Umm, he has been endorsed by Bush, and his debates and statements and speeches all make clear that a vote for John McCain is a vote for a third bush term.
get used to that Cawacko...not only will you be hearing it a lot, it's actually true!
Clinton Campaign says Obama is a Plagiarist!
- Thread starter Damocles
- Start date
Umm, he has been endorsed by Bush, and his debates and statements and speeches all make clear that a vote for John McCain is a vote for a third bush term.
get used to that Cawacko...not only will you be hearing it a lot, it's actually true!
Of course it is.
Disagreeing with whether or not we should federal funds for food stamps would make one or the other wrong for you. Expanding this alleged war on terror into Iran, stretching our troops even thinner, and sending them off to yet another unfounded war, which would inevitably make us less safe and garner more hatred toward the US in the future makes them both a bad choice for AMERICA. Not just you. By supporting a policy that will undoubtedly make all of us less safe safe means that they they are not qualified to run this country.
DigitalDave
Sexy Beast!
Not being a democrat myself, I think the thing that you'll hate Hillary for is uniting a Republican base that is divided right now. I also think many of the plans or bills she supports will be met with more resentment and not get passed. Obama is great at convincing people, and if you want someone to push democratic policies, he's the one who can do it. He might also have the same effect as Hillary if his plans fail, but I want someone we can at least work with and not have so much damn division in politics.
Last edited:
That is because both you and I agree that those choices will make America less safe. To us it seems self-evident. It is self-evident.
But there is a significant school of thought, much of it coming out of think-tanks, that says it does just the opposite. I think those people are bug fuck nuts though.
Lorax, all I can say is at this point I'm so beyond ascribing vast significance to polls. I totally got blindsided by polls, and made an idiotic prediction that McCain didn't have a prayer at the nomination.
Does Clinton have high negatives? Yes. Can the oncoming GOP swiftboating of Obama result in high negatives? Yes.
Michael Dukkakis was leading poppy bush in the polls throuough much of 1988. And then he got crushed. Polls this far out from an election don't mean much. And I don't think Hillary is as hated as the impression one gets from political junkies in cyberspace. We're a very select, and specific demographic. So, I'm not sure Hillary would lose. Of course, I could be wrong.
I'm not even talking about polls. I'm talking about a decade + of observation.
All Republicans have to do is put the word "Hillary" in a mailer and they double their fundraising.
It's a not brainer. She easily unites a dispirited, divided GOP base & gets them out to vote, in addition to the fundraising boost. The Dems lose Congress under President Hillary.
I'm sure they will try to swiftboat Obama, but there has never been anything even close to matching Hillary hate on the right.
Nah. I consider it a fact, especially since we've already watched in action with Iraq.
If a politician is that stupid that he or she can't look to the last six years and see that strategy for failure it is, then they aren't qualified one bit to be in office.
Which is why I will have no problems casting a vote for B!tchsmacking/Superstar McKinney if those two get nominated.
Yes, I think it's possible that Obama is a stronger general election candidate. Hillary, quite unfairly, is considered "the b*tch" by much of the con base, and they will be energized to vote against her.
The thing that puzzles me, is why alleged "moderate" republicans - who now claim that they sort of liked the clinton presidency - hate her so much. Her policy differences with bill clinton are nominal at best.
Well, actually I'm not puzzled. I know the reason why that is.
I totally agree with this assessment.
But I will point out that similar things were said about Howard Dean in 2004.
DigitalDave
Sexy Beast!
Yes, I think it's possible that Obama is a stronger general election candidate. Hillary, quite unfairly, is considered "the b*tch" by much of the con base, and they will be energized to vote against her.
The thing that puzzles me, is why alleged "moderate" republicans - who now claim that they sort of liked the clinton presidency - hate her so much. Her policy differences with bill clinton are nominal at best.
Well, actually I'm not puzzled. I know the reason why that is.
Yeah, she voted for the Iraq war
You might be right.
But, women might come out in droves to vote for Clinton. And she has a lot of support in the latino community. And, I'm not sure if an election has ever been won, purely on "hate" for another candidate. Maybe I'm wrong.
If I had to bet though, I think you might be right, that Obama is a stronger general election candidate. But, I'm so beyond predictions now, seeing as how I got owned on so many of my poor predictions.
Dean was more policy than personality/name hate. They had the base in a frenzy that he was a wacked out northeastern liberal, even though he wasn't.
But yeah - they were pleading for Dems to nominate him, just like they're praying the Dems screw up now & nominate Hillary. This time, it's their only hope.
Dont worry the republicans will come up with something. They will claim he said he invented the i-Phone or something. Just wait and see.
Socrtease
Verified User
In 1978 my mother became very active in passing the Equal Rights Amendment. She had all kinds of pamphlets and stuff in the house. After I read it I thought that it was a no brainer. I wore an ERA button on my Mork from Ork suspenders and it is still in a box somewhere in all my stuff.
In 1984 there was brief talk of Patricia Schoeder running for President. For those that don't know she was the Rep from District 1 in Colorado from 1973 to 1997. She was and is a die hard dem and a liberal. Had she run, I would have walked the streets and knocked on doors to get her elected. She is probably now a bit to left for me, but then I could think of no one better to run against Reagan. She would have lost but that would not have detered me because beating Reagan in 84 was a task worthy of Sisyphus.
I have been pro-choice since before I could vote, I took serval womens studies classes in college. I give less than two shits that Hillary is a woman. Hillary is not half the candidate that Pat Schoeder would have been. Hillary is a polarizing force in politics and that type of politics needs to come to an end. I don't EVER want to hear about the vast right wing conspiracy again. I don't want a president that, like her husband, will push an agenda that will be sure to create more gridlock and probably elect an republican congress again in 2010. I want someone that people feel good about having in office. I want someone that pronounces the word nuclear (nucular for you Bushites) correctly. I want someone that finds a happy medium in the stem cell research issue. I want someone that won't break the bank by raising taxes so high that no one can afford to hire new employees (I hope this will be Obama but I am not sure) and I want someone that will quit throwing soldiers into the mill like so much grist from now until the next century. Obama is the person I believe will accomplish things that I agree with. If I am wrong, in 2012 I will vote for someone else, but my bet is he can in no way EVER be as bad as bush, nor would Hillary, but I do believe he will be better than Hillary and I believe he has the best chance of defeating McCain. I wouldn't care if she were a hermaphrodite, every thing else being equal, I would not vote for her.
In 1984 there was brief talk of Patricia Schoeder running for President. For those that don't know she was the Rep from District 1 in Colorado from 1973 to 1997. She was and is a die hard dem and a liberal. Had she run, I would have walked the streets and knocked on doors to get her elected. She is probably now a bit to left for me, but then I could think of no one better to run against Reagan. She would have lost but that would not have detered me because beating Reagan in 84 was a task worthy of Sisyphus.
I have been pro-choice since before I could vote, I took serval womens studies classes in college. I give less than two shits that Hillary is a woman. Hillary is not half the candidate that Pat Schoeder would have been. Hillary is a polarizing force in politics and that type of politics needs to come to an end. I don't EVER want to hear about the vast right wing conspiracy again. I don't want a president that, like her husband, will push an agenda that will be sure to create more gridlock and probably elect an republican congress again in 2010. I want someone that people feel good about having in office. I want someone that pronounces the word nuclear (nucular for you Bushites) correctly. I want someone that finds a happy medium in the stem cell research issue. I want someone that won't break the bank by raising taxes so high that no one can afford to hire new employees (I hope this will be Obama but I am not sure) and I want someone that will quit throwing soldiers into the mill like so much grist from now until the next century. Obama is the person I believe will accomplish things that I agree with. If I am wrong, in 2012 I will vote for someone else, but my bet is he can in no way EVER be as bad as bush, nor would Hillary, but I do believe he will be better than Hillary and I believe he has the best chance of defeating McCain. I wouldn't care if she were a hermaphrodite, every thing else being equal, I would not vote for her.
Yeah, she voted for the Iraq war
that's why many progressives are oppossed to her - her inability to apologize or express regret for her vote on iraq. And that is in fact, the reason I voted for Obama over her. Even though I think she is a little more progressive than Obama on economic issues.
But, I was talking about the rightwing. Their hate for her isn't based on the war vote. They love the war. They hate her, because....well, because she's Hillary Clinton.
i have a feeling he will be a crossover president and lead from the middle unlike what many of you think. Hes very cost conscious from what i hear out of him.. that automatically will nix tons of the crap liberal agenda. Additionally his not in lobbiest pockets. This guy is truly a danger to corporate Americas agenda.
Dident she run for the Democratic nomination in 1987? She was lambasted by the press for crying when she droped out.
I always really liked her also.