Jump to content

The Next President of the USA will be?


TULedHead

Who will win the Presidency in 2008?  

282 members have voted

  1. 1. Who Wins in 2008?

    • Hillary Clinton
      47
    • Rudy Giuliani
      9
    • John Edwards
      7
    • Mike Huckabee
      7
    • John McCain
      42
    • Barack Obama
      136
    • Ron Paul
      21
    • Mitt Romney
      9
    • Bill Richardson
      1
    • Fred Thompson
      3


Recommended Posts

How in this fucking world you don't think the Rev, Wright,Bill Ayers, and Michell Obama is not going to hurt him. For every attack ad Moveon.org puts up, they are just going to play Rev. wright saying"NO NO NO God Damn America.

god damn once again for this Koolaid your drinking

and the list you put up saying most Americans

Most Americans believe there is homos in the world, but most of them don't wanna hear about.

Yes most American don't want troops in Iraq, but most agree Natl Security is more important.

Most agree they could live with a black or women president, but not one with black or women agendas, which the G.O.P. and Obama himself will make apparent

Most America does think global warming does exist, but they don't give shit about it.

Then you're attacking us saying you have yet to prove a valid argument. And i say while obama is digging in quick sand, you have your head in the sand. A valid argument for you is the one that supports your argument. I did not know they serve koolaid in the clouds and under the sand.

Get a Fucking clue

Hermit a definition

A person incapable of, or unwilling to socialize with other people. They will often spend an unnatural, possibly harmful amount of time in exclusion. Get a life you lonely hermit

Source: Cyrus, Jul 19, 2004

Also a word used to describe someone who does not like the same things most people do, often they do not see the whole picture and is assumed the hermit is socially retarded, when in fact he/she may just like their circle of friends but do not know anyone else into what they like to do outside,

yeah that sounds about right, I'm sure i could find some people to find that valid.

you're beginning to be the SteveAjones of the political world.

I still do like the More of the same McCain slogan. Maybe we should go back into the world of hijack planes and blow jobs in the oval office. Maybe most Americans won't mind a gay pride parade going down their street in small town America. We can make Third term abortions as easy as going to the movies. yeah, so while all the gangs are let loose from the jails, they will be the ones running around with the guns. then we can all watch obama talk to the leaders of Iran, while Iran is getting ready to lob nukes at Israel from the safety of Iraq, because of course, when obama pulls out the troops, Iraq will fail.

Nice America hermit.

Barack Obama is just TOO Extreme for America

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How in this fucking world you don't think the Rev, Wright,Bill Ayers, and Michell Obama is not going to hurt him. For every attack ad Moveon.org puts up, they are just going to play Rev. wright saying"NO NO NO God Damn America.

god damn once again for this Koolaid your drinking

and the list you put up saying most Americans

Most Americans believe there is homos in the world, but most of them don't wanna hear about.

Yes most American don't want troops in Iraq, but most agree Natl Security is more important.

Most agree they could live with a black or women president, but not one with black or women agendas, which the G.O.P. and Obama himself will make apparent

Most America does think global warming does exist, but they don't give shit about it.

Then you're attacking us saying you have yet to prove a valid argument. And i say while obama is digging in quick sand, you have your head in the sand. A valid argument for you is the one that supports your argument. I did not know they serve koolaid in the clouds and under the sand.

Get a Fucking clue

Hermit a definition

A person incapable of, or unwilling to socialize with other people. They will often spend an unnatural, possibly harmful amount of time in exclusion. Get a life you lonely hermit

Source: Cyrus, Jul 19, 2004

Also a word used to describe someone who does not like the same things most people do, often they do not see the whole picture and is assumed the hermit is socially retarded, when in fact he/she may just like their circle of friends but do not know anyone else into what they like to do outside,

yeah that sounds about right, I'm sure i could find some people to find that valid.

you're beginning to be the SteveAjones of the political world.

I still do like the More of the same McCain slogan. Maybe we should go back into the world of hijack planes and blow jobs in the oval office. Maybe most Americans won't mind a gay pride parade going down their street in small town America. We can make Third term abortions as easy as going to the movies. yeah, so while all the gangs are let loose from the jails, they will be the ones running around with the guns. then we can all watch obama talk to the leaders of Iran, while Iran is getting ready to lob nukes at Israel from the safety of Iraq, because of course, when obama pulls out the troops, Iraq will fail.

Nice America hermit.

Barack Obama is just TOO Extreme for America

Hey Joe,

This guy is on to something! :D

BTW, you forgot,.....

Most Americans believe whatever the liberal meda feeds them.

The rest believe the Conservative media sources.

Both sides are full of crap.

Global Warming? :lol: Record average low temperatures in Washington State for March and April, snow in late April.... BRING ON THE WARMING!!! :hippy:

Just dropped in to say "Howdy"!

SZ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How in this fucking world you don't think the Rev, Wright,Bill Ayers, and Michell Obama is not going to hurt him. For every attack ad Moveon.org puts up, they are just going to play Rev. wright saying"NO NO NO God Damn America.

god damn once again for this Koolaid your drinking

and the list you put up saying most Americans

Most Americans believe there is homos in the world, but most of them don't wanna hear about.

Yes most American don't want troops in Iraq, but most agree Natl Security is more important.

Most agree they could live with a black or women president, but not one with black or women agendas, which the G.O.P. and Obama himself will make apparent

Most America does think global warming does exist, but they don't give shit about it.

Then you're attacking us saying you have yet to prove a valid argument. And i say while obama is digging in quick sand, you have your head in the sand. A valid argument for you is the one that supports your argument. I did not know they serve koolaid in the clouds and under the sand.

Get a Fucking clue

Hermit a definition

A person incapable of, or unwilling to socialize with other people. They will often spend an unnatural, possibly harmful amount of time in exclusion. Get a life you lonely hermit

Source: Cyrus, Jul 19, 2004

Also a word used to describe someone who does not like the same things most people do, often they do not see the whole picture and is assumed the hermit is socially retarded, when in fact he/she may just like their circle of friends but do not know anyone else into what they like to do outside,

yeah that sounds about right, I'm sure i could find some people to find that valid.

you're beginning to be the SteveAjones of the political world.

I still do like the More of the same McCain slogan. Maybe we should go back into the world of hijack planes and blow jobs in the oval office. Maybe most Americans won't mind a gay pride parade going down their street in small town America. We can make Third term abortions as easy as going to the movies. yeah, so while all the gangs are let loose from the jails, they will be the ones running around with the guns. then we can all watch obama talk to the leaders of Iran, while Iran is getting ready to lob nukes at Israel from the safety of Iraq, because of course, when obama pulls out the troops, Iraq will fail.

Nice America hermit.

Barack Obama is just TOO Extreme for America

One of the dumbest posts in the history of dumb bantering.

You have no clue...about anything.

This country is on the brink of war, with itself. And none of you see it. Or ever will, until its too late.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the dumbest posts in the history of dumb bantering.

You have no clue...about anything.

This country is on the brink of war, with itself. And none of you see it. Or ever will, until its too late.

You may be right! Who the fuck knows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Joe,

This guy is on to something! :D

BTW, you forgot,.....

Most Americans believe whatever the liberal meda feeds them.

The rest believe the Conservative media sources.

Both sides are full of crap.

Global Warming? :lol: Record average low temperatures in Washington State for March and April, snow in late April.... BRING ON THE WARMING!!! :hippy:

Just dropped in to say "Howdy"!

SZ

Howdy ScottyZ! :wave:

Pb is not "on to" something.. he's "on" something.

I suspect it's crack. :P

:lol:

A mention of Global Warming/Climate Change always has "a good mathematical chance"

(to borrow a recently frequently used phrase) of drawing you into the debate,.. huh? :D

Snow in Seattle.. in late April. Ferking bizarre!

[Of note: Global warming/climate change does not merely refer to "warming", bud. The warming caused by excessive atmospheric carbons (thanks to the burning of fossil fuels and other man-made factors) is wreaking havoc on climate patterns. Thus,.. perhaps,.. the unusually late Seattle snow the other day, eh? ;) ]

Anyhooo,.. :whistling:

It's good to see you in a pol thread again, bud. I hope all is well. :hippy:

[Are you a grandpa yet? Please give my regards to Dani.]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get where you're coming from,.. and I disagree.

Most Americans are more accepting of homosexuality these days.

Most Americans (ok, half anyway) want universal healthcare.

Most Americans want our troops out of Iraq.

Most Americans believe Global Warming/Climate Change Crisis is real.

Most Americans (ok, half anyway) support Roe v. Wade.

Most Americans feel Social Security/Medicaid are worthwhile social programs.

Most Americans realize No Child Left Behind is an abject failure.

Most Americans support stem cell research.

Most Americans want America to be on the cutting edge of the energy revolution.

Most Americans believe in science, particularly as pertains to evolution vs creationism.

Many Americans feel America is ready for a Black and/or a woman POTUS.

Many Americans support some form of gun control.. that respects the right to bear arms.

Most Americans feel that gov't policies should be rooted in a sense of social conscience.

Those are examples of points of view that you (and conservatives like you) feel are "too liberal", and yet the reality is that these points of view are becoming more and more mainstream throughout America. While they may be the points of view held by most "liberals" (democrats), they are not by any means "radically liberal" points of view, they are actually rather "moderate" points of view... just not in the eyes of "conservative republicans" [you know.. republicans who think George W Bush (the self-proclaimed "compassionate conservative" and "uniter, not divider") is a "moderate" republican].

The times they are a changin', Del. Nowadays in America, to most people "liberal" and "progressive" are no longer political bad words, my friend. And it's no longer meaningful when republicans like you claim a democratic candidate is "too liberal". Most people recognize that to republicans, democrats (by very nature of their being democrats) are ALL considered to be "too liberal". A democrat does not exist that a republican would say is "not too liberal"; which means then, by inference, that when you say a candidate is "not moderate enough" or "is too liberal", what you're really saying is that the candidate is "not republican enough". Right? ;)

A majority of Americans feel that after 7 years of republican (mis)leadership America is "heading in the wrong direction". People want change. That means voting republicans out of the White House and voting in a democratic POTUS. Barack Obama represents intelligent, reasonable change and, as most polls are suggesting, he'd have a legitimate chance (ie, a "good mathematical chance") of winning the general election vs More Of The Same McCain.

Republicans like you, and rabid Clinton supporters (strange bed fellows indeed!), are the ones insisting that the Rev Wright issue will hurt Obama in the general election. You know it will subject him to swiftboat attacks/smears and you think that will be enough to give the election to McCain. Keep telling yourself that, muh-man, if that's what it takes for you to sleep somewhat soundly at night. But I know you're having nightmares about John McCain. You know full well that the Obama campaign and the DNC won't have to "swiftboat" McCain; all they'll have to do is point to his political record/policy positions (a record that even most conservative repubs find both nauseating and inconsistent) and highlight his many recent gaffes. Ya gotta admit, bro, that with each passing day McCain looks more and more like a (near-senile) buffoon. As the general election campaign wears on he's only going to look even more unappealing.. to everyone. He's not only going to look like More Of The Same in terms of Bush failed policies, he's going to look like More Of The Same in terms of Bush buffoonery. Americans, including most republicans, have been embarrassed enough by Bush; not many are gonna be eager to vote for More Of The Same. Sure, diehard repubs will hold their noses and vote for McCain; not because they think he'll be a good POTUS, but rather simply because they will not vote for any democrat for POTUS.. ever.. no matter what. I think reasonable-minded truly "moderate"-minded people (which excludes diehard repubs, obviously, and most so-called "moderate repubs") will, given the choice between Obama and More Of The Same.. vote for Obama.

I personally am looking forward with great eagerness to seeing Barack Obama and John McCain debate each other. It'll be youth, vitality, good looks, intelligence, and change vs. More Of The Same. It'll be a new vision for America, passionately and articulately expressed by political fresh blood vs. an old, broken down, incoherent, inconsistent, corporate welfare supporting, torture-supporting, war-mongering, fear-mongering good-ol-boy-wannabe.

I think Obama will do just fine in that head-to-head matchup. :thumbsup:

You and your fellow republicans' claims of "Obama's too liberal!".. and "Obama's a radical!" and "Obama will take your guns!" and "Obama is secretly a Muslim!" and "Obama's a racist!" and "Obama's a socialist!" and "Obama supports the terrorists!" and "Obama is whatever it is you fear most!" and "Hide your White women before Obama gets em!".. aren't gonna save your flip-flopping, pandering, war-mongering, fear-mongering, vapid, geriatric, buffoon of a candidate. B)

:hippy:

Go Obama!! :cheer:

btw,.. thanks for the response and welcome back to the thread, bud. Your points of view are as stale as an old cracker [pun intended, but nothing personal of course; I'm merely playfully referencing the fact that conservativism is extremely stale. *wink*], but your articulateness will be a refreshing change from the other anti-Obama/anti-democrat club members who (wannabe drummer, excluded) have been remarkably unwilling and/or unable to present anything remotely indicative of rational, logical, substantive, coherent arguments in support of (or defense of) their anti-Obama/anti-democrat diatribe/opinions. Yes indeed,.. welcome back, friend! :beer:

Well, I will say you are passionate about this guy Hermie. But I'm afraid that will not likely change the outcome this fall. When you say "most" the problem is that "most" is what you see in Seattle, the Bay area, West Los Angeles, Chicago and the East coast. But the truth is "most" of the rest of America is very uncomfortable with Barrack Obama, and will not vote for him. They may want some of those changes you talk about, but most people aren't going to take that big of chance to get there.

I agree with the Hillary camp when they say Barrack is not likely to be elected President. And although McCain is the nomination of my party, I am not supporting him either. Kind of funny isn't it?

My prediction for this fall if Barrack gets the Democratic nomination; that his will be a landslide victory for McCain. But I am not so sure that Barrack will get the nomination.... and wouldn't that be a funny scenario? Could be another '68' in Denver. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I will say you are passionate about this guy Hermie. But I'm afraid that will not likely change the outcome this fall. When you say "most" the problem is that "most" is what you see in Seattle, the Bay area, West Los Angeles, Chicago and the East coast. But the truth is "most" of the rest of America is very uncomfortable with Barrack Obama, and will not vote for him. They may want some of those changes you talk about, but most people aren't going to take that big of chance to get there.

"Not comfortable with" Obama is merely code for "don't trust a liberal/democrat to be POTUS" (the pov of most conservatives / republicans) and/or "don't trust a Black man to be POTUS" (the pov of someone with racial biases, fears, and prejudices against Blacks).. isn't it? :whistling: No news there, muh-man. Conservatives and people with racial prejudices, fears, and biases against Blacks simply aren't gonna vote for Obama under any circumstance; that's predictable.

Contrary to your claim, "the truth" of the matter is that conservatives/republicans (and people with anti-Black racial biases.. who, we might readily agree, tend to vote republican) do not make up "most of the rest of America"; they account for about HALF of the American voting populace. To support my assertion I point to the results of the past two presidential elections.

2000:

Gore: 50,996,116 votes; 48%; 266 elect coll votes

Bush: 50,456,169 votes; 48%; 271 elect coll votes

2004:

Bush : 62,040,606 votes; 51%; 286 elect coll votes

Kerry: 59,028,109 votes; 48%; 252 elect coll votes

So based on the election results in 2000 and 2004, it seems reasonable to presume that conservatives/republicans (a voting group in which I'm including people with anti-Black racial biases) will account for about half of the total vote in the upcoming general election. But hold on. The political climate is not the same as it was in 2000 and 2004. Here's a few examples of how things are different for the 2008 election:

1. Repubs are nowhere as enthusiastic about McCain as they were about Bush;

2. Obama and Clinton have registered NEW democratic voters in record numbers;

3. The democratic party is highly energized whereas the repub party is disaffected;

4. The political and economic hue and cry throughout America is that for CHANGE.

5. Once Obama is the nominee, the dem party's gonna go bonkers supporting him.

6. Every day, Mr Magoo.. erm.. McCain looks more confused and more like a buffoon.

Those factors all seem to suggest that there will be a very high democratic voter turnout and a fairly low republican voter turnout (lower than in 2000 and 2004 anyway). And that translates to Obama having a legitimate chance of winning the election. I think the dem turnout will be overwhelming enough that Obama can/will win the election regardless of how much repubs play the race/fear/smear cards during the campaign.

Obama does not, and will not, need to win over conservative voters in order to win the election. He'll win on the strength of democratic turnout and he may even get some additional support from a percentage of independent voters and an even smaller percentage of rational-minded republican crossover voters.

Just because conservatives like you, DelBro (and nutters like Pb), say Obama is "too liberal" or "too extreme" to be electable, that doesn't make it true. It won't be conservatives who elect Obama. I doubt anti-Obama swift boat smear ads will generate enough republican enthusiasm to match the democratic voter turnout on election day. The ONLY hope the republican party has of generating a higher voter turnout on election day than the democratic party is if... [yup, you know it].. Hillary Clinton is the democratic nominee.

Anyway..

That's my theory of how Obama can/will win, and I'm sticking with it. B)

You've got your "Obama's unelectable and loses in a landslide" theory.

I've got my "Obama wins on a tidal wave of dem voter turnout" theory.

Come Nov 5th (or so) we'll know whose theory was more accurate, eh? ;)

Cheers, bud. :beer:

:hippy:

John McCain: "There ya go, boy. You're a good dog!"

Mr_magoo_04.JPG

slapface.gif

:P

Go Obama!! :cheer:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He called met nutty and on crack.

Still once again. He said he'll debate me in good standing, but yet throw cheap shots in posts to sombody else.

Obama will be in the White House in Jan. McCain made a statue of him to celebrate his acheivment of winning the Dem. Nom.

jockey_2.jpg

I told you no old jokes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rev. Wright Takes His Message Directly to the Media

by FOXNews.com

Monday, April 28, 2008

The Rev. Jeremiah Wright taunted a gathering of journalists Monday in Washington, D.C., calling their coverage of his speeches an attack on the black church, while defending his claim that the U.S. was responsible for the terrorist attacks of 9/11.

Wright, the controversial former pastor of Barack Obama’s church, took dead aim at the U.S. government Monday — saying American soldiers in Iraq have died “over a lie” and called the war “unjust” — as he called for reconciliation and understanding between blacks and whites.

Wright was speaking at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. as he continues a series of nationwide appearances following an uproar over remarks he made in some of his sermons delivered from the pulpit.

On Monday, he did not shy away from tossing sharp barbs, either at the media, at the government or at other public figures.

Answering his first question, Wright first chided the questioner for not having heard the whole sermon, and then defended comments he made shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks that the United States had brought terrorism onto itself.

“If you heard the whole sermon, first of all, you heard that I was quoting the ambassador from Iraq. … But Number Two, to quote the bible: ‘Be not deceived. God is not mocked, for whatsoever you sew, that you shall’ –” he paused, and then some members of the audience responded, “Reap.”

He continued: “Jesus said do unto others as you would have them do unto you. You cannot do terrorism on other people and expect it never to come back on you. Those are biblical principles, not Jeremiah Wright bombastic, divisive principles.”

Wright also faced a question about his patriotism.”I served six years in the military. Does that make me patriotic?” he asked. “How many years did (Vice President Dick) Cheney serve?”

Wright also said fought off criticisms that he used “bombastic language” and fended off questions about Obama’s level of religious participation, even while painting Obama as a regular church-goer.

When Wright said Obama had distanced himself from speeches he had not heard in their entirety, Wright faced a follow up question on whether Obama was a regular attendee, or if he dozed during services.

He told the questioner: “He goes to church about as much as you do. What did your pastor preach in the last week? You don’t know?”

But Wright also said he wouldn’t refrain from criticism of Obama.

He said he has told Obama that if he is elected in November and is inaugurated in January, “I’m coming after you.” He said that’s because his differences are not with the American people, but U.S. policies.

“Whether he gets elected or not, I’m still going to have to be answerable to God on November 5 and January 21,” Wright said.

But during his remarks, Wright also sought to put space between what he called “attacks” on the black church.

“The most recent attack on the black church, it is not an attack on Jeremiah Wright, it is an attack on the black church,” Wright said.

He frequently criticized the press, but also said the heightened scrutiny of him and the black church could serve as a bridge for reconciliation and a decrease in the kinds of racial hatred that were exhibited during slavery, apartheid and by groups such as the Ku Klux Klan.

“Maybe this dialog on race … can move the people of faith in this country from various stages of alienation and marginalization to the exciting possibility of reconciliation.”

Obama’s association with Wright came into question after media reports this spring examined speeches over the years by Wright. At one point he bellowed, “God damn America, and he has referred to the United States as the “U.S. of KKK-A.” Wright recently retired as senior pastor of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, where Obama has attended for the past 20 years.

The pastor has set out to set the record straight, last week appearing in his first interview since the controversy erupted, and over the weekend giving two sermons and making an appearance at an NAACP event Sunday night in Detroit.

On Monday, his address in Washington is part of a tw0-day symposium on the African-American religious experience.

Yet the controversy isn’t appearing to go away. Even as Republican presidential candidate John McCain condemns the North Carolina GOP for focusing on Obama and Wright’s relationship in a new advertisement, yet another ad — this time in Mississippi congressional district race — has surfaced.

The ad comes from Republican candidate Greg Davis, who is running against Democrat Travis Childers.

The ad says: “Obama says Childers will put progress before politics, but when Obama’s pastor cursed America, blaming us for 9/11, Childers said nothing. When Obama ridiculed rural folks for clinging to guns and religion, Childers said nothing. Travis Childers: He took Obama’s endorsement over our conservative values. Conservatives just can’t trust Travis Childers.”

Sunday night, Wright — a well-respected black theologian — said the media have skewed his message.

“I’m not here for political reasons,” Wright told the audience in Detroit. “I’m not a politician. I know that fact will surprise many of you because many in the corporate-owned media made it seem like I am running for the Oval Office. I am not running for the Oval Office. I’ve been running for Jesus a long, long time, and I’m not tired yet.”

Taking on one adjective that has been ascribed to him recently, Wright said, “I am not one of the most divisive (black spiritual leaders). … I’m one of the most descriptive.”

While Obama has sought to distance himself from his former pastor to some degree, he has refused to disown him. In an interview with “FOX News Sunday” this weekend, Obama admitted his relationship with Wright is a political issue. The title of Obama’s best-selling book, “The Audicity of Hope,” is borrowed from one of Wright’s sermons.

“I think that people were legitimately offended by some of the comments that he had made in the past,” Obama said. “The fact that he is my former pastor I think makes it a legitimate political issue. So I understand that.”

But, Obama said, “it is also true that to run a snippet of 30-second sound bites, selecting out of a 30-year career, simplified and caricatured him, and caricatured the church. And I think that was done in a fairly deliberate way.”

While McCain has denounced the North Carolina GOP ad, he was critical of Wright on Sunday, criticism that drew a rebuke from the Obama campaign.

McCain told reporters that newly surfaced Wright speeches comparing U.S. Marines to Roman legions that killed Jesus and a comparison between Al Qaeda and American flags

Did he play the race card? I thnk he did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Howdy ScottyZ! :wave:

Pb is not "on to" something.. he's "on" something.

I suspect it's crack. :P

:lol:

A mention of Global Warming/Climate Change always has "a good mathematical chance"

(to borrow a recently frequently used phrase) of drawing you into the debate,.. huh? :D

Snow in Seattle.. in late April. Ferking bizarre!

[Of note: Global warming/climate change does not merely refer to "warming", bud. The warming caused by excessive atmospheric carbons (thanks to the burning of fossil fuels and other man-made factors) is wreaking havoc on climate patterns. Thus,.. perhaps,.. the unusually late Seattle snow the other day, eh? ;) ]

Anyhooo,.. :whistling:

It's good to see you in a pol thread again, bud. I hope all is well. :hippy:

[Are you a grandpa yet? Please give my regards to Dani.]

Or maybe a tornado in Wisconsin IN JANUARY!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I told you no old jokes.

That's true. You have not told me any old jokes.

Fwiw,.. my favorite of the new jokes you've told me was this one:

"Hillary has a good mathematical chance of winning the nomination".

That.. was.. a.. doozy! :hysterical:

:P

:D

oh, hey.. speaking of jokes..

here's an old-man joke for ya:

Three elderly men are talking about their aches, pains and bodily functions.

The first old man says, "I have this problem. I wake up every

morning at seven and it takes me twenty minutes to tinkle."

The second old man says, "My case is worse. I get up at eight and I sit

there grunting and groaning for half an hour before I finally have a BM."

John McCain says, "At seven I pee like a horse, at eight I dump like a cow."

"So what's your problem?" ask the others.

"I don't wake up until nine."

rimshot.gif

*click*

^_^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Not comfortable with" Obama is merely code for "don't trust a liberal/democrat to be POTUS" (the pov of most conservatives / republicans) and/or "don't trust a Black man to be POTUS" (the pov of someone with racial biases, fears, and prejudices against Blacks).. isn't it? :whistling: No news there, muh-man. Conservatives and people with racial prejudices, fears, and biases against Blacks simply aren't gonna vote for Obama under any circumstance; that's predictable.]

Contrary to your claim, "the truth" of the matter is that conservatives/republicans (and people with anti-Black racial biases.. who, we might readily agree, tend to vote republican) do not make up "most of the rest of America"; they account for about HALF of the American voting populace. To support my assertion I point to the results of the past two presidential elections.

2000:

Gore: 50,996,116 votes; 48%; 266 elect coll votes

Bush: 50,456,169 votes; 48%; 271 elect coll votes

2004:

Bush : 62,040,606 votes; 51%; 286 elect coll votes

Kerry: 59,028,109 votes; 48%; 252 elect coll votes

So based on the election results in 2000 and 2004, it seems reasonable to presume that conservatives/republicans (a voting group in which I'm including people with anti-Black racial biases) will account for about half of the total vote in the upcoming general election. But hold on. The political climate is not the same as it was in 2000 and 2004. Here's a few examples of how things are different for the 2008 election:

I think you are missing the point. It is not the Republicans who decide the president, it is the democrats. And in recent history, it are those 'Reagan Democrats' and 'Reagan Independents' who swing toward the Republican canidate... ESPECIALLY when that Democratic canidate has established themself to be left of center. Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter both ran as moderates not liberals.

So on that basis, it should be obvious (just as the Hilllary camp has correctly pointed out), that Barrack Obama is not electable in the areas of the country where it is going to be necessary.

1. Repubs are nowhere as enthusiastic about McCain as they were about Bush;

2. Obama and Clinton have registered NEW democratic voters in record numbers;

3. The democratic party is highly energized whereas the repub party is disaffected;

4. The political and economic hue and cry throughout America is that for CHANGE.

5. Once Obama is the nominee, the dem party's gonna go bonkers supporting him.

6. Every day, Mr Magoo.. erm.. McCain looks more confused and more like a buffoon.

You are correct that Conservative Republicans are not enthusiastic about McCain. But the difference between conservatives and liberals is that conservatives are much more pragmatic about these things. When it come down to brass tacks, you will see lots of 'enthusiasm' in the Republican camp, when the alternative is Barrack or Hillary. And in terms of Democratic voters; what happened to all those voters who were signed up in the last two elections? As soon as the Dems decide on their canidate, there are going to be a whole bunch of disenchanted liberals, especially if Obama gets passed over, and these people historically don't show up on election day.

Those factors all seem to suggest that there will be a very high democratic voter turnout and a fairly low republican voter turnout (lower than in 2000 and 2004 anyway). And that translates to Obama having a legitimate chance of winning the election. I think the dem turnout will be overwhelming enough that Obama can/will win the election regardless of how much repubs play the race/fear/smear cards during the campaign.

Just today Rev. Wright is out there talking more anti-American B.S. This guy is a nut AND he is Obama's spiritual mentor. That is going to KILL any chance Obama might have had, because people in middle America are going to question Obama's character on this issue. How could he sit there and listen to this 'Reverend' and still maintain his pollitical credibility. I know you don't understand this, but ask some people outside of your non-Christian liberal circles.

Obama does not, and will not, need to win over conservative voters in order to win the election. He'll win on the strength of democratic turnout and he may even get some additional support from a percentage of independent voters and an even smaller percentage of rational-minded republican crossover voters.

I believe that the independents are more likely to favor McCain. Enough so that they will probably offset the lack of enthusiasim from the conservative base.

Just because conservatives like you, DelBro (and nutters like Pb), say Obama is "too liberal" or "too extreme" to be electable, that doesn't make it true. It won't be conservatives who elect Obama. I doubt anti-Obama swift boat smear ads will generate enough republican enthusiasm to match the democratic voter turnout on election day. The ONLY hope the republican party has of generating a higher voter turnout on election day than the democratic party is if... [yup, you know it].. Hillary Clinton is the democratic nominee.

Anyway..

That's my theory of how Obama can/will win, and I'm sticking with it. B)

You've got your "Obama's unelectable and loses in a landslide" theory.

I've got my "Obama wins on a tidal wave of dem voter turnout" theory.

Come Nov 5th (or so) we'll know whose theory was more accurate, eh? ;)

Cheers, bud. :beer:

I like you dude, but I swear you are trying to "feel" your way through the logic involved here like usual. Obama may make some people "feel" inspired, but when it comes down to being president, he will fade away just like Howard Dean.

You'll see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you are missing the point. It is not the Republicans who decide the president, it is the democrats. And in recent history, it are those 'Reagan Democrats' and 'Reagan Independents' who swing toward the Republican canidate... ESPECIALLY when that Democratic canidate has established themself to be left of center. Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter both ran as moderates not liberals.

So on that basis, it should be obvious (just as the Hilllary camp has correctly pointed out), that Barrack Obama is not electable in the areas of the country where it is going to be necessary.

I'm not missing the point at all. I'm dismissing (refuting actually) your claims

that Obama is unelectable and that McCain will win in a landslide against him.

By the time the election rolls around McCain is gonna be looking like Mr Magoo. Really. He's already forgetting, and contradicting, from one day to the next what's he saying on the campaign trail; he keeps making mistakes about crucial foreign and domestic policy issues, and he has his legendary flip-flopping track record to contend with. With each passing month between now and November his candidacy is going to be more and more exposed for the farce that it is.

You'll see.

Furthermore, democrats of all colors and stripes.. be they liberals or so-called 'Reagan democrats'.. will vote for Obama in the general election. The democratic party WILL unite behind Obama. Only the most embittered of Clintonistas may not vote for Obama. Race will NOT be an issue for democrats. Anti-Black race bias is an issue among 'conservatives' / 'republicans', not democrats. And make no mistake about it, bro, once Obama gets the nomination, Hillary will be singing a vastly different tune about Obama's electability. She (and Bill) will be enthusiastically urging Clinton supporters to support and vote for Obama.

..and they will.

Count on it. ;)

You are correct that Conservative Republicans are not enthusiastic about McCain. But the difference between conservatives and liberals is that conservatives are much more pragmatic about these things. When it come down to brass tacks, you will see lots of 'enthusiasm' in the Republican camp, when the alternative is Barrack or Hillary. And in terms of Democratic voters; what happened to all those voters who were signed up in the last two elections? As soon as the Dems decide on their canidate, there are going to be a whole bunch of disenchanted liberals, especially if Obama gets passed over, and these people historically don't show up on election day.

The last two elections saw huge voter turnouts.. for both parties.

This year democratic voters will turnout in even greater numbers.. all across the

country.. whereas republican voter turnout will undoubtedly drop off.. all across the country.

[independents will probably split between Obama and McCain. It'll likely be a wash, and even if independents do edge toward McCain (which I think is unlikely), it wont be enough to overcome the enormous (perhaps record-breaking) voter turnout you're gonna see from Obama-supporting democrats.]

Connect the dots, friend. Pragmatically. ;)

I like you dude, but I swear you are trying to "feel" your way through the logic involved here like usual. Obama may make some people "feel" inspired, but when it comes down to being president, he will fade away just like Howard Dean.

You'll see.

I like you too, Del, but I think you're kidding yourself if you believe republicans will generate anywhere near as much enthusiasm for supporting McCain (or opposing Obama) as democrats will have in their support for Obama.

It's gonna come down to voter turnout and in that scenario I like Obama's chances. B)

:beer:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason the G.O.P. is not excited about McCain, is they are more excited that Obama may be the Dem. Nom. In which all they have to do is pick out what kind of music do they want to play during McCain inauguration.

jockey_2.jpg

"I swear boss, i don't know nothin about no rev. right. I fell asleep you see, me work so hard in the fields picing cotton."

But Del. this may be true

66qx2.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see racism is alive and well on LZ.com.

As is anti-Semitism, sexism, child discrimination...

Every day I read this board I see a new discriminatory remark from someone... and it's usually from the same few people, too (one of whom still hasn't answered for his anti-semetic comment).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As is anti-Semitism, sexism, child discrimination...

Every day I read this board I see a new discriminatory remark from someone... and it's usually from the same few people, too (one of whom still hasn't answered for his anti-semetic comment).

I made one but it was in defense of the Catholic priests. you're not talking about me are you?

can't discriminate about age too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I made one but it was in defense of the Catholic priests. you're not talking about me are you?

Nope. Yours was not an anti-semetic comment because you used it in a fashion to make a point, not as though you actually meant it, which automatically, IMO, disqualifies it as an anti-semetic comment.

As to the person I'm talking about, his board name is much shorter, is in all caps, and starts with a "D."

And you're right. Age discrimination is bad, too.

I would like to take a second and comment on your line from the previous post. Not to say it is racist, but it can be taken as quite racist by many people (as you saw with electrophile, and she won't be the only one). I'd either retract it or eaplain it if I were you. Just some friendly advice. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope. Yours was not an anti-semetic comment because you used it in a fashion to make a point, not as though you actually meant it, which automatically, IMO, disqualifies it as an anti-semetic comment.

As to the person I'm talking about, his board name is much shorter, is in all caps, and starts with a "D."

And you're right. Age discrimination is bad, too.

I would like to take a second and comment on your line from the previous post. Not to say it is racist, but it can be taken as quite racist by many people (as you saw with electrophile, and she won't be the only one). I'd either retract it or eaplain it if I were you. Just some friendly advice. :)

I could see how people can view that as racist, but i don't see how a joke about one person age could be allowed, but not about thier color, same thing applies when talking about Christians and Jews. We are not making broad judgements about everbody in a certain group, everybody id judged on thier own merit. If a black man steals my car, am i not allowed to hate him, even though his color of his skin happens to be black.

Remeber McCain may of forgot who was the good guys in iraq, but it was obama who forgot what his pastor was talking about for the last 20 years. Or did Rev. Wright mispoke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could see how people can view that as racist, but i don't see how a joke about one person age could be allowed, but not about thier color, same thing applies when talking about Christians and Jews. We are not making broad judgements about everbody in a certain group, everybody id judged on thier own merit. If a black man steals my car, am i not allowed to hate him, even though his color of his skin happens to be black.

Oh I agree. There are many black people I hate, but that doesn't make me racist. I hate the person, not the skin color. Major difference.

However, unlike you (from what I can see), a select group here (one most notably... you know who I'm talking about) tends to lump in everyone.

The comment on the Texas Polygamy thread from one person saying "She's Jewish" is a remark that has a higher chance of being an anti-semetic remark then not.

Remeber McCain may of forgot who was the good guys in iraq, but it was obama who forgot what his pastor was talking about for the last 20 years. Or did Rev. Wright mispoke.

Now he's claiming that the media isn't showing the whole story, and that he was quoting someone else (was it you or Hermit who brought that one up?). To be honest, I wouldn't be surprised if that were true. Our media has a bad habit of taking things out of context and giving them a whole new, and usually more sinister, meaning. So it's not that much of a stretch to believe that Rev. Wright was quoting someone else and the media, doing what they do a lot, took it out of context.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW, nobody wanted to vote for Alan Keyes back when he ran. But Obama is doing, or was doing, quite well in many state primaries.

The Rev. Wright, who is a hater, unfortunately may destroy Obama's chances now. And that's a national tragedy no matter what political spectrum one is on.

Is it just me or is Hillary's eyes scary?? The expression in them lately screams "It's all mine! It's all mine! IT'S ALL MINE!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"the president is not going to dictate to anyone what they should do with these economy stimulus rebate checks".

just heard that on the npr news break.

I don't think he can.

but 27 percent say they will pay bills with it. which would lead you to believe the money that they didn't have to spend on bills, will go to something else other than bills. Even buying food helps. It's everybody duty to help this economy, even though it may help your political cause, but if we are still talking about the economy in a year, no president is going to pull us out. My brother thinks it's a way for bush to get his approval up, but at the same time, he's going to spend the money on a new TV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

can't discriminate about age too.

Discrimination is bad; including discrimination based on age.

"Joking about" someone's age and "discriminating against" him based on age are not necessarily the same thing. Recognizing the difference requires discrimination (as in "discernment") (pun intended) skills. Skills that you seem to.. uhh.. lack, Pb.

Yes, I joke about Mr Magoo's.. erm.. John McCain's age, but I'm not 'discriminating against him' based on his age. Afaic, age is NOT a de facto a disqualifying factor with regard to one's fitness to serve in public office. I do, however, think that age (in the context of mortality and the sharpness of one's mental functioning) is certainly fair to consider in weighing a candidate's fitness to serve in public office.. particularly the office of POTUS.

And in a campaign/election in which "Change" is a major theme (a theme even McGoo is embracing), I think it's fair to highlight the fact one candidate represents youth, vitality, and "new blood" (pun intended) and the other represents old age, 'more of the same', and "the establishment". That is not age discrimination.

:beer:

:hippy:

[edited to add]

joking about someone's race is also not necessarily discrimination. But the content and spirit of the joking can reveal underlying racist feelings and beliefs. It seems to me that in making jokes about a Black man's race, one might be wise to consider the historical relevance of using a lawn jockey caricature and slavery-related comments as the punch line of that joke. Slavery-related caricatures and comments tend to skew the presentation from humor toward racism, ya know?

But wisdom really isn't your forte', now is Pb? :whistling:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now he's claiming that the media isn't showing the whole story, and that he was quoting someone else (was it you or Hermit who brought that one up?). To be honest, I wouldn't be surprised if that were true. Our media has a bad habit of taking things out of context and giving them a whole new, and usually more sinister, meaning. So it's not that much of a stretch to believe that Rev. Wright was quoting someone else and the media, doing what they do a lot, took it out of context.

Well unless he said, "Look at what this piece of shit said", before he read the quote. I don't know why would you read something unless you agree with it.

Even the guy whom Rev. wright said he quoted from, said that he never wrote or said it. Then Rev.Wright said the media picks and choses soundclips. well that was the soundclip that the church put on their DVD. so it's only his fault.

I know that Rev.Wright did alot of good, but their are people who done as much good as him, but they don't say words like that.

Rev. Wright did say he was a marine, so he does love his county. Well Lee harvey Oswald was a marine, did he love his country. He said Dick Chenny never served, well nor did Obama. DO they not love America because they did not serve. and McCain spent 5 years as a P.O.W.

Well I know where Rev. Wright lives and the day i drive past his house and see an american flag and the globe and anchor flying above his house, is the day that point is valid. and don't forget the yellow ribbon around the tree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...