Hillary won't get the nomination

You know, I read this interview with Tina Fey of 30 Rock? And her charcter on there makes the comment that she's one of those who will say they are going to vote for Obama, but then will vote for McCain and not tell anybody.

And fey admitted it was autobiographical, because she tells people she'll vote for Obama, but "I live in NY, when push comes to shove, I want the tough guy, I want Rudy".

Ok?

And I thought, shit, she's not the only one out there. there's a lot of them.
I don't think there are enough of those people out there to do what you say would happen. I believe that there is an equal and opposite reaction of those who are pissed that they "let" it happen.
 
We're you asleep during the 1990s?

Monicagate and the "culture warriors" on the right made "morality" and "christain values" a test for public office in the south by the late 1990s. Faux clinton-hatred was so embedded in the south by the late 1990s, that Gore and any Democrat of a national ticket wrote it off. Just like republicans wrote off the northeast and west coast in the 1990s - despite the fact that they had been winning northeast and west cost states mere years earlier

I'm not talking about the South as a whole. I'm talking about Tennessee specifically. If Al Gore had won Tennessee he would have been President.
 
Idiot? Read what Darla and Cypress wrote. They claim the times changed and the South (Tennessee) was all Republican in 2000 even though Gore won Tenneessee in '92 and '96.

Damn man, read the thread. As an aside, I'm sure you believe Auburn is the victim losing to USF and MSU.

No, Auburn plaid very badly against USF and MSU. Now had USF gained some power by beating Auburn, then used that power in a damaging and harmfull way. I would blame USF for the way they used/abused the power, not Auburn for having lost the game.
 
I don't think anyone would argue that there is blame to go around. But the original premise that it the Nader voters wasted their votes was idiotic. They voted for whom they thought was the best candidate... and that is their right.

NObody said it wasn't there right, but to deny that exercising this right had consequences is denial.
 
I'm not talking about the South as a whole. I'm talking about Tennessee specifically. If Al Gore had won Tennessee he would have been President.

If Gore had won Alabama he would have been president. If Gore had won Texas he would have been president. If Gore had won Florida's electoral votes he would have been president. If Bush had called all jews idiots Gore would have won the presidency.
 
If Gore had won Alabama he would have been president. If Gore had won Texas he would have been president. If Gore had won Florida's electoral votes he would have been president. If Bush had called all jews idiots Gore would have won the presidency.
He was only Senator of one state. You keep dragging on this.

Simply. Not even one President has ever been elected without gaining the vote of the State they gained original prominence in politics in. Not one.
 
I dont think he could get the south today SF. I think you are wrong. They still use Clinton to raise money in the south.

Well, they may raise money, but I still think you are wrong. I think he would carry most of the south. So that is the final word on this... I am right, you are wrong. :bleh:
 
A. It wasn't stolen.

B. The election was Gore's to lose and he lost.

Ok here you go.

Anyone living and breathing today who still belives that the 2000 election was not stolen, is not someone I can even debate, on this particular subject with.

It is now a fact, a stone cold fact.

George w bush is and always was illegitimate and the bad part for you is that there is a paper trail, and so that is how history will so record him.

I don't need to argue here, in an irrelevent forum, about actual historical facts.
 
NObody said it wasn't there right, but to deny that exercising this right had consequences is denial.

Again we disagree. You might as well blame those who voted for Bush, and people who didn't vote at all for Gore not being the president.

That's not how voting or elections work. One has to convince voters that they should be elected.
 
I'm not talking about the South as a whole. I'm talking about Tennessee specifically. If Al Gore had won Tennessee he would have been President.

If you have unlimited resources and money, you try to win tennessee.

If you have limited resources, you try to win electoral votes in states that will have the best change of putting you in the white house.

Having lived in the south in the 1990s, I can tell you that the metamorphasis of clinton hatred (and by extension, hatred of democrats), become so embedded by the late 1990s, that people there openly talked about assassinating clinton, and that democrats were satan worshippers.

It only took a few years for that metamorphisis to occur, dude. We're you aware that as late as 1994, an economic populist Democrat was Governor of Texas? It only took a few years of mobilizing and driving theocrats to the polls to put democrats out of business in Texas and across much of the south.
 
Hey, I would have been as happy as BB down at the bar on payday, if Bradley had been president for the past 7 years, but the fact remains he was to the left of Gore, and in 2000 (though I do not believe this holds true today), a candidate to the left of the then moderate, Gore, could not have won. That is just an opinion. That bradely was left of Gore, is fact.


Please leave me out of your fantasies...I rarely go to bars...but you sure as hell must!
 
1) I am not hiding behind anyone at 5'1 423 pounds that is rather hard

2) I am not denying that voter suppression occured, nor is that the main point of this argument.

3) The argument here is Lorax trying to act as if Nader voters wasted their vote because they didn't vote the way he wanted them too.

4) Gore ran a shitty campaign and he lost because of it.

I actually left your name out of a later post I made, and just included Cawacko and Damo, because I did notice you don't seem to be in total denial.
 
NObody said it wasn't there right, but to deny that exercising this right had consequences is denial.

To say they "wasted" their vote and were "delusional" or whatever claptrap Lorax was spouting yesterday ... calling them idiots for exercising their rights... ok.. yeah he might not have said they didn't have the right to do so, but to demean them in such a manner and place the blame on them was ridiculous. Because their votes are not what cost Gore the election.
 
I don't mind our disagreement at all my sister. Doesn't alter or change my TREMENDOUS respect for you and your thoughts.

But the reason democrats are so wimpy-weak, is because most of gheir constituents are .. not implying you of corse.

Gore should have been used as an example of what not to do in a race for the White House. Democrats even to this day pay little attention to the integrity of the vote .. so expect to be robbed again.

Well, we don't disagree on these basics.

They are wimps, as a whole. There have got to be exceptions and I keep hoping I see one.
 
He was only Senator of one state. You keep dragging on this.

Simply. Not even one President has ever been elected without gaining the vote of the State they gained original prominence in politics in. Not one.

I dont see why having been elected senator 10 years earlier makes a hill of beans of a difference.
 
If you have unlimited resources and money, you try to win tennessee.

If you have limited resources, you try to win electoral votes in states that will have the best change of putting you in the white house.

Having lived in the south in the 1990s, I can tell you that the metamorphasis of clinton hatred (and by extension, hatred of democrats), become so embedded by the late 1990s, that people there openly talked about assassinating clinton, and that democrats were satan worshippers.

It only took a few years for that metamorphisis to occur, dude. We're you aware that as late as 1994, an economic populist Democrat was Governor of Texas? It only took a few years of mobilizing and driving theocrats to the polls to put democrats out of business in Texas and across much of the south.

Considering that Tennessee was Gore's home state, a place he won '92 and '96 and a state that would have put him in the White House and not needed to win Florida it seems that Gore had a very poor strategy.
 
We're you asleep during the 1990s?

Monicagate and the "culture warriors" on the right made "morality" and "christain values" a test for public office in the south by the late 1990s. Faux clinton-hatred was so embedded in the south by the late 1990s, that Gore and any Democrat of a national ticket wrote it off. Just like republicans wrote off the northeast and west coast in the 1990s - despite the fact that they had been winning northeast and west cost states mere years earlier

"We're you asleep during the 1990s?"

Boy, is that the big question, or what?

lol
 
We're you asleep during the 1990s?

Monicagate and the "culture warriors" on the right made "morality" and "christain values" a test for public office in the south by the late 1990s. Faux clinton-hatred was so embedded in the south by the late 1990s, that Gore and any Democrat of a national ticket wrote it off. Just like republicans wrote off the northeast and west coast in the 1990s - despite the fact that they had been winning northeast and west cost states mere years earlier

In fact, what state was it, where a congressman actually announced that he "could not guarantte the safety of THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES" in, were Bill Clinton to visit?

I can look it up, but it happened.

And if that doesn't tell the story, then nothing can.

The citizens of the south are so patriotic, that the president of the united states may be shot dead if he comes there. If he's a democrat.
 
I actually left your name out of a later post I made, and just included Cawacko and Damo, because I did notice you don't seem to be in total denial.

That is because I am aware that fraud has occured on the part of BOTH parties for decades. I think it will continue for decades more, because the politicians don't really want to see a change. Which is what BAC is talking about... if they really cared they would DO something about it. Instead we simply see more lip-service.

Personally, I think we should have a list every time voter suppression is suggested for a particular district. That list should include all the decision makers and their party affilitiations. We should know who made the calls on how many voting machines (and the condition of the machines) went to each polling place and why. You would think it would be simple math to calculate the number of machines vs. number of registered voters.
 
Back
Top