 |
|
|
|
|
|
Politics
> 2008 Presidential Race
|
|
New Topic |
Post Reply
|
| 126. Wednesday, January 2, 2008 9:00 AM |
| KahlanMnel |
RE: 2008 Presidential Race |
Moderator
Member Since 12/18/2005 Posts:13606
View Profile Send PM
|
| QUOTE: 2. I don't care for the cut of her gib. At all. Not one bit. |
This has to be the best description for not liking Hillary that I've ever seen. I'm going to steal it because it's exactly how I feel about her. Folks have been automatically assuming I support her because she's A) a democrat and B) a woman. They seem to forget that C) she's ridiculous and D) she's not fit to run a McDonald's, much less a country.
~ Amanda "Just fear me, love me, do as I say and I will be your slave..."
|
| 127. Wednesday, January 2, 2008 10:03 AM |
| nuart |
RE: 2008 Presidential Race |
Member Since 12/18/2005 Posts:7632
View Profile Send PM
|
Hmmm, I'm liking my bets even more as the days go by. I have forty serious dollars saying that Hillary will NOT be the Democratic candidate. Now, as you long-time Gazetteers know, I have had no major philosophical problems with Bill Clinton. Yes, I was surprised by his Oval Office behavior with Lewinsky. I really would not have expected that degree of carelessness not to mention that degree of... classlessness. Having set himself up before a ready and willing firing squad in the midst of a civil law suit with another classless individual, I have to say -- YES, it took me by surprise. But Hillary. Even when I was a major fan of Bill Clinton's who cheered his first term as POTUS and who was equally enthusiastic about the second term, I never had similar affection toward the Mrs. That has sustained. Sure, now that I'm a registered Republican, one would not expect me to back Hillary Clinton, but it's more than that. I'm truly truly surprised that many Democrats do so with vigor. And I do like to inquire of Hillary backers if they would still be so eager for her to be in the White House if she were widowed before the general election and her win meant she alone would be back in the People's House. (sure, Chelsea might pay a visit but I'm talking no Bill) For me, if I attempt to pin it down, it has always begun with her artificial manner of speaking. I remember once listening to a speech she was delivering to a university back when she was a first term first lady. And I couldn't get past the vocal stylings to suss out the meaning (or lack of). She has worked on that but once again, yesterday, I was listening as she spoke to a crowd in Iowa. The newly acquired lower tones -- the smile -- the carefully delivered laugh lines -- they'd be broken when she hit the shrill meter once she got riled. And even this seems calculated to display her macho "nobody fucks with the Hillary" stance. And so I remain as I began over a year ago. Once Mark Warner dropped out of the Dem run for the office, I've liked Obama as the Dem candidate. The Atlantic Monthly cover story on Obama reinforced many of the reasons why I think Obama would be GOOD for the USA. My own pick was purely a fantasy pick -- Giuliani. I'm hoping he's the candidate for the Reps. In fact, I so like the duo that it really would give me pause as to which one I'd vote for come November '08. That gender factor? The idea that some men have that some women just want a woman as president? Any woman who happens to be of the same party will do. I don't think so. This can be rather clearly demonstrated by the many examples of how much (or how little) regard many women have for their woman bosses in the work place. No. I just don't think that's enough, even though myself, I do like the idea of a woman gynecologist. Other than that, there are not too many arenas where I would actively seek out a female just because we are the same sex. As for dynasties, we have had the Adams, the Roosevelts and the Bushs over the course of only 43 US presidents. You might say it's fairly common and not always a bad thing. Hey, even Al Gore, who could have been prez, comes from an elite political dynastic family. Lots of other examples but I've got to get running. (Dental cleaning this morning, Andrew. Thought you'd like to know... ) When it comes to a 12-year executive branch worth of Bush, followed by an 8-year Clintonian era and then another 8-years of Bush, it does seem almost suicidal to try to foist another Clinton into the ping-pong act, doesn't it? Hey, let's not forget that I warned you Dems about John Kerry and his unelectability back in 2004. I know, I know. The idea was to have a war hero nom and thereby show the Dems as "fighters" as their slogans generally proclaim -- "I'll FIGHT for you" and the like. Having worked both sides of the political spectrum I do have a couple of insights about how people choose. I pled with you all to go John Edwards back then. You didn't do it. Don't shoot yourselves in the foot again this time by nominating Hillary. For my own selfish reasons I don't want to spend four years countering conspiracy theories of stolen elections or being a surrogate voodoo doll for my Dem friends. Come on now, please..... I implore you -- VOTE OBAMA. I might even join you. It will take a cross-party vote for anyone to win you know.
Susan
“Half a truth is often a great lie.” Ben Franklin
|
| 128. Wednesday, January 2, 2008 2:03 PM |
| jordan |
RE: 2008 Presidential Race |
Admin
Member Since 12/17/2005 Posts:2274
View Profile Send PM
|
I have a bet with my mother-in-law that Hillary will NOT be elected. I'm actually on the belief that she won't even get the nomination now. The sooner she drops out, the sooner I'll get my expensive steak dinner at Ruths Chris Steakhouse.
Jordan .
|
| 129. Wednesday, January 2, 2008 2:23 PM |
| JVSCant |
RE: 2008 Presidential Race |
Member Since 12/18/2005 Posts:2870
View Profile Send PM
|
So, three people in a row have basically said "I don't like her because I don't like her"... Susan, I know you'll remember my earlier skepticism that Obama was making a serious run, and I'm definitely eating my words on that. I think he'll be president someday, but I still feel like it's too early for him. But the United States is a place where gambles sometimes pay off. If Democrats voting at the primaries decide they're in a forgiving mood and want to reach out to the red states and bring them on board (regardless of the hypothesis that anyone who won't vote for a woman on principle certainly won't vote for a black man either), then it'll be Obama. If they decide they're in a mood for vengeance, it'll be Hillary. My view is that forgiveness and a desire to avoid conflict is what dooms the Democrats over and over again; also, vengeance makes better television. Now, if Democrats drop acid before the primaries, it'll be Kucinich. I would give my right kidney to see a 2008 election between Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul.

|
| 130. Wednesday, January 2, 2008 9:12 PM |
| nuart |
RE: 2008 Presidential Race |
Member Since 12/18/2005 Posts:7632
View Profile Send PM
|
Oh, Jamie, there's a whole lotta folks that would vote for a black man for president especially after having TWO black presidents on "24" over the past few years. No problema. Then there was Geena Davis, the lady prez but Hillary is a horse of a different color so I still think that's unlikely. And I am serious about the "24" equation's relevance.
Obama and experience. I really don't think that experience is the most important feature for the president of the United States. It surely isn't for the voters. Consider this from Theodore Sorenson who worked for JFK: He [JFK] was, like Obama, a first-term US senator. But he was not yet 40 years old, making Obama, already 45, a geezer by comparison. At the time, Washington pundits assumed Kennedy had at least two insurmountable obstacles. The first was his lack of experience, especially compared with the senior statesmen also seeking that nomination - Lyndon Johnson, Hubert Humphrey, Adlai Stevenson and Stuart Symington. Kennedy acknowledged that his age and inexperience would turn away some voters. Obama, though older than Kennedy, is similarly dismissed by some today. But Kennedy noted in one speech that "experience is like tail-lights on a boat which illuminate where we have been when we should be focusing on where we should be going".
The second issue was religion since Kennedy was the first Catholic to run. We see how much that didn't hurt the outcome of the 1960 election. The way I see it is that whoever holds that highest office, they are going to do like a parent does -- they WILL do some harm. They will damage their child. But the hope is, that in this most impossible of jobs, you do cause more positive change than irrevocable damage. The Constitution is strong and I do not yet feel there are imminent death knells sounding.
What that takes is a couple of things. To me the most important quality is that the people, by and large, like their president and that they feel (by and large) he (yeah, "he") is capable, intelligent, strong and well-equipped for the challenges ahead. That is mostly perception since no individual in the world is equipped for the job. But fine. Let's go with the international perception. The press perception. The man on the street perception. Not to exclude the vainglorious perception of the man (yeah, man) himself as to his presidential abilities. There would be, in my opinion, a certain vindication among whites and blacks alike that the United States has reached the point where they would vote a black man into office. I think for most Americans there would be a whiff of "see, we're not the racists you in other lands might believe us to be." Ohmygawd, and I just realized, Obama is not only a black man but a black man whose name ends in a vowel other than "e." Another first! (Just like Giuliani would be) Since Obama is not a Republican, it would also allow much of the world to shudder off a huge sigh of relief that the next president is not a Bush crony or some other incarnation of an evil Republicans. (snicker loudly) Here would be the 21st century version of Camelot with the young attractive, optimistic candidate with his pretty, educated, intelligent wife and their two cute little kids. Perfect! Oh can you just see the magazine covers to come! Talk about a Morning in America! The Honeymoon Stage might go on indefinitely! Then there's the governing part. A president do not do this job alone. And he (yeah, "he") cannot arbitrarily make the ship sail according to his own set of rules regardless of the boo hoo hoos of those who would claim Bush has done just that. It's a great big complex government with enemies within and without. Steering the ship of state is a challenge no one can do with perfect expertise. I'm for giving a young, energetic, intelligent, optimistic, engaging, articulate (yeah, "articulate" -- also a necessary quality the next time out) guy a shot. Susan
“Half a truth is often a great lie.” Ben Franklin
|
| 131. Wednesday, January 2, 2008 9:13 PM |
| B |
RE: 2008 Presidential Race |
Member Since 12/18/2005 Posts:1263
View Profile Send PM
|
2008 cheat sheet: Clinton - unelectable Obama - unelectable Huckabee - unelectable Kucinich -unelectable Paul - won't be nominated by Republicans Richardson - won't be nominated by Democrats Dodd, Biden, Thompson - not a factor McCain - still a longshot Edwards - dangerous if nominated Guiliani - still the favorite Romney - still a chance Names to watch in the next few weeks - Gore, Bloomberg
-B
|
| 132. Thursday, January 3, 2008 6:04 AM |
| herofix |
RE: 2008 Presidential Race |
Member Since 12/18/2005 Posts:2500
View Profile Send PM
|
Jamie - Cut it any way you want to, everybody dislikes a candidate because they don't like 'em. President is a unique position anyway. What you want is someone whose judgement and integrity you trust, and those things are decided by signals and inferences and implications and twitches that are imperceptibe probably even to those whose minds are being made up at the time. Anyways, face it, reading policy and votes cast is not a good way to choose a candidate! For every explanation you might first come to as to why a candidate voted against or for a certain bill in the House or Senate, or why they vetoed or signed a bill as Governor, there are 10 other perfectly feasible explanations. They didn't 'vote against a bill giving better nursing care to seniors' because they are heartless, they thought the bill was privitization in disguise and a disguised indirect blow to senior's rights to some other more important benefit. They didn't 'vote against sex education in high schools' because they are closed-minded prigs, but because they thought the bill was a watered-down compromise that didn't do any good, and by rejecting the mediocre they might have a better chance of something more useful in the future. Etc. Etc. Etc. But as a voter, you know none of this, yet you can search the media and blogosphere for people's ignorant ramblings and character assassinations. All of that is basically next to useless. What is useful is knowing that a candidate shares your basic motivations and understandings of the world, had a strong character, has integrity in the areas you consider important...you decide ALL of that on seeing the person's face and hearing them speak, when you get a chance. I could give you a long laundry list of Clinton grievances within 30 minutes if I could be arsed - but I can't. To me, it's either self-evident to you that she's a devious bitch without judgement and integrity...or it's not. To me it's as clear as the nose on my face. B - Thanks for the tips, but I reckon you're way off. Obama is even more electable than Giuliani IMO. Even Clinton is 'electable' much to my obvious chagrin.
An Inverted Pyramid of Piffle
|
| 133. Thursday, January 3, 2008 8:28 AM |
| KahlanMnel |
RE: 2008 Presidential Race |
Moderator
Member Since 12/18/2005 Posts:13606
View Profile Send PM
|
Just thought you'd be amused by the Google ad that appeared at the bottom of this thread as I was reading it just now... 
~ Amanda "Just fear me, love me, do as I say and I will be your slave..."
|
| 134. Thursday, January 3, 2008 8:45 AM |
| superducky |
RE: 2008 Presidential Race |
Admin
Member Since 12/18/2005 Posts:8271
View Profile Send PM
|
Or this one: 
Kelly How Do You Live Your Dash? Check out the Kids' blogs: The CaleBlog and the Zoe Blog
|
| 135. Thursday, January 3, 2008 11:22 AM |
| jordan |
RE: 2008 Presidential Race |
Admin
Member Since 12/17/2005 Posts:2274
View Profile Send PM
|
have to disagree with some of these (disagreements are in bold): Clinton - unelectable - agree because she can't move right without angering the left, and she can't move left without alienating moderates - the only thing going for her is her last name and her sex - she doesn't have any real experience except for meeting foreign dignitaries. And if you listen to the average Sally about why she is voting for Hillary - it's usually because of her sex.
Obama - electable (if the DNC nominate) - granted, not a lot of experience, but he has charisma and more experience than Hill-dog.
Huckabee - unelectable - agree - if GOP nominate - GOP will probably lose the WH
Kucinich -unelectable - agree - nothing to add here
Paul - won't be nominated by Republicans - agree
Richardson - won't be nominated by Democrats - agree
Dodd, Biden, Thompson - not a factor - agree - even though I really like Thompson, but he has no charisma
McCain - electable (esp if Hillary gets the nom even though many GOP will be unhappy with him - but view him better than Hillary)
Edwards - dangerous if nominated - agree - if Dems want to ensure a victory, Edwards is the guy
Guiliani - still the favorite - agree - if the GOP want to have a chance at winning, Rudy would be the guy
Romney - still a chance - actually, I think he has a very good chance. Chsritian right can look beyond his religion in the end, and for social conservatives, he's better than Rudy. This might be a real fun year for American politics. Americans are unhappy with both sides. No one is really excited about any of the canddiates. Morris has a very nice summary of the rundown and who has to win to continue.
Jordan .
|
| 136. Thursday, January 3, 2008 11:50 AM |
| KahlanMnel |
RE: 2008 Presidential Race |
Moderator
Member Since 12/18/2005 Posts:13606
View Profile Send PM
|
I've been displeased with the dem options for a while and have been hanging my hat on McCain as the GOP nom. Still hoping for that one. Please please please. No Romney. I don't want to have utter the phrase "President Mitt Romney". His name sounds like something out of a pulp novel or perhaps a character in a porn flick. Urgh.  P.S. The last two times I viewed this thread, the Google ad was for Disney DVDs. Zuh?
~ Amanda "Just fear me, love me, do as I say and I will be your slave..."
|
| 137. Thursday, January 3, 2008 11:53 AM |
| nuart |
RE: 2008 Presidential Race |
Member Since 12/18/2005 Posts:7632
View Profile Send PM
|
And if you listen to the average Sally about why she is voting for Hillary - it's usually because of her sex. I still believe the Hillary appeal is mostly the byproduct of her being married to someone most Democrats would vote into another term in office and not the fact that Hillary is a woman. Someone who is a Dem and who LIKES Hillary should let us know if the gender factor trumps the Mrs. Bill Clinton factor but to do so would require an honest inner thoughtfulness. Not a simple "You go, girl" or "YAY! I loves Bill and want him back in the White House where he belongs." Think. Then report. Susan
“Half a truth is often a great lie.” Ben Franklin
|
| 138. Thursday, January 3, 2008 1:49 PM |
| jordan |
RE: 2008 Presidential Race |
Admin
Member Since 12/17/2005 Posts:2274
View Profile Send PM
|
My dad adn i were talking about Huckabee a few weeks ago, and that name alone should make it impossible for him to win..."President Huckabee" - it just doesn't ring true. I can already see jokes about Huckleberry Hound, etc.
Jordan .
|
| 139. Thursday, January 3, 2008 3:52 PM |
| Booth |
RE: 2008 Presidential Race |
Member Since 8/20/2006 Posts:4388
View Profile Send PM
|
| QUOTE: My dad adn i were talking about Huckabee a few weeks ago, and that name alone should make it impossible for him to win..."President Huckabee" - it just doesn't ring true. I can already see jokes about Huckleberry Hound, etc. | And this
|
| 140. Thursday, January 3, 2008 5:03 PM |
| one suave folk |
RE: 2008 Presidential Race |
Member Since 12/21/2005 Posts:5862
View Profile Send PM
|
Being a big Simpsons fan, the only Hillary ticket I can support is her as V.P. to Itchy as prez.
|
| 141. Thursday, January 3, 2008 5:46 PM |
| LetsRoque |
RE: 2008 Presidential Race |
Member Since 1/2/2006 Posts:922
View Profile Send PM
|
I like the cut of Edwards gib. That is all
'I look for an opening, do you understand?'
|
| 142. Thursday, January 3, 2008 9:34 PM |
| Raymond |
RE: 2008 Presidential Race |
Member Since 12/18/2005 Posts:1664
View Profile Send PM
|
Obama's approach to healthcare is way less socialized than Hil's.
|
| 143. Thursday, January 3, 2008 10:50 PM |
| nuart |
RE: 2008 Presidential Race |
Member Since 12/18/2005 Posts:7632
View Profile Send PM
|
QUOTE:I like the cut of Edwards gib. That is all
|
Yeah. Not bad. But.... who won tonight??? O-Bam-A! Got this email from him about an hour ago.
Susan -- We just won Iowa, and I'm about to head down to talk to everyone. Democrats turned out in record numbers tonight, and independents and even some Republicans joined our party to stand together for change. Thank you for everything you've done to make this possible. Barack
Da nada, Barack. Susan 
“Half a truth is often a great lie.” Ben Franklin
|
| 144. Friday, January 4, 2008 6:54 AM |
| jordan |
RE: 2008 Presidential Race |
Admin
Member Since 12/17/2005 Posts:2274
View Profile Send PM
|
more important - Hilldog was #3 behind Edwards!
Jordan .
|
| 145. Friday, January 4, 2008 8:22 AM |
| Booth |
RE: 2008 Presidential Race |
Member Since 8/20/2006 Posts:4388
View Profile Send PM
|
QUOTE:I like the cut of Edwards gib. That is all
| Jib.
|
| 146. Friday, January 4, 2008 8:42 AM |
| LogicHat |
RE: 2008 Presidential Race |
Member Since 12/19/2005 Posts:2335
View Profile Send PM
|
QUOTE:QUOTE:I like the cut of Edwards gib. That is all
| Jib. |
Are you being glib?
Logic Hat Online- logichat.org
|
| 147. Friday, January 4, 2008 11:20 AM |
| herofix |
RE: 2008 Presidential Race |
Member Since 12/18/2005 Posts:2500
View Profile Send PM
|
QUOTE: QUOTE:I like the cut of Edwards gib. That is all
| Jib.
|
Well, I'll be damned.
An Inverted Pyramid of Piffle
|
| 148. Friday, January 4, 2008 11:23 AM |
| herofix |
RE: 2008 Presidential Race |
Member Since 12/18/2005 Posts:2500
View Profile Send PM
|
I've just checked Paddpower.com. You can get Obama 4/6 on for New Hampshire. Hillary is at 11/10 and Edwards 33/1. I've got this nasty feeling that will go Clinton's way, and then Michigan, and then Obama will lose his momentum. Hope not though! Enjoyed the Iowa result immensely. If McCain takes New Hampshire that would (slightly) mitigate my disappointment. Interestingly, why does no one say or hear anything about Wyoming GOP caucus coming up on the 5th? I found out about that almost by accident.
An Inverted Pyramid of Piffle
|
| 149. Friday, January 4, 2008 11:44 AM |
| jordan |
RE: 2008 Presidential Race |
Admin
Member Since 12/17/2005 Posts:2274
View Profile Send PM
|
Well, Obama has the wind at his back now which is key (so did Howard Dean LOL!!). Even though Edwards and Hillary are very close in the vote count, the headlines read #3 next to Hillary for the next few days - not good for her. Expect some points to go from Hilldog to Obama or Edwards. Yes, I think it's likely that she will win NH. And she will win Michigan because NO ONE is running in that caucus except for Hillary (according to Dick Morris in this article - quote is below if you don't wnat to click the link) so that won't add any momentum for her since the media won't cover Michigan except for the GOP. South Carolina and Florida will be key for everyone, IMO. I'll be surprised if come January 30, we won't know both nominees from both parties. Here's a rundown of the dates. QUOTE: The Obama win last night probably presages another in New Hampshire and follow-up victories in Nevada and South Carolina. (Clinton will carry Michigan: She's alone on the ballot). BTW - Wyoming caucus isn't that big of a deal for anyone. I'm guessing Huckabee at this point...
Jordan .
|
| 150. Friday, January 4, 2008 7:48 PM |
| B |
RE: 2008 Presidential Race |
Member Since 12/18/2005 Posts:1263
View Profile Send PM
|
Any thoughts on this ticket: Rudy Giuliani / Mike Huckabee Would it work? The mayor and the governor. The Italian and the hillbilly. The Catholic and the Baptist. Sinner and saint. Hawk and dove. '44 and '55. Yankee and southerner. Manhattan and Hope. Tiffany and Walmart. It would be interesting. The busy campaign schedule would keep them apart so they wouldn't kill each other before the election.
-B
|
|
New Topic |
Post Reply
|
Page 6 of 31 ::
<< |
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |
>>
|
|
Politics
> 2008 Presidential Race
|
| Users viewing this Topic (1) |
| 1 Guest |
Powered by JorkelBB 2006 (Version 1.0b)
|
|
|