondered if the American public knew about that way back in the day.

Well Rudy did the same so...

[The Incredible Hulk]

Also wasn't FDR a widow?

No he died in 1945, eleanor died in the early 1960's

Who was his cousin:csad:

she was like his 5th cousin twice removed or something like that. When you think about it, most people dont even know their 3rd cousins...

[Steve Rogers]

Also wasn't FDR a widower?Yeah widower. Damn there goes my "smart poster" status. :csad:


It was a great point you made though.

Many historians think that it was T.V. that help JFK to beat Nixon.I see nothing to suggest that you loose your status :up:

Oh yeah, JFK totally worked the television cameras. I mean, Regan got elected. Makes me wonder if his Hollywood background was a plus for him to deleiver great performances on camera.

[Steve Rogers]

Well Rudy did the same so...Married his cousin? I did not know that.

[raybia]

she was like his 5th cousin twice removed or something like that. When you think about it, most people dont even know their 3rd cousins...

Well its one thing to marry your cousin but what if the public knew about those politicians who HAD their cousins.

[lazur]

Married his cousin? I did not know that.

Umm, fifth cousins, once removed. Which means virtually unrelated. They were both descendants of a family from the 1640's.

Anyone whose ancestors originated in this country back during the same time period could marry a 'cousin' today and probably never realize it.

[Asteroid-Man]

Why do you support him? Really, I want to know. This entire Obama craze has been totally lost on me and I am curious as to what the appeal is. In all honesty, I also wonder, how many Obama supporters will come out and say they are voting for him on the grounds of him being black? (which I consider that just as bad as not voting for him on the grounds of his being black.) I ask because it seems he has taken a substantial lead in Iowa and it seems to that he lacks any kind of platform (sure, he will give vague ideas, but has never given a practical way to fund or carry out these grand schemes of his). He has no experience outside of 3 years in national politics, so that seems to me to be the equivilant of handing the reigns of a fortune 500 company to a CEO who has spent a few years in marketing. I can give a list of reasons why I support Richardson...I really wonder how many Obama voters can do the same (without using words like "He is fresh blood" or "He's an honest respectable guy....I know even though I've never met him"...y'know, using pseudo-reasons to cover up the fact that they are voting for him to show how 'liberal' they are)?

Note: I am not saying all Obama supporters are voting for him because he is charasmatic or black or trendy. I am simply asking to know why most people are supporting him.
Why? He's charismatic, black and trendy. Oh and Obama Vs./On Osama sounds cool :woot:

What I've bolded is what you spelled wrong :o

[Sincere]

We aren't getting a Reagan or a Bill Clinton in this election, lazur. Closest thing we've got in terms of experience and ability to get the right things done is Richardson and he's fat, Mexican and ugly so there's no way he's getting elected.

jag


Give me a break. Richardson being a mexican has nothing to do with his low polling. Mexicans are much more assimilated than blacks. Look at their interracial marriage stats. Quit playing the race card. He is fat and ugly though.

[Steve Rogers]

Umm, fifth cousins, once removed. Which means virtually unrelated. They were both descendants of a family from the 1640's.

Anyone whose ancestors originated in this country back during the same time period could marry a 'cousin' today and probably never realize it.I didn't realize there were Italians here in the 1640's. Thought it was only Spanish, Dutch and English settlers that early.

[Steve Rogers]

Give me a break. Richardson being a mexican has nothing to do with his low polling. Mexicans are much more assimilated than blacks. Look at their interracial marriage stats. Quit playing the race card. He is fat and ugly though.
Does white middle America hate blacks and feel threatened by their ever increasing numbers in their own backyards?

[Soundwave]

After every Democratic debate I come away thinking that Richardson would be the best man for the job, but I can see why Obama has a lot of support. He knows how to win over a crowd.

[Sincere]

Why do you support him? Really, I want to know. This entire Obama craze has been totally lost on me and I am curious as to what the appeal is. In all honesty, I also wonder, how many Obama supporters will come out and say they are voting for him on the grounds of him being black? (which I consider that just as bad as not voting for him on the grounds of his being black.) I ask because it seems he has taken a substantial lead in Iowa and it seems to that he lacks any kind of platform (sure, he will give vague ideas, but has never given a practical way to fund or carry out these grand schemes of his). He has no experience outside of 3 years in national politics, so that seems to me to be the equivilant of handing the reigns of a fortune 500 company to a CEO who has spent a few years in marketing. I can give a list of reasons why I support Richardson...I really wonder how many Obama voters can do the same (without using words like "He is fresh blood" or "He's an honest respectable guy....I know even though I've never met him"...y'know, using pseudo-reasons to cover up the fact that they are voting for him to show how 'liberal' they are)?

Note: I am not saying all Obama supporters are voting for him because he is charasmatic or black or trendy. I am simply asking to know why most people are supporting him.

The funny thing is only Obamas detractors bring up race. His supporters never even mention it. Your theory about people voting for Obama is retarded. If people didnt want to appear racist, they would vote for someone else, but praise Obama in public. His supporters are voting and praising his name in public which says something.

[Warhammer]

Charisma and "likability" go a long way with voters. See Kennedy vs. Nixon or even Bush vs. Gore. It also helps that Obama seems to be the "trendy" especially with people like Oprah backing him. On the other side, Hillary even with more experience than Obama has 0 charisma or likability.

Yep, who's to say that Nixon would not have handled things better than Kennedy did during his term? Because of his appearance in the debate, he ended up losing. That is the biggest reason why I understand why Obama is winning, his charisma.

[raybia]

Does white middle America hate blacks and feel threatened by their ever increasing numbers in their own backyards?

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that white middle America has grow accustom to black and tolerates them. Now the Mexicans? Well thats another story...though they do love the cuisine.

[jaguarr]

Give me a break. Richardson being a mexican has nothing to do with his low polling. Mexicans are much more assimilated than blacks. Look at their interracial marriage stats. Quit playing the race card. He is fat and ugly though.

That must be why we've had all this talk about building a wall at our border with Africa to keep all black people out. :dry:

jag

[Warhammer]

Damn. :o

[raybia]

That must be why we've had all this talk about building a wall at our border with Africa to keep all black people out. :dry:

jag

Damn no one does sarcasm better than jag.

[Steve Rogers]

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that white middle America has grow accustom to black and tolerates them. Now the Mexicans? Well thats another story...though they do love the cuisine.
Which is the point I was making. While there is a rift between black and white in this country, we all, African and European Americans, can unite under the moniker "American" while Mexicans are invading outsiders.

[Sincere]

Does white middle America hate blacks and feel threatened by their ever increasing numbers in their own backyards?

White middle America has hated us for along time, but we still managed to get things done so dont give me that. And where are all of these white Mexican hating racist? Every white person I know says "Oh those Mexicans are so hard working". Are Mexicans being lynched, or beaten in the streets? Statisticly speaking most whites have to have some sort of relationship with hispanics through marriage. I just dont see all of this "whtie racist hatred" against Mexicans like liberals claim.

[Steve Rogers]

White middle America has hated us for along time, but we still managed to get things done so dont give me that. And where are all of these white Mexican hating racist? Every white person I know says "Oh those Mexicans are so hard working". Are Mexicans being lynched, or beaten in the streets? Statisticly speaking most whites have to have some sort of relationship with hispanics through marriage. I just dont see all of this "whtie racist hatred" against Mexicans like liberals claim.Because it's not a race thing. It's a foreign thing. Mexicans are like the Irish of the late 19th century. And if you want to see it, take a trip to the border sometime. Hell, listen to the politicians talk about closing the border. They don't talk about closing the border with Canada.

[Sincere]

That must be why we've had all this talk about building a wall at our border with Africa to keep all black people out. :dry:

jag

Wha the hell are you talking about? Africa and America is seperated by a vast ocean. Their is no reason for them to build any sort of barrier. I dont have anything against people trying to find work, but why is that our responsibility. Mexicans should march in their streets, and protest their corrupt goverment just as we did in the 50's.

[Warhammer]

Wha the hell are you talking about? Africa and America is seperated by a vast ocean. Their is no reason for them to build any sort of barrier. I dont have anything against people trying to find work, but why is that our responsibility. Mexicans should march in their streets, and protest their corrupt goverment just as we did in the 50's.

Sarcasm, man. Sarcasm.

[Steve Rogers]

Mexicans should march in their streets, and protest their corrupt goverment just as we did in the 50's.

White middle America has hated us for along time,

So...er....um...huh? Which we is you?

[Sincere]

Because it's not a race thing. It's a foreign thing. Mexicans are like the Irish of the late 19th century. And if you want to see it, take a trip to the border sometime. Hell, listen to the politicians talk about closing the border. They don't talk about closing the border with Canada.

Because Canada has a working goverment and produces professional citizens. Canadians would not want to come here in the first place. Mexico is a corrupt country, where gangs control cities, and everything has a price. They also suffer from high poverty, and low literacy rates. If you want to add someone to your team, than you should strive for the best.

[Sincere]

So...er....um...huh? Which we is you?

Im black

[jaguarr]

Because Canada has a working goverment and produces professional citizens. Canadians would not want to come here in the first place. Mexico is a corrupt country, where gangs control cities, and everything has a price. They also suffer from high poverty, and low literacy rates. If you want to add someone to your team, than you should strive for the best.

Wow. Strong stereotyping and racism.

jag

[Sincere]

Sarcasm, man. Sarcasm.

He wasnt making any sense. He should have said Canada, but he would be wrong even then.

[Steve Rogers]

Because Canada has a working goverment and produces professional citizens. Canadians would not want to come here in the first place. Mexico is a corrupt country, where gangs control cities, and everything has a price. They also suffer from high poverty, and low literacy rates. If you want to add someone to your team, than you should strive for the best.
So you are saying that white americans have no problem with a nationality of corrupt, lazy, poor, ignorant gang bangers? I have to disagree.

Oh, but us I thought you meant you were Mexican and then by we I thought you meant you were American. That's why I got confused.

[Warhammer]

He wasnt making any sense. He should have said Canada, but he would be wrong even then.

Damn, son. :csad:

[raybia]

Wha the hell are you talking about? Africa and America is seperated by a vast ocean. Their is no reason for them to build any sort of barrier.

Unfortunately no one can be told what the Matrix is.

[Varient]

................

ouch and Damn.


Good thing you guys are all friends.

[Sincere]

Wow. Strong stereotyping and racism.

jag

Thats all you got? Calling me racist. Maybe I was a bit harsh, but let's be real. The Canadian goverment has their **** together for the most part, the Mexican goverment does not. Or do you think it's normal for a countries citizens to flee in the millions for a low paying job? The Mexican citizens with good jobs,education,ect stay in there. The low skilled one's come here.

[Kel]

Because Canada has a working goverment and produces professional citizens. Canadians would not want to come here in the first place. Mexico is a corrupt country, where gangs control cities, and everything has a price. They also suffer from high poverty, and low literacy rates. If you want to add someone to your team, than you should strive for the best.


A. Mexico
B. Canada


ummmmmmm......................is their a "C" choice please....

Thank You!

[jaguarr]

Thats all you got? Calling me racist. Maybe I was a bit harsh, but let's be real. The Canadian goverment has their **** together for the most part, the Mexican goverment does not. Or do you think it's normal for a countries citizens to flee in the millions for a low paying job? The Mexican citizens with good jobs,education,ect stay in there. The low skilled one's come here.

I'm not the one buying lock, stock and barrel into stereotypes (that are either exaggerated or unfounded) about Mexican people. You are.

jag

[Steve Rogers]

I'm not the one buying lock, stock and barrel into stereotypes (that are either exaggerated or unfounded) about Mexican people. You are.

jagThat's all you got? Calling him a racist?

Pretty sad that he doesn't take offense to that. Apparently there are worse things than being racist. Shame on you for nit picking, Jag. :whatever:

[jaguarr]

That's all you got? Calling him a racist?

Pretty sad that he doesn't take offense to that. Apparently there are worse things than being racist. Shame on you for nit picking, Jag. :whatever:

I just find it interesting that people will buy into stereotypes that are clearly exaggerated and haven't even been investigated by themselves and then condemn an entire race of people for that. Especially since migrant workers don't even vote. What we're really talking about here is people of Mexican-American heritage or legal citizenship who CAN vote who take a lot of offense to how their race is being regarded by the people in power and have about had enough of it. I suspect we'll see some record Latino turnouts at the polls this year. It's also quite sad to me that there is a very large number of people who will immediately overlook a candidate like Richardson, who is more qualified than anyone else in the race, for the primary reason that he is of Mexican descent. And if you don't think that's happening then you need to just pipe down and keep sucking on your feeding tube. :matrixreference:

jag

[Sincere]

I'm not the one buying lock, stock and barrel into stereotypes (that are either exaggerated or unfounded) about Mexican people. You are.

jag

You must be (liberal) joking. Are you saying that corruption is not a huge problem in Mexico that their own citizens will admit to? Do I have to post the thousands of articles from both American, and Mexican citizens? Do I need to post the stories of corrupt cops kidnapping American citizens and bringing them to Mexico. Do I need to post stories of the horrors being commited in border towns across the US? Or maybe the female homicides of Juarez where hundreds of young Mexican women have been found mutilated. I believe in helping people, but they have to want to help themselves. The Mexican goverment has not gone after the drug cartels hard enough, and would rather send their citizens here to take jobs, than start any kind of social programs. I will respect their goverment when it respects the citizens.

[raybia]

I just find it interesting that people will buy into stereotypes that are clearly exaggerated and haven't even been investigated by themselves and then condemn an entire race of people for that. Especially since migrant workers don't even vote. What we're really talking about here is people of Mexican-American heritage or legal citizenship who CAN vote who take a lot of offense to how their race is being regarded by the people in power and have about had enough of it. I suspect we'll see some record Latino turnouts at the polls this year. It's also quite sad to me that there is a very large number of people who will immediately overlook a candidate like Richardson, who is more qualified than anyone else in the race, for the primary reason that he is of Mexican descent. And if you don't think that's happening then you need to just pipe down and keep sucking on your feeding tube. :matrixreference:

jag

Yes!. I was about to blow off your comments until I saw that.

Good job!

[Steve Rogers]

I just find it interesting that people will buy into stereotypes that are clearly exaggerated and haven't even been investigated by themselves and then condemn an entire race of people for that. Especially since migrant workers don't even vote. What we're really talking about here is people of Mexican-American heritage or legal citizenship who CAN vote who take a lot of offense to how their race is being regarded by the people in power and have about had enough of it. I suspect we'll see some record Latino turnouts at the polls this year. It's also quite sad to me that there is a very large number of people who will immediately overlook a candidate like Richardson, who is more qualified than anyone else in the race, for the primary reason that he is of Mexican descent. And if you don't think that's happening then you need to just pipe down and keep sucking on your feeding tube. :matrixreference:

jagWell isn't that racism in a nutshell?

Intersting side note, and Sincere might not agree here, but the issues with Mexicans are not race related. I recently moved to New Mexico where Hispanics are the majority. They. Hate. Mexicans. More than anyone. It's us (Americans) versus them (Mexicans). It's not as white versus brown as some people would like to think it is. But because of sterotypes, a lot of white Americans will hear the word "Mexican" and think what they will about an American born man who has much white blood in him as Mexican blood.

[Kel]

You must be (liberal) joking. Are you saying that corruption is not a huge problem in Mexico that their own citizens will admit to? Do I have to post the thousands of articles from both American, and Mexican citizens? Do I need to post the stories of corrupt cops kidnapping American citizens and bringing them to Mexico. Do I need to post stories of the horrors being commited in border towns across the US? Or maybe the female homicides of Juarez where hundreds of young Mexican women have been found mutilated. I believe in helping people, but they have to want to help themselves. The Mexican goverment has not gone after the drug cartels hard enough, and would rather send their citizens here to take jobs, than start any kind of social programs. I will respect their goverment when it respects the citizens.


Ooooooh your talking about the Mexican government..........damn, and I thought you were talking about those "in general" lazy Mexicans.....:whatever:


Because Canada has a working goverment and produces professional citizens. Canadians would not want to come here in the first place. Mexico is a corrupt country, where gangs control cities, and everything has a price. They also suffer from high poverty, and low literacy rates. If you want to add someone to your team, than you should strive for the best.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, looking for Mexican government........

Well, still missing it..........

[jaguarr]

You must be (liberal) joking. Are you saying that corruption is not a huge problem in Mexico that their own citizens will admit to? Do I have to post the thousands of articles from both American, and Mexican citizens? Do I need to post the stories of corrupt cops kidnapping American citizens and bringing them to Mexico. Do I need to post stories of the horrors being commited in border towns across the US? Or maybe the female homicides of Juarez where hundreds of young Mexican women have been found mutilated. I believe in helping people, but they have to want to help themselves. The Mexican goverment has not gone after the drug cartels hard enough, and would rather send their citizens here to take jobs, than start any kind of social programs. I will respect their goverment when it respects the citizens.

What part of all of that not being the NORM in Mexico, but the NEWS which is sensationalized just as bad as it is here in the states, doesn't quite sink in for you? Have you ever even been to Mexico? I have. I'm not saying that those things don't exist, but they are not the norm for the majority of the country. Not by a long shot. Do you even know any Mexicans? And are you suggesting that the U.S. doesn't have high levels of corruption itself? And all that aside, it's just too bad you don't have a heritage where you could appreciate the struggles of a minority people against an oppressive culture and government. :dry:

jag

[jaguarr]

Well isn't that racism in a nutshell?

Intersting side note, and Sincere might not agree here, but the issues with Mexicans are not race related. I recently moved to New Mexico where Hispanics are the majority. They. Hate. Mexicans. More than anyone. It's us (Americans) versus them (Mexicans). It's not as white versus brown as some people would like to think it is. But because of sterotypes, a lot of white Americans will hear the word "Mexican" and think what they will about an American born man who has much white blood in him as Mexican blood.

A lot of those Hispanics also resent the hell out of those white Americans that stereotype them for their race, and a lot of those white Americans that do that are a-holes with House and Senate seats, unfortunately.

jag

[raybia]

Ooooooh your talking about the Mexican government..........damn, and I thought you were talking about those "in general" lazy Mexicans.....:whatever:




Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, looking for Mexican government........

Well, still missing it..........


Yeah, Mexican government officials are notorious for their laziness.

Thank God that we don't have that problem in the U.S.

[Kel]

Yeah, Mexican government officials are notorious for their laziness.

Thank God that we don't have that problem in the U.S.

Damn right.........:hehe:


*sighs*

[bored]

All our officials are busy doing blow and meeting the help in the restroom.

[Steve Rogers]

A lot of those Hispanics also resent the hell out of those white Americans that stereotype them for their race
jag
Who can blame them? Racism breeds more racism. It's a never-ending cycle that will go round and round possibly forever.

[raybia]

All our officials are busy doing blow and meeting the help in the restroom.

Well at least they are busy unlike those lazy Mexican government officials!:cmad:

Plus I've heard that blow may actually help to cure male pattern baldness...in small quantities.

[Matt]

Well, the thing with Obama is that he IS charismatic and he does give people hope for some change, which they are really wanting right now. His policies aren't very well fleshed out, I agree. However, he hasn't said anything that's really turned me OFF of his policies, either, which most of the candidates have managed to do at one point or another. I'm an independent voter myself and, frankly, I'm not really happy with this crop of candidates we have to choose from. All the Republicans are dirty, dirty, dirty and will continue Bushco business as usual. The Dem's....well, Hillary is just as bad as any Bushie and Obama hasn't really nailed down his platforms. Richardson is the only one I'd vote for, to be honest, but he'll never get the shot at the big chair.

jag

The thing is..thats what makes me feel he is insincere. Practically everything he says comes off as just playing to the masses and telling them what they want to hear.

And for the record, I don't "hate" Obama. I see him as insincere and a bit of a hypocrite. BUt the main reason I won't vote for him (I will vote for 3 of the main 4 Republicans before him, though chances are I would write in Michael Bloomberg first, if he doesn't run as an independent) is because he lacks any kind of credentials to be president. He really had no business seeking the office this early in his career and I forsee him becoming the puppet ruler of Nancy Pelosi should he win the office because of that inexperience..

[Sincere]

What part of all of that not being the NORM in Mexico, but the NEWS which is sensationalized just as bad as it is here in the states, doesn't quite sink in for you? Have you ever even been to Mexico? I have. I'm not saying that those things don't exist, but they are not the norm for the majority of the country. Not by a long shot. Do you even know any Mexicans? And are you suggesting that the U.S. doesn't have high levels of corruption itself? And all that aside, it's just too bad you don't have a heritage where you could appreciate the struggles of a minority people against an oppressive culture and government. :dry:

jag

You know thats not right. If their country didnt have those problems than their citizens would not risk life and limb to get here. Yes I have been to Mexico, and yes I know Mexicans but that doesent matter. I am well aware of the US goverments corrupt actions but, two wrongs dont make a right. Thats my whole point. Their country is oppressing them not us. I dont see what's so brave about protesting in American streets for things you are not legally entitled to. If they did that in their own county they would be gunned down. The Mexican people need to stop abandoning their country and stand up to their goverment. To compare the "undocumented workers" plight to the Civil Rights Movement is an insult. With that said I am glad that we are able to provide people with jobs, and a chance at a better life. But im tired of liberals acting like America is obligated to do that.

[jaguarr]

You know thats not right. If their country didnt have those problems than their citizens would not risk life and limb to get here. Yes I have been to Mexico, and yes I know Mexicans but that doesent matter. I am well aware of the US goverments corrupt actions but, two wrongs dont make a right. Thats my whole point. Their country is oppressing them not us. I dont see what's so brave about protesting in American streets for things you are not legally entitled to. If they did that in their own county they would be gunned down. The Mexican people need to stop abandoning their country and stand up to their goverment. To compare the "undocumented workers" plight to the Civil Rights Movement is an insult. With that said I am glad that we are able to provide people with jobs, and a chance at a better life. But im tired of liberals acting like America is obligated to do that.

I think you've managed to miss the point of every one of my posts in this thread. Congratulations. :up:

jag

[Mr Sparkle]

Note: I am not saying all Obama supporters are voting for him because he is charasmatic or black or trendy. I am simply asking to know why most people are supporting him.

simply put?
some people are voting for legitimate reasons, but for the most part people will vote for a candidate because he is charismatic or trendy, why?
because it's human nature, and most people won't really care about politics for 3 years and ten months and it takes effort and interest to really learn about a candidate.
why do you think Kerry Lost despite Bush's obvious incompetence, I remember Wilhelm posting about an old lady that elected Bush because he already had his "feet wet" ( yeah, freaky memory I know :csad:) so, really what else can people go on, except for charisma.
also, regardless of what the candidates stand for while campaigning this will change when they are elected.
I mean, just look at Bush jr.

[Mr Sparkle]

What part of all of that not being the NORM in Mexico, but the NEWS which is sensationalized just as bad as it is here in the states, doesn't quite sink in for you? Have you ever even been to Mexico? I have. I'm not saying that those things don't exist, but they are not the norm for the majority of the country. Not by a long shot. Do you even know any Mexicans? And are you suggesting that the U.S. doesn't have high levels of corruption itself? And all that aside, it's just too bad you don't have a heritage where you could appreciate the struggles of a minority people against an oppressive culture and government. :dry:

jag

how the hell did Mexico get into this?
Meh, there's **** happening everywhere, but yeah, It's not as safe as it used to be in Mexico.
but that really has more to do with economic problems than corruption, the corruption is deeply rooted but it can be changed, the mentality of Mexican people needs to change, more so than it's government.
I'm pretty sure this had to do with illegals or some ****, but, again, I have to tell whoever brought this on to the discussion that economists analyzed the impact of Illegal immigration on the US and the economy was favorably affected by 1%.
so, let's start talking about something that matters. seriously.
I'm tired as a tourist to have to jump through hoops just to go stimulate your economy, so yeah, build a wall, build 5 walls with alligators and motes and robot alligators with portable motes.
seriously, look at your country, far greater problems are there to be fixed.

[jaguarr]

how the hell did Mexico get into this?


Someone had the silly notion that there was no way people would NOT vote for Richardson because he's Hispanic, severely underestimating the ability of people to wallow in bigotry. From there, it got steered completely off course into an irrelevant discussion about Mexican immigrants. And now you know.

jag

[Sincere]

Someone had the silly notion that there was no way people would NOT vote for Richardson because he's Hispanic, severely underestimating the ability of people to wallow in bigotry. From there, it got steered completely off course into an irrelevant discussion about Mexican immigrants. And now you know.

jag

Once again you are putting words in my mouth. I never said they wouldnt. I know there are plenty of people who "Would never vote for a sp1c", but there are even more who would "Never vote for a n1gger". Blacks are the least liked group in America. Not only do we have to deal with whites, but Asians and Hispanics as well. If Barrack Huessein Obama can get through that, than so can Bill Richardson. The American people do not like his views/ideas accept it, and stop playing the race card.

[Steve Rogers]

Once again you are putting words in my mouth. I never said they wouldnt.Who said he was referring to you?

[terry78]

I don't see a lot of asians supporting Michelle Malkin because she's filipino, either...mostly because she's an annoying crone that says whatever moronic thought breeds itself in her skull.

[jaguarr]

Once again you are putting words in my mouth. I never said they wouldnt. I know there are plenty of people who "Would never vote for a sp1c", but there are even more who would "Never vote for a n1gger". Blacks are the least liked group in America. Not only do we have to deal with whites, but Asians and Hispanics as well. If Barrack Huessein Obama can get through that, than so can Bill Richardson. The American people do not like his views/ideas accept it, and stop playing the race card.

:irony:

jag

[jaguarr]

By the way, the American people haven't even HEARD Richardson's views and political expertise because they've been too busy having the "beautiful people" shoved down their throat by the media who have been pimping Obama, Hillary, Rudy and Romney like their next meal depended on it. An overweight, homely, understated Latino guy isn't glamorous enough for them to give a lot of airtime to.

jag

[Kel]

Truth...

[terry78]

A hot candidate for anything will always garner attention. Or at least one that's not obese and slug-like.

[Handsome Rob]

Our culture has been conditioned to vote for whoever is "popular" with the media rather than for the people who are most qualified to do the job at hand. As long as our country continues to run it's politics like a high school class election, we'll forever be in a tailspin.

jag

I completely agree with you. I'm sick of the superficial way in which campaigns are being showcased by the media.

I went to The Drudge Report, as I do every morning (I hit my local newspaper online, Drudge, FoxNews, and CNN), and I was greeted with perhaps the most unflattering picture of Sen. Clinton that I have ever seen. I was disgusted--not with her, but with the fact that the picture was up there with no "link." In other words, no story--just a bad photo. Sometime while I was at work, though, they linked a story to it.

But, what was the point of that? What does a bad photo have to do with Sen. Clinton's ability to be President? Don't get me wrong--I'm a staunch, traditional conservative, and Sen. Clinton will not get my vote. I am really, really not a fan of hers. Still, it just made me sick to see a superficial attack on her. If you want to go after her, go after her because of her platform, not because of her wrinkles. :cmad::cmad::cmad::cmad:

[Arkady Rossovich]

Why do you support him? Really, I want to know. This entire Obama craze has been totally lost on me and I am curious as to what the appeal is. In all honesty, I also wonder, how many Obama supporters will come out and say they are voting for him on the grounds of him being black?

I know,i don't think Obama has any experience.But he is a fresh face,but when it comes down to it.I don't think he will last,sad to say..i truely think most are voting for him simply because he is black.More like for the Africans,this is a dream come true.Someone for them,vote for a black.Even if he's not the best choice for President.

[Kel]

I know,i don't think Obama has any experience.But he is a fresh face,but when it comes down to it.I don't think he will last,sad to say..i truely think most are voting for him simply because he is black.More like for the Africans,this is a dream come true.Someone for them,vote for a black.Even if he's not the best choice for President.


Alan Keyes wished that was true back in 1996 and 2000, apparently that didn't work out for him....

[SoulManX]

Alan Keyes wished that was true back in 1996 and 2000, apparently that didn't work out for him....

But Keyes comes off like a prick:o

[Steve Rogers]

That Raven again in your av Soulman?

[Excel]

Lets examine our past few presidents.

BUSH-old white guy who lied to us and made the US, White House, and Presidential job look like a joke.

CLINTON-old white guy who famously lied to us and made the U.S., White House, and Presidential Job looks like a joke.

BUSH- old white guy

REAGAN: old white guy who, while extremely popular than, hes become some what of a joke as a president since

CARTER: old white guy

FORD: old white guy

NIXON: old white guy

Clinton had charisma but it was different than Obamas. Obamas is serious but hopeful; Bill was more charming/sleazy.

It aint just charisma, Obama comes off very idealistic and DIFFERENT and thats whatr people want, somethign different. It isnt just what he says and it has nothing to do with his track record; hes a YOUNG BLACK GUY.

Hes the definition of DIFFERENT when it comes the president and the candidates, that is how he is so instantly popular.

[deemar325]

Why do you support him? Really, I want to know. This entire Obama craze has been totally lost on me and I am curious as to what the appeal is. In all honesty, I also wonder, how many Obama supporters will come out and say they are voting for him on the grounds of him being black? (which I consider that just as bad as not voting for him on the grounds of his being black.) I ask because it seems he has taken a substantial lead in Iowa and it seems to that he lacks any kind of platform (sure, he will give vague ideas, but has never given a practical way to fund or carry out these grand schemes of his). He has no experience outside of 3 years in national politics, so that seems to me to be the equivilant of handing the reigns of a fortune 500 company to a CEO who has spent a few years in marketing. I can give a list of reasons why I support Richardson...I really wonder how many Obama voters can do the same (without using words like "He is fresh blood" or "He's an honest respectable guy....I know even though I've never met him"...y'know, using pseudo-reasons to cover up the fact that they are voting for him to show how 'liberal' they are)?

Note: I am not saying all Obama supporters are voting for him because he is charasmatic or black or trendy. I am simply asking to know why most people are supporting him.


BECAUSE HE'S BLACK

[raybia]

By the way, the American people haven't even HEARD Richardson's views and political expertise because they've been too busy having the "beautiful people" shoved down their throat by the media who have been pimping Obama, Hillary, Rudy and Romney like their next meal depended on it. An overweight, homely, understated Latino guy isn't glamorous enough for them to give a lot of airtime to.

jag

I'm sorry jag. You're my main man but I have to disagree with you on this one.

Rudy is not one of these "beautiful people."

[raybia]

You know thats not right. If their country didnt have those problems than their citizens would not risk life and limb to get here. Yes I have been to Mexico, and yes I know Mexicans but that doesent matter. I am well aware of the US goverments corrupt actions but, two wrongs dont make a right. Thats my whole point. Their country is oppressing them not us. I dont see what's so brave about protesting in American streets for things you are not legally entitled to. If they did that in their own county they would be gunned down.

The Mexican people need to stop abandoning their country and stand up to their goverment. To compare the "undocumented workers" plight to the Civil Rights Movement is an insult. With that said I am glad that we are able to provide people with jobs, and a chance at a better life. But im tired of liberals acting like America is obligated to do that.

First you say that the Mexican people would be gunned down by their Government if they protested then you say they should stand up to their Government. :huh:

So in other words you are saying they should commit suicide instead of immigrating to a country where they can have a life of freedom and potential prosperity.

[jaguarr]

I'm sorry jag. You're my main man but I have to disagree with you on this one.

Rudy is not one of these "beautiful people."

Rudy's got the whole "I'm America's Mayor/King of 9/11" thing going on and that puts him in the political cult of celebrity right there amongst the "beautiful" people as far as the media is concerned.

jag

[jaguarr]

BECAUSE HE'S BLACK

:eek:

DEEMAR!!!! Where the hell have you been, young man?! Your mother has been worried SICK! :cmad:

jag

[raybia]

Rudy's got the whole "I'm America's Mayor/King of 9/11" thing going on and that puts him in the political cult of celebrity right there amongst the "beautiful" people as far as the media is concerned.

jag

Ok, if that's the way you define "beautiful" then I agree with you. :cwink:

But one of these days I going to find something to disagree with you about. Mark my words! :cmad:

[jaguarr]

Ok, if that's the way you define "beautiful" then I agree with you. :cwink:

But one of these days I going to find something to disagree with you about. Mark my words! :cmad:

In other news, Mitt Romney's hair is a sentient entity and is planning a hostile attack on Giuliani's bald scalp. Just you watch.

jag

[deemar325]

:eek:

DEEMAR!!!! Where the hell have you been, young man?! Your mother has been worried SICK! :cmad:

jag


Sup Jag

Been focusing on my family, I've been lacking in that department.

But! I'm back for a while at least.

[jaguarr]

Sup Jag

Been focusing on my family, I've been lacking in that department.

But! I'm back for a while at least.

Alright, I'ma let you slide in that case. Any other answer would have resulted in a beating with a bag of oranges. Welcome home. :up:

jag

[raybia]

Sup Jag

Been focusing on my family, I've been lacking in that department.

But! I'm back for a while at least.

You have to know how to put your foot down man.

I told my ex-wife that I have to devote my time to the Hype whether she likes it or not.

[deemar325]

Alright, I'ma let you slide in that case. Any other answer would have resulted in a beating with a bag of oranges. Welcome home. :up:

jag

I prefer bags of apples, yum!

[deemar325]

You have to know how to put your foot down man.

I told my ex-wife that I have to devote my time to the Hype whether she likes it or not.

Man look my wife gave me a ultimatum, spend less time online or less time in them guts.








I like poo nana

Internet lost so sue me

[Matt]

Lets examine our past few presidents.

BUSH-old white guy who lied to us and made the US, White House, and Presidential job look like a joke.

CLINTON-old white guy who famously lied to us and made the U.S., White House, and Presidential Job looks like a joke.

BUSH- old white guy

REAGAN: old white guy who, while extremely popular than, hes become some what of a joke as a president since

CARTER: old white guy

FORD: old white guy

NIXON: old white guy

Clinton had charisma but it was different than Obamas. Obamas is serious but hopeful; Bill was more charming/sleazy.

It aint just charisma, Obama comes off very idealistic and DIFFERENT and thats whatr people want, somethign different. It isnt just what he says and it has nothing to do with his track record; hes a YOUNG BLACK GUY.

Hes the definition of DIFFERENT when it comes the president and the candidates, that is how he is so instantly popular.

So COSMETIC change simply for the sake of change is why you support him?

At least Deemar was honest and said its because he's black instead of saying as much while using a bunch of words like "different" to hide it.

[raybia]

Man look my wife gave me a ultimatum, spend less time online or less time in them guts.








I like poo nana

Internet lost so sue me

http://www.countrychoicenaturals.com/images/pages/products/recipes/bananapudding.jpg

Yeah I like it too. :csad:

[Matt]

http://www.countrychoicenaturals.com/images/pages/products/recipes/bananapudding.jpg

Yeah I like it too. :csad:

Now I really want some banana pudding :csad:

[deemar325]

I'm down for Obama, because I feel his politics will benefit me. Plain and simple, its moving the old guard out and ushering in new fresh blood.

And he's BLACK.

[deemar325]

http://www.countrychoicenaturals.com/images/pages/products/recipes/bananapudding.jpg

Yeah I like it too. :csad:

Pudding POP!

Doohh!

[Abaddon]

[QUOTE=Excel;13564105]
Clinton had charisma but it was different than Obamas. Obamas is serious but hopeful; Bill was more charming/sleazy.
You can't be charming and sleazy.:o
You're impression of Clinton is tainted by the sex scandal.

[Excel]

So COSMETIC change simply for the sake of change is why you support him?

At least Deemar was honest and said its because he's black instead of saying as much while using a bunch of words like "different" to hide it.

i didnt say that why i liked him; thats why most do.

[Matt]

i didnt say that why i liked him; thats why most do.

Why do YOU like him?

[deemar325]

[QUOTE=Excel;13564105]
Clinton had charisma but it was different than Obamas. Obamas is serious but hopeful; Bill was more charming/sleazy.
You can't be charming and sleazy.:o
You're impression of Clinton is tainted by the sex scandal.



Yeah you can

Snoop Dogg

Bill Maher

Bill Murray (His character at least)

[raybia]

Why do YOU like him?

Matt, I know you wouldn't vote for anyone just because of their race but would it take for you to vote for a black presidential candidate?

[Abaddon]

[QUOTE=Abaddon;13565026]



Yeah you can

Snoop Dogg

Bill Maher

Bill Murray (His character at least)

I don't find any of them particularly charming.:o

[deemar325]

[QUOTE=deemar325;13565087]

I don't find any of them particularly charming.:o

Your in the minority

[Excel]

Why do YOU like him?

Theres political frontrunner for me and the only person I know who I honestly think we would be the best guy for the kjob cant even run (Scwarzenegger) because hes a liberal republican; hes not too much of either which is exactly what we need-someone everybody can like, not half love and half hate.

BUT Obama will always have my vote because hes black and being black I wanna see a black president. I wish it were colin powell, but I wanna see a black man in Washington. THAT is progress, THAT is historical news.

but when it comes to issues; he still wins me over. Hes the only one who honestly seems to still be out of the political agenda; he talks like he personally has dreams to acomplish and their helping us, not winning elections. Hilarys in to win she said it herself, but I feel he is in it to help.

Its people like Obama who got us to the moon, who got the trains across the country, freed the slaves, and all that other historical ****. People who actually try and make a difference and advance and guide our country forward into the future.

I dont look at it like you do, examining all their views on current issues n **** cause the fact is while hes president there will be different and more important issues; bigger ones that have bigger effects and i want someone who i can trust to be thinking of me and how ill be affected rather than how business's or wars will be affected.

If Obama won and came out and said hed be transporting all war money to the "man on mars" fund, you guys would be the kind to freak out because of wehat it could be going to, how its some needleess cause and waste of money; but fact would be that would be actually advancing mankind far more than any other cause could.

A odd but imo accurate comparison for my view of the presedency is like most music albums nowadays. 3 quarters of all the tracks are filler but there are some are just awesome; that you listen to over and over again.

I dont want a filler president who just sits in the office for years, not really hurting or helping us or "helping" us by not ****ing up badly. And we've had filler president every year ever since JFK died, and god damnitt every candidate in this election just screams FILLER except for Barrack.

And thats from someone who honestly doesnt give a **** bout politics; if he aint the nominee I wont even vote because i wont help somebody who will suck get into office.

[Sincere]

First you say that the Mexican people would be gunned down by their Government if they protested then you say they should stand up to their Government. :huh:

So in other words you are saying they should commit suicide instead of immigrating to a country where they can have a life of freedom and potential prosperity.

Civil Rights activist faced beatings, water hosings, church bombings, lynchings, and all out terrorism. Im asking the Mexican people to get some balls, and stop running away from their country. It isnt right for them to come over and take jobs from American citizens. I know most of you are sheltered suburban liberals and you dont know any better. But Americans are losing their jobs and that isnt right.

[Abaddon]

But if he wins, and he sucks then wouldn't that just be an embarrassment for the black community?

[deemar325]

But if he wins, and he sucks then wouldn't that just be an embarrassment for the black community?


Not really, he'd just be a sh**ty Prez, but realistically alot of white folk will judge his performance and actions as all blacks, its the same old story. One brotha do something messed up we all the same in their eyes.

[Excel]

i know right? why aint bush making it rough for white folk get elected?

[Abaddon]

I say it in terms of people just voting for him because he's black. I mean it's pointless if he isn't well-qualified.

[raybia]

Civil Rights activist faced beatings, water hosings, church bombings, lynchings, and all out terrorism. Im asking the Mexican people to get some balls, and stop running away from their country. It isnt right for them to come over and take jobs from American citizens. I know most of you are sheltered suburban liberals and you dont know any better. But Americans are losing their jobs and that isnt right.

Americans are losing jobs to illegal immigrants from Mexico?

Please name the specific type and the approximate number of jobs that they are taking from us.

[deemar325]

I say it in terms of people just voting for him because he's black. I mean it's pointless if he isn't well-qualified.

C'mon man, people gonna take pride and special interest in their own. I'm willing to put money on all the Irish men who voted for Kennedy just because of his being Irish also.

Now for me, I've voted for white presidential canidates everytime and no one made me feel strange about that. I want to see a brother in the White House it might not change a damn thing or it actually might, but regardless I'd like to see it.

[Abaddon]

Civil Rights activist faced beatings, water hosings, church bombings, lynchings, and all out terrorism. Im asking the Mexican people to get some balls, and stop running away from their country. It isnt right for them to come over and take jobs from American citizens. I know most of you are sheltered suburban liberals and you dont know any better. But Americans are losing their jobs and that isnt right.

lol, they get jobs nobody else wants. You make it sound like they're running around as brokers, and real estate agents.:o

[Abaddon]

C'mon man, people gonna take pride and special interest in their own. I'm willing to put money on all the Irish men who voted for Kennedy just because of his being Irish also.

Now for me, I've voted for white presidential canidates everytime and no one made me feel strange about that. I want to see a brother in the White House it might not change a damn thing or it actually might, but regardless I'd like to see it.

Yeah, and people tend to vote for those who share their religious views. I get it, but you have to be willing to take the good with the bad and understand the consequence of making superficial decisions.

[raybia]

C'mon man, people gonna take pride and special interest in their own. I'm willing to put money on all the Irish men who voted for Kennedy just because of his being Irish also.

Now for me, I've voted for white presidential canidates everytime and no one made me feel strange about that. I want to see a brother in the White House it might not change a damn thing or it actually might, but regardless I'd like to see it.

You know, if I'm honest with myself I also want to see a black president. Think of the message that it would send to the world.

On one hand we say we are the most advance and civilized country on Earth and we have this idealist form of Government yet we lag behind is demonstrating we are a land that is progressive.

This is the 21st century but the U.S. has yet to have anything other than old rich men as President.

Wait I forgot about JFK, a young rich man, my bad.

[deemar325]

lol, they get jobs nobody else wants. You make it sound like they're running around as brokers, and real estate agents.:o

That's cold man, look I got some issues with illegals but I understand why they come over heres and respect them for the struggles they go through to get here.

Any man who would travel thousands of miles for work gets my respect.

[Abaddon]

young rich Catholic. and look how he turned out.:o

[raybia]

Yeah, and people tend to vote for those who share their religious views. I get it, but you have to be willing to take the good with the bad and understand the consequence of making superficial decisions.

I'm willing. Its not like every president that we every had wasn't elected due to superficial reasons so why not do it for a black man.

Also we aren't just picking some black guy off the street. Its Obama we are suggesting for office; not 50 cent.

[deemar325]

You know, if I'm honest with myself I also want to see a black president. Think of the message that it would send to the world.

On one hand we say we are the most advance and civilized country on Earth and we have this idealist form of Government yet we lag behind is demonstrating we are a land that is progressive.

This is the 21st century but the U.S. has yet to have anything other than old rich men as President.

Wait I forgot about JFK, a young rich man, my bad.


Yeah funny how that works.

Well in 20-30yrs a good chunk of American will be a brown hue so...

[raybia]

young rich Catholic. and look how he turned out.:o

They killed him. Probably the fate of the first black president. :csad:

[deemar325]

I'm willing. Its not like every president that we every had wasn't elected due to superficial reasons so why not do it for a black man.

Also we aren't just picking some black guy off the street. Its Obama we are suggesting for office; not 50 cent.

Thank you

[Matt]

Matt, I know you wouldn't vote for anyone just because of their race but would it take for you to vote for a black presidential candidate?

They'd simply have to be the best candidate. I have reviewed practically every candidate in this election with a fine toothed comb. I simply do not find Obama to be the best choice. He lacks all form of qualification and he takes no real stance on issues and only seems to pander to the masses by saying generalized ideas while giving no real insight on how to carry out his ideas (most of which are grossly unrealistic). I have found that Bill Richardson is the best choice for the presidency of these United States at the current time and that is why I will vote for him. He is Hispanic, is that why I am voting for him? No. I am voting for him because he is the best choice. The same would have to hold true for an African American candidate for them to get my vote. To this point there has not been a black candidate who has been the best choice for President. Right now, one African American politican I have been keeping an eye on is the new Governor of Massachusetts, Deval Patrick. I like his policy stances. Now how he does as governor of Mass. will determine whether or not I would be interested in seeing him as President, but he has definitely piqued my interest.

[Mr Sparkle]

Civil Rights activist faced beatings, water hosings, church bombings, lynchings, and all out terrorism. Im asking the Mexican people to get some balls, and stop running away from their country. It isnt right for them to come over and take jobs from American citizens. I know most of you are sheltered suburban liberals and you dont know any better. But Americans are losing their jobs and that isnt right.

:huh: you're kind of being a big hypocrite.
first of all, maybe you should grow some balls and start working harder so they don't give your job to some Mexican.
second, they're not taking jobs, it's not like you go to the restroom come back and there's a Mexican sitting on your chair, give me a break :whatever:.
the people that leave Mexico don't so so because of the corruption, they leave because it's a third world country where they get 1/10 what they get for doing the same job twice as hard.
there's little to no problem for Mexicans to protest as you should know if you knew anything about Mexico and had all those imaginary Mexican friends you keep saying you have.
you should ask them about the recent election and the continuous and sometimes obnoxious protests that some people launched against the government.
you should ask them about the people that have marched through the Main streets of Mexico demanding this or that, or the people that took the Mexico City University campus for almost a year.
all in protest, you don't fix a country by protesting, or else the US wouldn't be in Iraq would it?
don't be dumb it has nothing to do with being a "sheltered liberal" and everything to do with at least having passing knowledge of whatever it is you happen to be talking about.

[Mr Sparkle]

Yeah funny how that works.

Well in 20-30yrs a good chunk of American will be a brown hue so...


ahahahaha! how about you guys pick a good President, regardless of the color.
I like this Obama dude, he has Charisma.
is he the best? nope, could he be great? yeah.

[raybia]

They'd simply have to be the best candidate. I have reviewed practically every candidate in this election with a fine toothed comb. I simply do not find Obama to be the best choice. He lacks all form of qualification and he takes no real stance on issues and only seems to pander to the masses by saying generalized ideas while giving no real insight on how to carry out his ideas (most of which are grossly unrealistic). I have found that Bill Richardson is the best choice for the presidency of these United States at the current time and that is why I will vote for him. He is Hispanic, is that why I am voting for him? No. I am voting for him because he is the best choice. The same would have to hold true for an African American candidate for them to get my vote. To this point there has not been a black candidate who has been the best choice for President. Right now, one African American politican I have been keeping an eye on is the new Governor of Massachusetts, Deval Patrick. I like his policy stances. Now how he does as governor of Mass. will determine whether or not I would be interested in seeing him as President, but he has definitely piqued my interest.

I like him already.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deval_Patrick

[raybia]

ahahahaha! how about you guys pick a good President, regardless of the color.
I like this Obama dude, he has Charisma.
is he the best? nope, could he be great? yeah.

I haven't made up my mind yet. My conscious wouldn't allow me to vote for Obama merely because he's black but I'm not convinced about the "he has no experience" argument. I'm sure there we elected President's to where that argument could have been used.

George W. Bush's experience should have been the reason why he shouldn't have been elected.

[Matt]

I like him already.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deval_Patrick

I do aswell. A lot of his beliefs seem to be in sync with my own. I'm curious to see how he does as governor of massachusetts, but I am definitely interested in seeing where his career goes.

[raybia]

I do aswell. A lot of his beliefs seem to be in sync with my own. I'm curious to see how he does as governor of massachusetts, but I am definitely interested in seeing where his career goes.

edit

[raybia]

I do aswell. A lot of his beliefs seem to be in sync with my own. I'm curious to see how he does as governor of massachusetts, but I am definitely interested in seeing where his career goes.

I take it he has presidential expectations but does he have the right people behind him to make it possible?

[Matt]

I take it he has presidential expectations but does he have the right people behind him to make it possible?

Bit too soon to say on either account. More will be clear after we see where the 2008 election goes. Afterall, his governor seat is his first foray into politics (outside of some work for the Clinton administration).

[jaguarr]

Civil Rights activist faced beatings, water hosings, church bombings, lynchings, and all out terrorism. Im asking the Mexican people to get some balls, and stop running away from their country. It isnt right for them to come over and take jobs from American citizens. I know most of you are sheltered suburban liberals and you dont know any better. But Americans are losing their jobs and that isnt right.

Americans are losing their jobs to brown skinned people alright. But those people live in India and China. Try again.

jag

[hippie_hunter]

BUT Obama will always have my vote because hes black and being black I wanna see a black president. I wish it were colin powell, but I wanna see a black man in Washington. THAT is progress, THAT is historical news.
It would be great to see a minority in Washington but race should have absolutely no factor in the race. The best person should get the job regardless of sex or race.

but when it comes to issues; he still wins me over. Hes the only one who honestly seems to still be out of the political agenda; he talks like he personally has dreams to acomplish and their helping us, not winning elections. Hilarys in to win she said it herself, but I feel he is in it to help.
How so? Sure he has ideals, but how is he going to impliment them. Universal health care. Biofuels. Ending the Iraq War. Ending the genocide in Darfur. And everything else he says look great on paper. But how is he going to impliment them?

Although I do agree with you that he comes off as a person who's in it to make a good difference. But good intentions aren't enough.

Its people like Obama who got us to the moon, who got the trains across the country, freed the slaves, and all that other historical ****. People who actually try and make a difference and advance and guide our country forward into the future.
People like Obama are not what got us to the Moon, got trains across the country, and freed the slaves. That was done by people who took action. Obama really hasn't done enough action to make him on par with Abraham Lincoln and the Abolitionists, Lyndon B. Johnson who milked Kennedy's death to get things done, or the robber barrons.

Obama is more on par with Kennedy right now. An idealist. That's it. But he isn't like Lincoln, Johnson, Washington, Jefferson, or Roosevelt.

I dont look at it like you do, examining all their views on current issues n **** cause the fact is while hes president there will be different and more important issues; bigger ones that have bigger effects and i want someone who i can trust to be thinking of me and how ill be affected rather than how business's or wars will be affected.

If Obama won and came out and said hed be transporting all war money to the "man on mars" fund, you guys would be the kind to freak out because of wehat it could be going to, how its some needleess cause and waste of money; but fact would be that would be actually advancing mankind far more than any other cause could.
Yeah, you keep thinking that. I guarantee with someone like Obama and the vast majority of candidates out there things will still be the same old, same old.

A odd but imo accurate comparison for my view of the presedency is like most music albums nowadays. 3 quarters of all the tracks are filler but there are some are just awesome; that you listen to over and over again.

I dont want a filler president who just sits in the office for years, not really hurting or helping us or "helping" us by not ****ing up badly. And we've had filler president every year ever since JFK died, and god damnitt every candidate in this election just screams FILLER except for Barrack.
JFK wasn't that great of a President to begin with. Like Obama, he was more of an idealist. He couldn't get much done with because of a Republican Congress that didn't want to work with him. And common sense prevailed in the Cuban Missile Crisis. I bet that if George W. Bush were in office we'd have the same outcome.

The reason why we were able to have things such as going to the Moon, and fighting poverty and what not was because Johnson was excellent in milking Kennedy's death.

And thats from someone who honestly doesnt give a **** bout politics; if he aint the nominee I wont even vote because i wont help somebody who will suck get into office.
I find candidates such as Ron Paul, Bill Richardson, Joe Biden, and Mike Huckabee to be better than Obama.

[bored]

Keyes is a prick. Fittingly, Obama beat him for his Senate seat.

[Varient]

A lot of those Hispanics also resent the hell out of those white Americans that stereotype them for their race, and a lot of those white Americans that do that are a-holes with House and Senate seats, unfortunately.

jag

(smirk)

It's so refreshing to read some other group getting upset about poor treatment and stereotyping,.... I know I should join in,.. but I'm enjoying the caterwauling fine fm the sidelines just a lil too much,.....

(Chuckle)

[Varient]

Funny how "experience" gets air time when more than a few GOOD Presidents stepped into office with less of it.

Gee,.. I didn't Know George Washington even ran a company let alone a country prior to his election,... from what I understood,.. he ran a plantation.

Tsk.

You guys that REALLY believe in an age of Carter, Reagan, Clinton and Bush, (Peanut farmer, Movie Star, Womanizing Stereotyped politician, and Harvard C student.), that OBAMA MUST have some predetermined amount of "experience" before becoming president?

TSK.

[Darthphere]

Gee,.. I didn't Know George Washington even ran a company let alone a country prior to his election,... from what I understood,.. he ran a plantation.

Yes, lets forget that whole thing called the Revolutionary War.:huh:

[Matt]

Funny how "experience" gets air time when more than a few GOOD Presidents stepped into office with less of it.

Gee,.. I didn't Know George Washington even ran a company let alone a country prior to his election,... from what I understood,.. he ran a plantation.

Tsk.


You're comparing modern politics to a time when the President did next to nothing. George Washington would have tea with ANYONE who came to see him who was "dressed properly". His biggest task in office was to put down the Whiskey Rebellion, at which point he personally led the troops into the battle. See, in Washington's day...the office of President was pretty much the office of a glorified military general, which made Washington the perfect choice. The duties of the President really did not start to expand until after the Civl War. The Civil War did a lot of things, including pretty much killing federalism. That is when the office really became prominent.

And just for the record, at the time plantations were practically as large as and functioned as towns. Not to mention the biggest business in the US, so he was essentially a CEO and a mayor.


You guys that REALLY believe in an age of Carter, Reagan, Clinton and Bush, (Peanut farmer, Movie Star, Womanizing Stereotyped politician, and Harvard C student.), that OBAMA MUST have some predetermined amount of "experience" before becoming president?

TSK.

Peanut farmer who was the governor of Georgia, movie star who was the Governor of California, womanizing stereotyped politican who was the governor of Arknasas, and Harvard C student who was the governor of Texas. Way to try and generalize while ignoring facts and making a fool of yourself. :up:

No, there isn't some pre-determined ammount of experience, but I would certainly think better of trying to put a man with practically NO experience in National politics into the White House. Do you think foreign diplomats are going to take him seriously? Hell no, they will walk all over him. Do you think Congress will take him seriously? Again, they will walk all over him. He will become Nancy Pelosi's puppet leader. The man will be commander-in-chief of our military in a time of war with absolutely no experience. Whether or not you like the war (and I sure as hell don't), it is there and Obama really doesn't inspire me as Commander-in-Chief.

Experience is not a bad word as you try and make it out to be and I think the President should have a little more than 3 years in Congress, one of which he has missed over 85 % of his votes to campaign to be President.

[Matt]

It would be great to see a minority in Washington but race should have absolutely no factor in the race. The best person should get the job regardless of sex or race.


How so? Sure he has ideals, but how is he going to impliment them. Universal health care. Biofuels. Ending the Iraq War. Ending the genocide in Darfur. And everything else he says look great on paper. But how is he going to impliment them?

Although I do agree with you that he comes off as a person who's in it to make a good difference. But good intentions aren't enough.


People like Obama are not what got us to the Moon, got trains across the country, and freed the slaves. That was done by people who took action. Obama really hasn't done enough action to make him on par with Abraham Lincoln and the Abolitionists, Lyndon B. Johnson who milked Kennedy's death to get things done, or the robber barrons.

Obama is more on par with Kennedy right now. An idealist. That's it. But he isn't like Lincoln, Johnson, Washington, Jefferson, or Roosevelt.


Yeah, you keep thinking that. I guarantee with someone like Obama and the vast majority of candidates out there things will still be the same old, same old.


JFK wasn't that great of a President to begin with. Like Obama, he was more of an idealist. He couldn't get much done with because of a Republican Congress that didn't want to work with him. And common sense prevailed in the Cuban Missile Crisis. I bet that if George W. Bush were in office we'd have the same outcome.

The reason why we were able to have things such as going to the Moon, and fighting poverty and what not was because Johnson was excellent in milking Kennedy's death.


I find candidates such as Ron Paul, Bill Richardson, Joe Biden, and Mike Huckabee to be better than Obama.

If you ever come to my bar, you drink for free. Simply for that post alone :up:

[Varient]

You're comparing modern politics to a time when the President did next to nothing. George Washington would have tea with ANYONE who came to see him who was "dressed properly". His biggest task in office was to put down the Whiskey Rebellion, at which point he personally led the troops into the battle. See, in Washington's day...the office of President was pretty much the office of a glorified military general, which made Washington the perfect choice. The duties of the President really did not start to expand until after the Civl War. The Civil War did a lot of things, including pretty much killing federalism. That is when the office really became prominent.

And just for the record, at the time plantations were practically as large as and functioned as towns. Not to mention the biggest business in the US, so he was essentially a CEO and a mayor.



Peanut farmer who was the governor of Georgia, movie star who was the Governor of California, womanizing stereotyped politican who was the governor of Arknasas, and Harvard C student who was the governor of Texas. Way to try and generalize while ignoring facts and making a fool of yourself. :up:

No, there isn't some pre-determined ammount of experience, but I would certainly think better of trying to put a man with practically NO experience in National politics into the White House. Do you think foreign diplomats are going to take him seriously? Hell no, they will walk all over him. Do you think Congress will take him seriously? Again, they will walk all over him. He will become Nancy Pelosi's puppet leader. The man will be commander-in-chief of our military in a time of war with absolutely no experience. Whether or not you like the war (and I sure as hell don't), it is there and Obama really doesn't inspire me as Commander-in-Chief.

Experience is not a bad word as you try and make it out to be and I think the President should have a little more than 3 years in Congress, one of which he has missed over 85 % of his votes to campaign to be President.

Forced to go there because I've been called a fool by someone who doesn't know his history.

In EACH case where they were "Govenor" of a state,... these guys were able to pull it off because of their support structures.

It's right there in their Bio's authorized and otherwise.

And way to go on your saying that others will "walk over him" w/o you having ANY examples to pull from except your bias.

Jeez,.. and I thought this was an intelligent debate.

YOU JUST KNOW how he's going to be in office,... (LOL @ how many "presidents" surprized the masses in regards of what they did in office and then hear you come telling us how it WILL BE.)

Tsk,.. try again and be more civil next time.

[Varient]

Yes, lets forget that whole thing called the Revolutionary War.:huh:

I think my main point has merit that THROUGHOUT this countries history,... people have stepped into that role (president) with less resource and/or experience than folk are bleating that Obama needs.

And of course to win their points,.. folk are now minimizing those presidents with "less experience" as having it easier than Obama will.

Tsk.

[Varient]

It would be great to see a minority in Washington but race should have absolutely no factor in the race. The best person should get the job regardless of sex or race.


How so? Sure he has ideals, but how is he going to impliment them. Universal health care. Biofuels. Ending the Iraq War. Ending the genocide in Darfur. And everything else he says look great on paper. But how is he going to impliment them?

Although I do agree with you that he comes off as a person who's in it to make a good difference. But good intentions aren't enough.


People like Obama are not what got us to the Moon, got trains across the country, and freed the slaves. That was done by people who took action. Obama really hasn't done enough action to make him on par with Abraham Lincoln and the Abolitionists, Lyndon B. Johnson who milked Kennedy's death to get things done, or the robber barrons.

Obama is more on par with Kennedy right now. An idealist. That's it. But he isn't like Lincoln, Johnson, Washington, Jefferson, or Roosevelt.


Yeah, you keep thinking that. I guarantee with someone like Obama and the vast majority of candidates out there things will still be the same old, same old.


JFK wasn't that great of a President to begin with. Like Obama, he was more of an idealist. He couldn't get much done with because of a Republican Congress that didn't want to work with him. And common sense prevailed in the Cuban Missile Crisis. I bet that if George W. Bush were in office we'd have the same outcome.

The reason why we were able to have things such as going to the Moon, and fighting poverty and what not was because Johnson was excellent in milking Kennedy's death.


I find candidates such as Ron Paul, Bill Richardson, Joe Biden, and Mike Huckabee to be better than Obama.

Meh.

Why argue with someone who minimizes the fact that Kennedy intended to go to the moon but was "too much of an idealist" to pull it off - so his Vice did it by milking his death?

I'm done,... the twisted history here is starting to give me a clue as to what I'm dealing with.


V.

[Excel]

Deval Patrick...hes demands to cut money but also demands he roll in a rolls royce and have his own helicopter...whatever, my parents who live in Mass love him though.

btw huckabeesucks; same way I would never hold osmeonesreligion against them; they sure ashell better not use it to run the country. And doesnt he want all people with aids on their own island?

[Matt]

Forced to go there because I've been called a fool by someone who doesn't know his history.

In EACH case where they were "Govenor" of a state,... these guys were able to pull it off because of their support structures.

It's right there in their Bio's authorized and otherwise.

And way to go on your saying that others will "walk over him" w/o you having ANY examples to pull from except your bias.


Probably because he has been a lap dog of Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the Democratic leadership throughout his time in Congress. And what are you talking about support structure? This isn't about why they win elections. Its about whether or not they are qualified to be President. Obama is not. They were.


Jeez,.. and I thought this was an intelligent debate.

YOU JUST KNOW how he's going to be in office,... (LOL @ how many "presidents" surprized the masses in regards of what they did in office and then hear you come telling us how it WILL BE.)

Tsk,.. try again and be more civil next time.

Nice to know you can read the future, and how 'bout you don't tell me to be civil while using your passive aggressive "I guess you don't know your history" schtick.

[Matt]

Deval Patrick...hes demands to cut money but also demands he roll in a rolls royce and have his own helicopter...whatever, my parents who live in Mass love him though.

btw huckabeesucks; same way I would never hold osmeonesreligion against them; they sure ashell better not use it to run the country. And doesnt he want all people with aids on their own island?

Excel, you should better inform yourself on Mike Huckabee. I don't see how you are such an adamant Obama supporter when you seem to know nothing on the other candidates. Why not read up on the other candidates running before you back someone so you can make the best informed decision?

[Excel]

No way am I voting another old southern white guy like the last 4 Presidents we had ;) :up:

They seem to be very good at selling themselves and then ****ing us over; I dont see why huckabee would be any different. If you want change,then you elect someone DIFFERENT, and voting for someone who is the exact same kinda person who weve had the past 18 years aint changing ****. It isnt rocket science.

[Matt]

Then vote for the south-western Hispanic guy who also happens to be the best qualified :yay:

[Varient]

Probably because he has been a lap dog of Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the Democratic leadership throughout his time in Congress. And what are you talking about support structure? This isn't about why they win elections. Its about whether or not they are qualified to be President. Obama is not. They were.



Nice to know you can read the future, and how 'bout you don't tell me to be civil while using your passive aggressive "I guess you don't know your history" schtick.

Why are you going there?

Bottom line you don't KNOW how he will do.

Example: NIXON was a surprise to EVERYONE when he got into office.

You don't like the fact that I don't appreciate being called names and THEN take offense cuz I talk down to someone who dismisses DEBATE w/o any data?

Strange place you have here.

V.

[Excel]

Then vote for the south-western Hispanic guy who also happens to be the best qualified :yay:

But his image is aweful; I dont want to see the office continue to be looked at as a national joke either. He's my dream VP for Barrack though :up:

[Erzengel]

Why are you going there?

Bottom line you don't KNOW how he will do.

Example: NIXON was a surprise to EVERYONE when he got into office.

You don't like the fact that I don't appreciate being called names and THEN take offense cuz I talk down to someone who dismisses DEBATE w/o any data?

Strange place you have here.

V.

Unless I missed something here, where did Matt exactly call you any name? :huh:

[Matt]

But his image is aweful; I dont want to see the office continue to be looked at as a national joke either.

Looked down on? Richardson is a world respected diplomat. Foreign dignitaries loved him because he was Bill Clinton's ambassador to the U.N.. He has successfully negotiated with North Korea, Cuba, and Iraq for the release of political prisoners and nominated four times for a Nobel Peace Prize due to his work as a diplomat. That is one of the main reasons I believe we need him. We need a diplomat at this point of our countrty's history. Not a cowboy like Clinton, and not someone who is green like Obama. If anything, foreign leaders will look down upon Obama for his total lack of experience.

[Matt]

Why are you going there?

Bottom line you don't KNOW how he will do.

Example: NIXON was a surprise to EVERYONE when he got into office.

You don't like the fact that I don't appreciate being called names and THEN take offense cuz I talk down to someone who dismisses DEBATE w/o any data?

Strange place you have here.

V.

Hippie_Hunter and Phere have both given you facts that you seem to ignore by saying "Clearly you don't know your history" while they are the ones backing it up.

[Excel]

Looked down on? Richardson is a world respected diplomat. Foreign dignitaries loved him because he was Bill Clinton's ambassador to the U.N.. He has successfully negotiated with North Korea, Cuba, and Iraq for the release of political prisoners and nominated four times for a Nobel Peace Prize due to his work as a diplomat. That is one of the main reasons I believe we need him. We need a diplomat at this point of our countrty's history. Not a cowboy like Clinton, and not someone who is green like Obama. If anything, foreign leaders will look down upon Obama for his total lack of experience.

I was rfering to that I dont want another president who gets mauled by the media and press after a couple mistakes because he looks human. I dont want to see our presidents weight getting made fun of by Jay Leno. I want him to bring some respect. Yall hate on Kennedy but he brought respect to our office and country both because he was a pimp and because he was smart; thats what I want.

[Matt]

I was rfering to that I dont want another president who gets mauled by the media and press after a couple mistakes because he looks human. I dont want to see our presidents weight getting made fun of by Jay Leno. I want him to bring some respect. Yall hate on Kennedy but he brought respect to our office and country both because he was a pimp and because he was smart; thats what I want.

But that'll never happen. Leno, Conan, Stewart...they will make fun of any president. They will make fun of Obama for something. It is just the nature of our society. Richardson is smart and respected. To not vote for him because he is fat is ridiculous and quite frankly, beneath you, Excel.

[Erzengel]

Kennedy was an idealist and he spent all of 2 years in the Office, and his legacy to you is "he was a pimp" and "because he was smart"? :huh:

[Excel]

Heh I didnt say I wouldnt vote for him because he was fat, if Barrack drops out and him vs. Hilary hell have my vote, I just think he would better as VP.

He doesnt strike me as a real leader so much as an intelligent worker so he should be put in a position to help us best, and thats not leading but helping.

[Excel]

Kennedy was an idealist and he spent all of 2 years in the Office, and his legacy to you is "he was a pimp" and "because he was smart"? :huh:

Lol no, people of all kinds at the time has mad respect for him because he didnt only get things done but he had a good looking wife was mor eof a celebrity than president. We could look up to him. When is the last time we were able to say we looked up to our president?

[ANTOINE X]

I m Canadian so I can't vote but we depend on you guys so I have to take an eye on your presidency. What I have to say is life is not about doing the right decision but more importantly about making changes in life that they are right or wrong. I don't really blame Bush cause he is a victim of the old system. The US is like an old machine who did very good for many decades but now it shows some flaws and it needs to be redesigned to be able to survive the new millennium. If the Americans elect Obama or Hillary who are two minorities I think it means a lot, it means that the Americans are open to a change and that they want to experiment. This is what life is all about trying new things rather than looking for succes!

[Matt]

Heh I didnt say I wouldnt vote for him because he was fat, if Barrack drops out and him vs. Hilary hell have my vote, I just think he would better as VP.

He doesnt strike me as a real leader so much as an intelligent worker so he should be put in a position to help us best, and thats not leading but helping.

Tell that to the people of New Mexico where he is turning out to be one of the most successful governors they have ever had.

[Matt]

Lol no, people of all kinds at the time has mad respect for him because he didnt only get things done but he had a good looking wife was mor eof a celebrity than president. We could look up to him. When is the last time we were able to say we looked up to our president?

Okay...y'know what...you shouldn't be allowed to vote :csad:

[Matt]

I m Canadian so I can't vote but we depend on you guys so I have to take an eye on your presidency. What I have to say is life is not about doing the right decision but more importantly about making changes in life that they are right or wrong. I don't really blame Bush cause he is a victim of the old system. The US is like an old machine who did very good for many decades but now it shows some flaws and it needs to be redesigned to be able to survive the new millennium. If the Americans elect Obama or Hillary who are two minorities I think it means a lot, it means that the Americans are open to a change and that they want to experiment. This is what life is all about trying new things rather than looking for succes!

But what you are suggesting is that we should elect an inferior candidate over a more qualified candidate simply because of their gender or skin color? That is at best, change simply for the sake of change, at worst extreme racism or sexual descrimination.

[Erzengel]

Kennedy had very little major legislative changes, while he was probably more appealing to the general populace, people who think of him as one of the best presidents based only on 2 and a half years in office, and ignoring the Bay of Pigs incident? :huh:

[hippie_hunter]

Meh.

Why argue with someone who minimizes the fact that Kennedy intended to go to the moon but was "too much of an idealist" to pull it off - so his Vice did it by milking his death?

I'm done,... the twisted history here is starting to give me a clue as to what I'm dealing with.


V.

Sorry, but it's the truth. Kennedy got very little done in office. Mostly because of a Republican Congress that didn't want to work with him. Name me one thing that Kennedy actually managed to do while he was in office that has such a huge impact today.

And you can't say the Cuban Missile Crisis. Common sense of both the American and Soviet leadership realising that if they went to nuclear war, everything would be destroyed.

You know what I'll save you the time, because I'll tell you. The Peace Corps. That's about it.

The majority of Kennedy's vision like the Civil Rights Act, the Moon Landing, and Johnson's transformation of Kennedy's ideas of fighting poverty, improving health care, heavy immigration reform, improving education, etc. were either incorporated into Johnson's Great Society or done under his watch.

[hippie_hunter]

If you ever come to my bar, you drink for free. Simply for that post alone :up:

Awesome. Now all I have to do is wait until I'm 21! :yay:

[Varient]

Unless I missed something here, where did Matt exactly call you any name? :huh:

Semantics.
"Being congratted on sounding like a fool" for having an opinion based on History 101 in college.

I'm really not going to go into it with you because I'd rather not be immediately banned,... maybe later this afternoon when I finish DEBATING why Obama is no worse than all these other scary Yahoo's running for the office.

See,.. here's my spin:

I need BETTER reasons than "He doesn't have enough experience" or "He's a smoker" before I write someone off as not able to be president.

IMPO the presidential race is a popularity contest for those who have the resources to run.

What no one has explained to my satisfaction is how one can ignore the fact that it is more important who the president surrounds himself with than how much "experience" he has in the job.

I really don't mean to be trite,.. but Political office doesn't get more difficult as you go up the chain unless you insist on making it harder - it's all about resources and knowing how to use them.

A good president IMHO is one who can surround himself with good people,... listen to their council,.. then make the hard choices.

It's not about who's prettier or who's been lying to the public the longest except in running the race.

For the second time since I've started voting I don't "Like" any of the canidates,.... but I'm also not going to dismiss Obama because "He lacks experience" and his toeing the line in Congress is seen as being a lapdog?

V.

[Erzengel]

Even the Civil Rights Act was conceived by his brother Robert and many Civil Right Leaders didn't like that he distanced himself from civil right issues previously.

I think Kennedy could have done a lot for the country if he wasn't assassinated but saying he did a lot in the time in office, is somewhat exagerated.

[Matt]

Semantics.
"Being congratted on sounding like a fool" for having an opinion based on History 101 in college.

I'm really not going to go into it with you because I'd rather not be immediately banned,... maybe later this afternoon when I finish DEBATING why Obama is no worse than all these other scary Yahoo's running for the office.

See,.. here's my spin:

I need BETTER reasons than "He doesn't have enough experience" or "He's a smoker" before I write someone off as not able to be president.

IMPO the presidential race is a popularity contest for those who have the resources to run.

What no one has explained to my satisfaction is how one can ignore the fact that it is more important who the president surrounds himself with than how much "experience" he has in the job.

I really don't mean to be trite,.. but Political office doesn't get more difficult as you go up the chain unless you insist on making it harder - it's all about resources and knowing how to use them.

A good president IMHO is one who can surround himself with good people,... listen to their council,.. then make the hard choices.

It's not about who's prettier or who's been lying to the public the longest except in running the race.

For the second time since I've started voting I don't "Like" any of the canidates,.... but I'm also not going to dismiss Obama because "He lacks experience" and his toeing the line in Congress is seen as being a lapdog?

V.

I gave you tons of reasons. All you can say is he "is idealistic" or "fresh".

And I said you made a fool of yourself. Not that you are a fool. There is a difference. Mostly because you tried to ignore the fact that Carter, Bush, Clinton, and Reagan all held governor seats before being president.

[Varient]

Hippie_Hunter and Phere have both given you facts that you seem to ignore by saying "Clearly you don't know your history" while they are the ones backing it up.

No.

They have given their opinions and rationalized (In one case) that because he didn't get what he wanted done before he was killed that JFK would not have gotten to the moon or done any of the things he'd wanted.

If you are saying that stating "what-if's" is the way to argue a point,.. Ill come back with scads of "facts" for you.

V.

[hippie_hunter]

Kennedy had very little major legislative changes, while he was probably more appealing to the general populace, people who think of him as one of the best presidents based only on 2 and a half years in office, and ignoring the Bay of Pigs incident? :huh:

Let's not forget that Kennedy's administration pretty much set in motion for Saddam Hussein to gain power. Or increasing our presence in Vietnam.

People loved and still love Kennedy for the ideals he represented and his image. Also the fact that you get your head blown off guarantees you a 95% approval rating. Not for his actions

[Erzengel]

I do think "experience" is somewhat important and I'd throw Hillary in, because she's only in her 2nd term as Senator which is her "only" official political position. Plus the fact that she carpetbagged her way into NY, always bugs me. I'd have more respect if she stayed in Arkansas and became a Senator there but no she had to go for a state that would make her more appealing.

[Matt]

No.

They have given their opinions and rationalized (In one case) that because he didn't get what he wanted done before he was killed that JFK would not have gotten to the moon or done any of the things he'd wanted.

If you are saying that stating "what-if's" is the way to argue a point,.. Ill come back with scads of "facts" for you.

V.

You're the one using What-ifs. Kennedy's short term shows Congress blocked practically every attempt he made to pass anything. YOu are the one saying "If he didn't die he would be one of the greatest"

[PhotoJones]

I think the appeal of Obama is that he says things that other politicians don't say. He speaks about things that matter to the majority of the country, not just a select few. Also, he seems the most genuine.

[hippie_hunter]

No.

They have given their opinions and rationalized (In one case) that because he didn't get what he wanted done before he was killed that JFK would not have gotten to the moon or done any of the things he'd wanted.

If you are saying that stating "what-if's" is the way to argue a point,.. Ill come back with scads of "facts" for you.

V.

The man couldn't get anything done due to Congress. That's fact. However, I'll admit that I was wrong due that the Republicans were a majority. However you still had your conservative Democrats and the Republican minority that didn't work with Kennedy. Put those two together and the outnumbered the Kennedy styled Democrats.

The man was more of an idealist than an action taker. That's fact.

Pretty much everything Kennedy invisioned was done under Johnson's watch. That's fact.

He was in office for too short of time to make any true impact because a huge portion of his skull flopped off his head. That's fact.

If things continued the way they were going under Kennedy's leadership. The Civil Rights Act would have most likely occured slightly later than it did. And maybe the Moon landing would have happened so we could beat those damn evil Commies. But unless a more Kennedy-styled Democratic Congress gained power under his administration. Kennedy would have still been unable to do the vast majority of what he visioned.

[hippie_hunter]

I do think "experience" is somewhat important and I'd throw Hillary in, because she's only in her 2nd term as Senator which is her "only" official political position. Plus the fact that she carpetbagged her way into NY, always bugs me. I'd have more respect if she stayed in Arkansas and became a Senator there but no she had to go for a state that would make her more appealing.

I live in New York and the fact that she carpetbagged her way into New York pissses me off. What else pisses me off about her is that she used her position not to help the people of New York, but to build her own political career so that she could run for President. She used her re-election campaign as a fundraiser for her Presidential aspirations.

I'd really would prefer Obama over this b***h.

[Varient]

Sorry, but it's the truth. Kennedy got very little done in office. Mostly because of a Republican Congress that didn't want to work with him. Name me one thing that Kennedy actually managed to do while he was in office that has such a huge impact today.

And you can't say the Cuban Missile Crisis. Common sense of both the American and Soviet leadership realising that if they went to nuclear war, everything would be destroyed.

You know what I'll save you the time, because I'll tell you. The Peace Corps. That's about it.

The majority of Kennedy's vision like the Civil Rights Act, the Moon Landing, and Johnson's transformation of Kennedy's ideas of fighting poverty, improving health care, heavy immigration reform, improving education, etc. were either incorporated into Johnson's Great Society or done under his watch.


No offense -
My point is we'll never know because he was killed halfway thru his first run.
He HAD A VISION,... he was trying to impliment it,... he got wacked in the process of trying to make change.

I'm also not going to minimize someone that others believed it would be better if he were dead,.... It points for me at the fact that he was in the process of making change and it wasn't appreciated.

V.

[hippie_hunter]

No offense -
My point is we'll never know because he was killed halfway thru his first run.
He HAD A VISION,... he was trying to impliment it,... he got wacked in the process of trying to make change.

I'm also not going to minimize someone that others believed it would be better if he were dead,.... It points for me at the fact that he was in the process of making change and it wasn't appreciated.

V.

Yes Kennedy had a vision. A good vision designed to bring change and help to the American people. That's it. Sorry but the truth is that Kennedy was unable, and very likely to continue to be so because of Congress, to get much of anything done.

Kennedy's assassination and Johnson's action taking was what got Kennedy's vision off the ground.

[Varient]

I gave you tons of reasons. All you can say is he "is idealistic" or "fresh".

And I said you made a fool of yourself. Not that you are a fool. There is a difference. Mostly because you tried to ignore the fact that Carter, Bush, Clinton, and Reagan all held governor seats before being president.

I never said that. (Idealistic? "Fresh"???)

And I didn't "ignore" what they did before - I had taken the time to look at how they had pulled it off.

Look at the current Govenor of California.

How much "experience" does he have and how much of his successes have been by who he surrounded himself with?

Easy answer : He built his team and delegated and overcame his lack of "experience" by using the counsel of others more privy in the areas that he was not familar with to govern correctly.

Honestly,... A CEO of a major Corp could probably be a better president than anyone running for the job right now,... but none of them would take the pay cut.

This is because that is what CEO's do - they surround themselves with folk with a clue and make money.



V.

[Varient]

Let's not forget that Kennedy's administration pretty much set in motion for Saddam Hussein to gain power. Or increasing our presence in Vietnam.

People loved and still love Kennedy for the ideals he represented and his image. Also the fact that you get your head blown off guarantees you a 95% approval rating. Not for his actions

Damn.

[Varient]

You're the one using What-ifs. Kennedy's short term shows Congress blocked practically every attempt he made to pass anything. YOu are the one saying "If he didn't die he would be one of the greatest"

Stop that please.

I didn't say that either.

V.

[Steve Rogers]

I'm pretty neutral towards Obama. While I don't hate him, I feel there are other candidates better suited out there. And while I'd sooner vote for Richardson or Edwards before Obama, let's face it: neither of those guys have a shot. So if the race comes down to Obama vs. Any of the Republican Candidates, would it be wrong to cast my vote for him based on the fact that I support him over any of the Republican candidates, but still don't support him one hundred percent?

[Matt]

I never said that. (Idealistic? "Fresh"???)

And I didn't "ignore" what they did before - I had taken the time to look at how they had pulled it off.

Look at the current Govenor of California.

How much "experience" does he have and how much of his successes have been by who he surrounded himself with?

Easy answer : He built his team and delegated and overcame his lack of "experience" by using the counsel of others more privy in the areas that he was not familar with to govern correctly.

Honestly,... A CEO of a major Corp could probably be a better president than anyone running for the job right now,... but none of them would take the pay cut.

This is because that is what CEO's do - they surround themselves with folk with a clue and make money.



V.

Arnold was a lobbyist, wrote several bills in California, and was actively involved in politics before running. He had experience.

I'm not saying that a strong cabinet and staff is not important, but I am not electing a guy who will hire a strong staff to do his job for him. I am voting for the guy who will do his job the best because when push comes to shove, the President makes the final decision. Not his staff. Obama hasn't shown that he is capable of handling the job nor that he has the experience to do it.

[Varient]

Arnold was a lobbyist, wrote several bills in California, and was actively involved in politics before running. He had experience.

I'm not saying that a strong cabinet and staff is not important, but I am not electing a guy who will hire a strong staff to do his job for him. I am voting for the guy who will do his job the best because when push comes to shove, the President makes the final decision. Not his staff. Obama hasn't shown that he is capable of handling the job nor that he has the experience to do it.

?
"a lobbyist, wrote several bills in California, and was actively involved in politics before running." = "Experience in being the GOVENOR of CALIFORNIA?"


Now you are reaching because:

Obama was in Illinois State senate 1997-2004 - not lobbying for attention from elected officials,... Obama has Written Bills WHILE IN OFFICE,.... Not simply doing it from the outside.

His BIO says he was MORE active than Arnold has been,.... so what exactly do you mean?

V.

[ANTOINE X]

But what you are suggesting is that we should elect an inferior candidate over a more qualified candidate simply because of their gender or skin color? That is at best, change simply for the sake of change, at worst extreme racism or sexual descrimination.

Well first I never said he(Obama) was inferior in contrary I think he said something that really justify what I was saying earlier with bush as part of the old system! Obama said we should not always hate our enemies but also try to understand try to communicate see if there other alternative than war. To me sending troops to fight the enemy is part of the old system. With bush it s more like ''its my way or the Highway''. Not that it wasn't effective it was at some time but if you use it all the time it 's becoming a problem.

To tell you the truth I was more about Hillary than Obama.But she made a big mistake to agree to send troops In Irak, so now she's out of my list.

And I ll be honest with you it is simply because she s a woman. Why? You re probably gonna laugh at that answer but I want you to think about it.

Even if I m a man (And some time really macho) I found out that most of the problems in humanity existence were done by men! Beginning with war! I m tired about having people killing each other for a peace of land or money or religion it has never change since!

Ill tell you what make change my mind : I went in a store and there was two girls playing side by side on a race video game: one of the girls was better than the other one but instead of looking for the finish line she said to her other girl to watch her self she even tell her how to play at the risk of loosing the game. Now you know if it was 2 guys chance are it wouldn't be the same story. one would be the winer and the other one the loser end of the story.

So by electing a woman I think they might be hope for a none violent world. I'm not saying there re saint ( b**** will still exist :grin:) but I could live with that. I have a big respect for Hillary to be a woman in that jungle. I think guys have to step down for while go back to 'school' learn from the women...But that doesn't mean we wont be back we will and this time stronger than ever! :yay:

[Matt]

?
"a lobbyist, wrote several bills in California, and was actively involved in politics before running." = "Experience in being the GOVENOR of CALIFORNIA?"


Now you are reaching because:

Obama was in Illinois State senate 1997-2004 - not lobbying for attention from elected officials,... Obama has Written Bills WHILE IN OFFICE,.... Not simply doing it from the outside.

His BIO says he was MORE active than Arnold has been,.... so what exactly do you mean?

V.


Firstly, what bio are you talking about? Cite your sources if you are going to make claims like that.

Second, yes, Arnold's experience in CALIFORNIA politics does qualify him to be governor of a single state. Obama's state senate tenure qualifies him to be a senator, not President of the ENTIRE UNITED STATES.

[Steve Rogers]

Damn it. I hate when my post becomes the last on the previous page and gets lost forever in the SHH void.

[Matt]

Well first I never said he(Obama) was inferior in contrary I think he said something that really justify what I was saying earlier with bush as part of the old system! Obama said we should not always hate our enemies but also try to understand try to communicate see if there other alternative than war. To me sending troops to fight the enemy is part of the old system. With bush it s more like ''its my way or the Highway''. Not that it wasn't effective it was at some time but if you use it all the time it 's becoming a problem.

To tell you the truth I was more about Hillary than Obama.But she made a big mistake to agree to send troops In Irak, so now she's out of my list.

And I ll be honest with you it is simply because she s a woman. Why? You re probably gonna laugh at that answer but I want you to think about it.

Even if I m a man (And some time really macho) I found out that most of the problems in humanity existence were done by men! Beginning with war! I m tired about having people killing each other for a peace of land or money or religion it has never change since!

Ill tell you what make change my mind : I went in a store and there was two girls playing side by side on a race video game: one of the girls was better than the other one but instead of looking for the finish line she said to her other girl to watch her self she even tell her how to play at the risk of loosing the game. Now you know if it was 2 guys chance are it wouldn't be the same story. one would be the winer and the other one the loser end of the story.

So by electing a woman I think they might be hope for a none violent world. I'm not saying there re saint ( b**** will still exist :grin:) but I could live with that. I have a big respect for Hillary to be a woman in that jungle. I think guys have to step down for while go back to 'school' learn from the women...But that doesn't mean we wont be back we will and this time stronger than ever! :yay:

I honestly don't know how to respond to any of that rant :huh:

[Erzengel]

So essentially American should give Hillary a shot in the White House because she's a woman, almost using the excuse, men have f'ed it up, let's see what she can do. Not even going into the aspect if she is indeed qualified for the job?

[Matt]

I'm pretty neutral towards Obama. While I don't hate him, I feel there are other candidates better suited out there. And while I'd sooner vote for Richardson or Edwards before Obama, let's face it: neither of those guys have a shot. So if the race comes down to Obama vs. Any of the Republican Candidates, would it be wrong to cast my vote for him based on the fact that I support him over any of the Republican candidates, but still don't support him one hundred percent?

I'm still not sure that Edwards and Richardson can't win. Polls in primaries are very inaccurate as several of the people they project do not show up to vote for primaries.

The fact that Richardson has 13-15 % of the vote is impressive because that 13-15 % who are aware of RIchardson are likely more devoted as they have bothered to inform themselves of a lower tier candidate, where as Edwards, Clinton, and Obama's campaing probably has AT LEAST a quarter of their votes due to media as opposed to actual support. If Richardson can get the vote out there in Iowa, he can very well be the dark horse that finishes in the top 3. If he beats just one of the major 3, then his campaign can very well snowball by the time it gets to New Hampshire and South Carolina.

[ANTOINE X]

So essentially American should give Hillary a shot in the White House because she's a woman, almost using the excuse, men have f'ed it up, let's see what she can do. Not even going into the aspect if she is indeed qualified for the job?

why not... you see many president with diplomas bigger then all the super hero hype treads combined together and what? Did you really see big changes?

[ANTOINE X]

Some of u are afraid of changes so you elect the same type of guy and things don't change much.

[Erzengel]

Because it would be incredibly careless and naive to think that just because she's a woman, it would be a catalyst to end violence over the world and bring us to a golden age.

[Steve Rogers]

I'm still not sure that Edwards and Richardson can't win. Polls in primaries are very inaccurate as several of the people they project do not show up to vote for primaries.

The fact that Richardson has 13-15 % of the vote is impressive because that 13-15 % who are aware of RIchardson are likely more devoted as they have bothered to inform themselves of a lower tier candidate, where as Edwards, Clinton, and Obama's campaing probably has AT LEAST a quarter of their votes due to media as opposed to actual support. If Richardson can get the vote out there in Iowa, he can very well be the dark horse that finishes in the top 3. If he beats just one of the major 3, then his campaign can very well snowball by the time it gets to New Hampshire and South Carolina.That would be nice. I mean, mathaematically speaking everyone has a chance, but in the end I think it will come down to media coverage. Sometimes I wish we could do away with television in times of election. I think we've been voting based on what the boob tube tells us since the 50's. I also love how the media plays up the fact that Obama is black and that Hillary is a woman and never mentions Richardson's hispanic heritage. If we are going to turn this into a We Are the World Election, then give all minorities a fair shake in the media. But still, my earlier question still stands. Should I vote for a guy I kinda like just because I hate the other guy? Last election I voted for Nader just because I hated Kerry and Bush. I don't know how smart that was. Is it better to not vote at all? Again, I don't dislike Obama, but at this point of the race there are other candidates I support. In my personal list Obama is like 3rd place. Is it morally wrong to vote in my number three choice because my number one and two choices are out?

[Matt]

I think it is. But thats just me. I think you should vote for who you see as the best person for the job, regardless of their odds of winning.

[Steve Rogers]

I think it is. But thats just me. I think you should vote for who you see as the best person for the job, regardless of their odds of winning.Well I'm talking about in November. When only two candidates remain.

[ANTOINE X]

Because it would be incredibly careless and naive to think that just because she's a woman, it would be a catalyst to end violence over the world and bring us to a golden age.

First u don't know that. Cause you never tried it and thats the whole problem with some Americans citizens they are too traditional. And also I think Hillary will do some mistake but it s normal she is the first woman so it wont be perfect. But she will open the door to other woman president so you have to see this in long term.

Look I m not a feminist but I am open to knew idea new ways of thinking. Men we had our chances and we did very good in terms of economy and science but socially we need help. All those war are men's war noting to do with women.

[Varient]

Firstly, what bio are you talking about? Cite your sources if you are going to make claims like that.

Second, yes, Arnold's experience in CALIFORNIA politics does qualify him to be governor of a single state. Obama's state senate tenure qualifies him to be a senator, not President of the ENTIRE UNITED STATES.

Agreeing to disagree that being able to write out what you want and "lobby" elected officials does NOT give the required experience to be the govenor of ANY STATE.

If you like I'll start posting links,... they all say the same thing,...
For example in ref to his "lack of experience on foriegn topics:

"First off, the whole, no experience in international issues is a) not a Presidential qualification - if it was, Bush wouldn’t have been allowed to run, and b) not true - he was born in Hawaii to a Kenyan father, and his family relocated to Jakarta.

He received a B.A. in political science with a specialization in international relations from Columbia University, and spent a year working for the Business International Corporation, a publishing and advisory firm dedicated to assisting American companies in operating abroad, as an editor in its international financial information division.
He was also the primary sponsor of the "Democratic Republic of the Congo Relief, Security, and Democracy Promotion Act."
Obama has also traveled to Russia, the Ukraine and Azerbaijan to personally inspect a nuclear warhead destruction facility, and to tout a disease control and prevention facility.

He’s travelled to Kenya, Ethiopia, Chad, Djibouti and South Africa to encourage voluntary HIV testing. He’s also gone to Kuwait, Iraq, Jordan, Israel, and Palestine on official Congressional delegations.

So, to say he hasn’t got international experience is kind of inaccurate considering how much more experience he has than others who have run successfully. "

Reference: dalepetrie - a poster on http://askville.amazon.com/Barack-Obama-appeals-people
Who compiled his info from Obama website, wikipedia and the Chicago Tribune.

Can you disprove any of this? as in keep saying he has no experience abroad dealing with others?

Can you please list the other canidates who have at least "SOME" experience abroad before assuming that because Obama doesn't he'll be run rough-shod over by foriegn diplomats?

V.

V.

[Erzengel]

First u don't know that. Cause you never tried it and thats the whole problem with some Americans citizens they are too traditional. And also I think Hillary will do some mistake but it s normal she is the first woman so it wont be perfect. But she will open the door to other woman president so you have to see this in long term.

Look I m not a feminist but I am open to knew idea new ways of thinking. Men we had our chances and we did very good in terms of economy and science but socially we need help. All those war are men's war noting to do with women.
Hey I like ideas as much as the next guy, but picking the president of the most powerful country of the world based on, "let's try something different" is foolish. It'd be one thing if she was the most capable person for the job, which I have to say as of right now, I don't think she is.

[ANTOINE X]

Hey I like ideas as much as the next guy, but picking the president of the most powerful country of the world based on, "let's try something different" is foolish. It'd be one thing if she was the most capable person for the job, which I have to say as of right now, I don't think she is.


You know what is man world? I do. Its lets be first in the world. I'm tired of working 8 or twelve hours just to see some trillions of dollars showing in a brilliant LED Nadsdaq screen in the middle of Manhattan! Like its something cool to watch! Or working hard so that Bile gates gets 20 mercedez benz instead of 10 so that it look good on his CV.

Let s face it! All the different nation talk to each other because of money not because they like each other thats crap!. White, black ,yellow, brown we speak to each other at work but when the shift ends we split to our home end of story. So maybe girls have something different to offer.I think they have more skills than man when it comes to solve social problems. I can be wrong or I can be right it doesn't matter failure is part of life but at least we tried something new! We try to change things!

[Erzengel]

Honestly, my spell check broke trying to decipher that. Could you break it down into 1 sentence please?

[Varient]

Honestly, my spell check broke trying to decipher that. Could you break it down into 1 sentence please?

Stop being insulting because you don't want to consider his premise:

That he feels that perhaps a woman with a woman's point of view should be given a chance to untangle the kind of issues a president would handle,... simply because most women seem to have a different spin on things than the stereotypical male.

And yes,... he did say that.

And there is a precedence. I believe Iceland, (or Greenland) has had many female leaders - I think I'll go Google that,.. my info's over ten years old.

V.

[ANTOINE X]

Honestly, my spell check broke trying to decipher that. Could you break it down into 1 sentence please?

LoL even with google I still do a lot error. Ok Let say that man's world is just about been first no matter what are the consequences. And that child game has to stop!

[Erzengel]

How do you know I'm not considering his premise?

Secondly, maybe you shouldn't try to nit pick my posts, considering you seem to go off on people who try and do it to you.

[Erzengel]

LoL even with google I still do a lot error. Ok Let say that man's world is just about been first no matter what are the consequences. And that child game has to stop!
Unfortunately, even in the age we live in, and as "liberal" as we are in the cities, I think that we see a minority male president before we even see a female president. This country is still a little sexist in that regard especially in the red states.

In Hillary's case, "experience" and "competence" aside, she's not likable. I've said this before, she has 0 of Bill's charisma and I think her debates are what hurt her and while other Democrats have cut the lead on her.

[Varient]

How do you know I'm not considering his premise?

Secondly, maybe you shouldn't try to nit pick my posts, considering you seem to go off on people who try and do it to you.

one - Because he has said the SAME thing three times in different ways as you continued to not understand.

two - Not even "nit-picking your posts",.. you seem to get a charge out of acting obtuse to generate drama,... and in my case I have little patience with "nah ah" games where people state opinion as if it were fact and then get ugly when folk don't agree with them.

In fact,.. of the two of us from previous posts,.. YOU have wasted more time attacking others for not agreeing with you,... this situation being a good example.

And yes,... it's an attack when you use words like, careless, and foolish, on his premise while reducing his arguement like sumbody just pulled a homeless female off the street and put her up as President BECAUSE she is female.

V.

[Erzengel]

one - there you go again, I understood what he said, just questioning the rationale behind it.

two - this from a person who craves attention? I'm leaving this thread because it's ridiculous, oh wait, someone responded to me. :whatever:

three - First of all, my post to him was a joke, which he took it as, you on the other hand seem to be constantly posting passive-aggressive condescending posts to anyone who even tries and debate you.

Call it an attack all you want, you just look for any reason to get on your high horse. :o