01-28-2008, 12:07 AM | #11 |
Erotic Esquire
|
I like McCain, Huckabee, and Obama, and liked Joe Biden quite a bit back when he was running.
I dislike Romney and Clinton. I know: I make absolutely no sense. I can't really explain why my two least favorite candidates are a Democrat and a Republican and why the three I could actually tolerate transcend party lines. I suppose the way I've justified it before had something to do with "integrity", and generally viewing Obama, Huckabee and McCain as more "trustworthy" than Clinton or Romney. Something about the way Clinton and Romney have run their campaigns lately has fundamentally turned me off...they seem the two most interested in going negative and changing their views on a dime. As for Clinton, the way Bill Clinton's been acting lately has really turned me off from Hillary. I know she's independent of her husband, but she must be condoning Bill's actions in some respect, and it seems like if Bill will make the democratic party absolutely implode if it means getting his wife elected. I also think that Hillary Clinton is close to unelectable, but that's just my personal opinion. Obama probably would beat nearly anyone (even McCain, though I'd hesitantly vote for McCain in that hypothetical circumstance), but I don't see Hillary carrying broad appeal. The Rush Limbaughs of the world have to be rooting for Hillary. If she's the democratic nominee, Republican fundraising will be off the roof and the right-wing movement will be reinvigorated. Conservatives will be scared into voting in droves. I feel bad for Huckabee in a sense. Without turning this conversation into something blatantly religious, I will at least mention that as an evangelical Christian myself, it gets annoying when people stereotype Huck into "the evangelical candidate" and subsequently perceive him as a stereotype of everything that's wrong with the evangelical movement. Even I don't agree with all of Huck's beliefs when it comes to the Bible, but there's no reason to assume that as President he'd suddenly start destroying the constitution and forcing everyone to convert to Christianity. I like the fact that the guy's a moderate, populist Republican who actually cares about the lower classes (he favored improving U.S. infrastructure over the current stimulus plan, and in my personal opinion the stimulus plan is a terrible idea.) And while I can't see the majority of Congress supporting the FairTax system I have to say taxing consumption makes more pragmatic economic sense than our current tax plans. As for McCain, I like him because he's a bit of a maverick, and I like mavericks who stay true to their own convictions and who are willing to change facets of the modern political process. I suspect what will happen is McCain VS Hillary. I'd actually say Obama has a better chance of upsetting Hillary right now than any of the other Republican candidates do in taking down McCain. Romney has the most money but that Mormon issue is taking him down in the very conservative states (Iowa, South Carolina) you'd expect to support him; even if he wins Florida (which seems more doubtful by the moment, with florida's governor and a Cuban-American senator recently endorsing McCain) he'll struggle to build momentum into Super Tuesday, where the majority of delegates will go through states like New York and California -- where moderate Republicans reign supreme. Huckabee has no chance right now, nor does Giuliani (I mean if you're even losing in the polls in the state where you served as Mayor and garnered your post-9/11 reputation, you're really, really screwed.) Whereas on the Democratic side, anything can really happen. Which may be bad news, long-term, for the Dems. They have an advantage going into this election in terms of the direction the country wants to go in, but if Clinton and Obama end up in a slugfest with clear racial and gender-based overtones and accusations, havoc will be wreaked. If there's one thing that's always held true in the primaries, it's that Republicans generally rally around a single candidate who establishes himself as the "front-runner," whereas Democrats can be much more independent and it's harder to get them to conform to expectations.
__________________
WARNING: Snek's all up in this thread. Be prepared to read massive walls of text. |
01-28-2008, 06:42 AM | #12 | |
bOB iZ brOkeN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: It's a nice place to visit...
Posts: 3,755
|
Quote:
I'm sorry, but even if Hillary didn't burn every possible bridge with Obama, Hillary isn't so big that Obama sees her a as a must have running mate. Its Bill, not Hillary who's big with Democrats, and I just can't see him working well as a First Lady. Here's an article which quotes Bill on what he thinks his role will be. Hillary might have to take Obama, after her unfortunate remark which came about the same time as Bill's Fairy Tale remark (which was equally misinterpreted). That, and Bill Clinton's recent use as an attack dog in South Carolina, may have additionally hurt her. From what I hear, she'd basically conceded SC, but left Bill there to keep Obama there, while he constantly lashed out on Obama's own unfortunate remarks. If you listen to the full quote, you hear him state that Reagan did tap into the public's pulse & led the country in a direction, but a direction that was flawed. Again, I feel this is more part of Obama's tendency to reach out to moderate Republicans, rather than anything else. As for the anti-gay thing, I've only heard of one vaguely heard of one occasion where he was basically blindsided in a speaking rally & just didn't respond until afterwards. Personally, I'm willing to write this off as shock. But I'm no big fan of a Hillary/Obama ticket. Either one will have a challenge on their own merits, together it just will make it into a Circus. On the Republican side, Romney might pull it. Just because of his cash advantage. While I couldn't find it, I'd heard that McCain recently had to have an emergency fun raiser. Just because there are so many states to go, and Romney is leading. If he hangs in for the long haul, he could certainly walk away with the prize. I've also heard that a lot of the Republican punditry don't like McCain for his past actions. Rush, apparently doesn't like any of the options. Of course, the GOP hates Romney apparently (short version found here), but its the voters that eventually matter, now what those in Washington think. SWB - I wouldn't mind it Hillary consistently started losing to Edwards, and Edwards won because of that, but right now I'm leaning to a preference of Obama over Hillary. Hillary just seems too much to be the choice of the one the Republicans want to run against, even if she wins the whole thing, I think she'll hurt the Democrats overall if she gets the nod.
__________________
:bmage: Because breakdancing is evil, and so am I, you will click on this link: You are in error. No one is screaming. Thank you for your cooperation. Yes I know the breakdancing BM link doesn't work, and I don't care.
Last edited by Sky Warrior Bob; 01-28-2008 at 07:18 AM. |
|
01-28-2008, 10:14 AM | #13 |
Erotic Esquire
|
McCain had significant cash problems before he won South Carolina. Winning South Carolina of all states -- a deeply conservative bastion a guy like McCain didn't win in 2000 and had no business winning in 2008 -- gave him an immediate boost in fundraising to the tune of seven million dollars total in the month of January, a vast majority of which came through post-SC primary. By contrast, Mike Huckabee raised less than $3 mil after December 25th -- and that includes the substantial boost he got way back post-Iowa, back when he was (however briefly) a front-runner.
So no, fundraising isn't a significant problem for McCain anymore, though yes, he still has less money than Romney. More important is the notion that the GOP establishment is now actually embracing McCain as the most electable candidate (a mandate that once belonged to Giuliani several months ago.) Basically, he may not be the "perfect" conservative, but so long as he polls well against Hillary and Obama, the GOP will be forced to love him. Desperation makes for intriguing bedfellows, after all.
__________________
WARNING: Snek's all up in this thread. Be prepared to read massive walls of text. |
01-28-2008, 05:05 PM | #14 | |
Stop the hate
|
Quote:
__________________
Drank |
|
01-28-2008, 06:29 PM | #15 | ||
Argus Agony
|
Quote:
I've talked to Hillary supporters, and they like her because of her record and ideas. They actually want her as President because they think she'll do a good job, and I don't think they're wrong. I prefer Obama, personally, but I'm not as outright against her being elected as I am Edwards. Hillary's still bigger than Obama right now, though not by much and current trends seem to suggest that Obama will eventually overtake her by the time the convention rolls around, but it still won't be by a wide margin. Thus, Obama/Clinton ticket is major vote-get. Doesn't matter if they said some mean things about each other when they were competing for the nomination. That's politics and they've both been playing this game long enough to know that, and they've also been playing this game long enough to know how to reach the largest possible demographic in order to win the election. But yeah, Feingold would have been totally great. Quote:
A hypothetical future President Obama would be safer than the very real President Bush we currently have, in my estimation.
__________________
Either you're dead or my watch has stopped. Last edited by POS Industries; 01-28-2008 at 06:33 PM. |
||
01-28-2008, 09:59 PM | #16 |
Stop the hate
|
we're assuming none of the current secret service memebers have'nt got their swastika tattos filled in yet.
Let's not forget most of these guys(super Saiya-jin racists) are actually fully functioning members of society with jobs and kids and such, and surprisingly, Many people will let a racist comment slide if it's not directed at them or their group, especially if it's not along the lines of "I'll kill some niggers" and more Archie Bunkerish "I just don't trust 'em is all" the response is basically "Oh Bill's harmless, he's just old and set in his ways" This is particuarly prevelant with the good ol' boy set-up the current government has.
__________________
Drank Last edited by Premmy; 01-28-2008 at 10:03 PM. |
01-28-2008, 10:46 PM | #17 | ||
Argus Agony
|
Quote:
Quote:
JFK gets shot? Okay, no more riding around in convertibles down busy city streets. Reagan gets shot? Okay, we clear a path from the President down to his car well in advance before he goes anywhere. If someone were to seriously make an attempt to assassinate a sitting US President in a way that the Secret Service isn't prepared for, it would requires such a conspiratorial undertaking that the authorities would see it coming from a mile away. A very quick stop would be put to it.
__________________
Either you're dead or my watch has stopped. |
||
01-28-2008, 10:48 PM | #18 |
Stop the hate
|
true true, I honestly was just addresing everyone's confusion about Obama's potential assasination attempt(it's going to happen, whether it's succesful or not remains to be seen)
__________________
Drank |
01-28-2008, 10:51 PM | #19 |
There is no Toph, only Melon Lord!
|
There is absolutely no reason to believe that if Obama were to become president that he would up and get shot entirely because racism exists. If that were true, then I'm fairly sure some anti-white people who very well exist would've up and killed some other presidents.
Most people, even given their stupid intolerance, won't risk trying to kill a President. The last guy to succeed was mentally unstable, for a little perspective.
__________________
I can tell you're lying. |
01-28-2008, 11:19 PM | #20 |
BUTTPANDA!!
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 554
|
I've fallen in love with Obama after reading his book. Really, he looks very promising to me, mainly because he views politics as a medium to change the nation, rather than an attempt to win one for the party.
I don't remember which CHAPTER it was in his book (when I get back home, I'll read it again and update it here), but there was one where he subtlely denounces the need for political parties. The overall feel I get from him his "screw political parties, this is what I want to do. And this is how I will do it. Take it for what you will". Just my take on it...I don't want to go into a whole lot of detail, because I think there's so much that has already been said about this matter. Clinton's a bitch, in my eyes. I used to think, MAYBE she'll be not the worst ever because I loved Bill Clinton. And some inkling of me hoped that maybe, just MAYBE, bill will be the one leading the country behind the visage of Hillary. But I've seen the mud-flinging debates of Hillary, and man. No way. McCain...I've got no words for him. Edwards is okay I guess...didn't really like him. STEPHEN COLBERT '08!!! |
|
|