Hillary, America's Thatcher!

"I won't say Hillary is far left, Pelosi-left, Feingold-left, but she is left nonetheless, and not a moderate by any stretch of the imagination."

OK... compared to those two, there aren't too many people that would be considered far left. My point was that she is in no way a moderate dem.
 
You think McCain is a moderate? Maybe socially but not when it comes to forign affairs, and that is what the 08' election will be about!
 
Superfreak said:
"I won't say Hillary is far left, Pelosi-left, Feingold-left, but she is left nonetheless, and not a moderate by any stretch of the imagination."

OK... compared to those two, there aren't too many people that would be considered far left. My point was that she is in no way a moderate dem.
Click to expand...
Actually, she is a moderate dem. There are a lot of dems out there who think she's basically a Dino.

I, on the other hand, am proudly "far left." :P
 
subway... yes, McCain is a moderate. That doesn't mean he is a moderate in ALL things. Just in general. As you mentioned, he is socially moderate, he is more hawkish when it comes to the military, but his foreign relation skills would be considered moderate on the whole. I think he would be very well accepted President by our traditional allies.
 
Labeling someone a moderate is subjective and comes from your perspective. If you are comparing McCain to Bush... Sure McCain is a moderate, heck for that matter Obama is a moderate compared to Bush. Bush is to the Conservatives what Abbie Hoffman is to liberals... both extreemists!
 
Superfreak said:
subway... yes, McCain is a moderate. That doesn't mean he is a moderate in ALL things. Just in general. As you mentioned, he is socially moderate, he is more hawkish when it comes to the military, but his foreign relation skills would be considered moderate on the whole. I think he would be very well accepted President by our traditional allies.
Click to expand...


In 2008 the American people will be looking for someone more "anti-Iraq-War" than McCain has been. Thats the bottom line in my opinion. If McCain is the nominee for the Republicans I think the Democratic nominee will be saying, "Its the war, stupid" all day long, and as long as the Democrats nominate someone who is left of McCain on the war.. the Democrat wins.

Left of McCain on the war will be easy to find!
 
subway... you are correct that it is a matter of perspective. I disagree that the Iraq war will be the primary focus in 2008. People are going to want a leader in all areas, not just someone who has simply chanted "the war sucks" over and over again. I believe people long for substance in their President. It has been a long time since we have had a President that we can respect. (Reagan in my opinion is the only one since JFK and Ike)
 
Superfreak said:
subway... you are correct that it is a matter of perspective. I disagree that the Iraq war will be the primary focus in 2008. People are going to want a leader in all areas, not just someone who has simply chanted "the war sucks" over and over again. I believe people long for substance in their President. It has been a long time since we have had a President that we can respect. (Reagan in my opinion is the only one since JFK and Ike)
Click to expand...


I think just like it was, "The economie, stuipd" back in 1992... It will be. "The War, stupid." in 08'. I could be wrong, 08 is a long time away in political terms, but I am judging by the 06 election.

If things get better in Iraq, God I hope they do, it will still be an issue but to McCain's benefit. I just dont belive that will happen!
 
IN a nutshell, what I am saying, is that of all the canidates, McCain is the colsest to Bush on matters conserning the Iraq war, and I dont think that will be a good thing.
 
Well, I can understand your perspective, but I disagree on two points...

1) I don't think Iraq will be as big an issue in 2008 as it was in 2006. I think people will want someone who can be an effective leader and that can demonstrate they can lead us out of Iraq at the same time as being fiscally responsible. I think this is where McCain will stand out.

2) I think McCains current stance on the war is the right one. Cutting funds, cutting troops is not going to help the troops on the ground. Adding forces might help and we should give it time to see if it does.
 
Superfreak said:
Well, I can understand your perspective, but I disagree on two points...

1) I don't think Iraq will be as big an issue in 2008 as it was in 2006. I think people will want someone who can be an effective leader and that can demonstrate they can lead us out of Iraq at the same time as being fiscally responsible. I think this is where McCain will stand out.

2) I think McCains current stance on the war is the right one. Cutting funds, cutting troops is not going to help the troops on the ground. Adding forces might help and we should give it time to see if it does.
Click to expand...



Time will tell on both counts. I hope you are right, I think I am right.
 
Superfreak said:
Well, I can understand your perspective, but I disagree on two points...

1) I don't think Iraq will be as big an issue in 2008 as it was in 2006. I think people will want someone who can be an effective leader and that can demonstrate they can lead us out of Iraq at the same time as being fiscally responsible. I think this is where McCain will stand out.

2) I think McCains current stance on the war is the right one. Cutting funds, cutting troops is not going to help the troops on the ground. Adding forces might help and we should give it time to see if it does.
Click to expand...
Exactly my point.
 
Superfreak said:
Well, I can understand your perspective, but I disagree on two points...

1) I don't think Iraq will be as big an issue in 2008 as it was in 2006. I think people will want someone who can be an effective leader and that can demonstrate they can lead us out of Iraq at the same time as being fiscally responsible. I think this is where McCain will stand out.

2) I think McCains current stance on the war is the right one. Cutting funds, cutting troops is not going to help the troops on the ground. Adding forces might help and we should give it time to see if it does.
Click to expand...

Sadly, we're not just "giving it time". We're giving it lives. Young lives.

You know what would really help our troops on the ground? Getting them the hell home.
 
No, I believe that McCain will not be as harmed by it as y'all are making out. He simply has stated, let us see...
 
Damocles said:
No, I believe that McCain will not be as harmed by it as y'all are making out. He simply has stated, let us see...
Click to expand...

I see. Well, I disagree, but I'm relieved that you don't support the escalation. I couldn't figure that one out. Notice I didn't accuse you of supporting it though, I was very careful in my wording and even re-wrote how I phrased it.

I'm coming along, you have to admit it.
 
Damocles said:
No, I believe that McCain will not be as harmed by it as y'all are making out. He simply has stated, let us see...
Click to expand...
I think that's going to depend on how deeply we're still involved in Iraq come 2008. If the war is still dragging on pretty much as it is now then McCain is toast.

For Dixie's benefit, that is both an opinion and a prediction. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top