|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: The political junkie POTUS prediction thread
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
Yeah, it is a lot like checks and balances. The superdelegates can vote against the people if they want, but if they do so foolishly, the people can choose not to vote for the superdelegates' selected candidate, especially since the competition is someone who could easily draw support from some sections of the democratic base, if he played his cards right. That's the risk.
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Choirboy
Shipmate
# 9659
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
quote:
Originally posted by Choirboy:
I imagine Maryland going for Clinton
It's a closed primary, yes, but Maryland has a large black population (30%) and a bunch of rich white liberals. And Obama is polling well ahead of Clinton (FWIW).
As an Obama supporter, I'd be glad to be proven wrong, especially as he is not yet polling as well in Ohio or Texas.
Maryland is Democratic party territory, although that has eroded in the last years. My in-laws from Maryland are thoroughgoing Republicans, but were registered Democrats for ages because, as they said, that's what you had to be in Maryland to get along in business. Now folks like them wouldn't go for Obama over Clinton, but it just makes me wonder what proportion of the Democratic primary vote in Maryland will be African American. I expect that although a large proportion of the state is African American, the large party membership may in fact dilute their vote compared to other states, such as Louisiana or Virginia.
I have read that Bill is making the rounds of African American churches in the region, so perhaps it will be as you say. Still the Clintons are going to know a lot of people in Maryland.
If Obama does pull that off, Maryland and Virginia together are almost the same number of delegates as Texas, which would definitely push things to Pennsylvania (at least) (assuming a Clinton win in Texas and Ohio). And guarantee that the super delegates will have the final say (although they may be there already).
[ETA - as much as I love New Orleans, it is not a state. Replaced by 'Louisiana' above.]
[ 11. February 2008, 21:54: Message edited by: Choirboy ]
Posts: 2994 | From: Minneapolis, Minnesota USA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
Love, Actually
Some blogger I never heard of with a weird take on the Clintons. The post has a genuinely memorable last line. Comments interesting too.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
Wow that was an interesting take on them.
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
Well, it looks like Obama has won Virginia.
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
agrgurich
Shipmate
# 5724
|
Posted
I guarantee there won't be a caucus in Michigan. No one here wants it. 600,000 Democrats voted in the primary. John McCain would have a field day if their votes were thrown out. I almost feel sorry for the Democrats. Almost, but not quite. ![[Snigger]](graemlins/snigger.gif)
--------------------
Life is a comedy to those who think & a tragedy to those who feel.-Horace Walpole
AJG
Posts: 4478 | From: Michigan's Copper Country | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alfred E. Neuman
What? Me worry?
# 6855
|
Posted
I'm in shock. It has occurred to me that this country will actually break the 232-year white man's monopoly on the White House. There is a new day dawning for leadership of this country and I'm beginning to hope it will be much more than a symbolic changing of the guard, be that Clinton or Obama.
There are few points in history when the identity of a people can overcome their diverse interests and focus on change for the common good; not only for the internal concerns of any particular country but for the best interests of all nations.
Posts: 12954 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Living in Gin
Liturgical Pyromaniac
# 2572
|
Posted
Sweep!
--------------------
It's all fun and games until somebody gets burned at the stake.
Posts: 1893 | From: Cincinnati, USA | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
jlg
What is this place?
Why am I here?
# 98
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gort:
I'm in shock. It has occurred to me that this country will actually break the 232-year white man's monopoly on the White House. There is a new day dawning for leadership of this country and I'm beginning to hope it will be much more than a symbolic changing of the guard, be that Clinton or Obama.
There was an op-ed page column recently in the Boston Globe (sorry, I can't find an on-line link) which used the Obama/Clinton political race to talk about the fact that we won't have gotten past racial and gender prejudice until nobody bothers to mention that aspect of the candidate.
(The article made the point that it wasn't all that many decades back that being Italian-American elicited severe levels of bigotry, but Rudy Guiliani was not once labelled the "Italian-American" candidate. He was allowed to run, and fail, simply on his own merits.)
To be honest, I simply don't think of Obama as a "black" candidate for president. Like Tiger Woods, he's of mixed racial background and talks and behaves like the sort of "neutral" person the TV people hire for their news shows. And the people I know who support him never mention his race (as in "Oh, I want to help elect the first black president!"). They all seem focussed on his personal qualities (he comes across as very genuine and caring) and his policies.
Clinton is still seen as "the female candidate" to a greater extent, I think. Though maybe I'm projecting my own feelings about this; which I find really ironic, being a member of the '70s feminist movement.
But having the two of them competing, without a single White Male (Living or Dead and ignoring Bill) involved, is, I believe, going to turn out to be a defining moment. Everyone (well OK, everyone considering voting Democratic) is being forced to look past the outer shell (male/female, black/white) and simply ponder which of these two odd ducks (by political standards) they want to see in the White House running the country.
Not to mention McCain's unexpected heir-apparent status.
It's going to be verrrr-rry interrrr-essssting. And we all know that reputedly Chinese curse about "interesting times", right?
Posts: 17391 | From: Just a Town, New Hampshire, USA | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Choirboy
Shipmate
# 9659
|
Posted
Things are much better than they used to be, but we're not past anything until such folks routinely become President.
Posts: 2994 | From: Minneapolis, Minnesota USA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Choirboy
Shipmate
# 9659
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Choirboy:
As an Obama supporter, I'd be glad to be proven wrong, especially as he is not yet polling as well in Ohio or Texas.
I was wrong, I was wrong! I was wrong! [What, no 'jump for joy' smiley?]. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
He's doing pretty much as well in either Virginia or Maryland - another crushing 60%+ return.
Posts: 2994 | From: Minneapolis, Minnesota USA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alfred E. Neuman
What? Me worry?
# 6855
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by jlg:
...To be honest, I simply don't think of Obama as a "black" candidate for president. Like Tiger Woods, he's of mixed racial background and talks and behaves like the sort of "neutral" person the TV people hire for their news shows.
Then you would only consider Obama a "black candidate" if he shucked and jived across the stage with a ghetto accent using ebonics? Of course his racial heritage isn't an important notable quality beyond the fact he will break a long-standing barrier. Otherwise, I would have voted for Jesse Jackson years ago. Still, the "first" for Obama's election this fall will be just as notable as JFK's catholic heritage in the 60s. That doesn't detract from his qualities as an inspirational statesman.
Posts: 12954 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Choirboy
Shipmate
# 9659
|
Posted
This is all pretty dangerous territory [what is blackness], but you can cut jlg a little slack here. Obama has been criticized quietly by some members of the Congressional Black Caucus for being insufficiently vocal on "black" issues, in spite of being happy to take their contributions.
If one is charitable, then one might say Obama is avoiding hot-button issues that suck him in to being type cast as a candidate, but that he is 100% in league with the civil rights movement, etc. Someone not so charitable could perceive it as an intentional distancing from their concerns.
[ETA - he does tend to avoid race issues in his speeches, e.g.]
[ 13. February 2008, 04:43: Message edited by: Choirboy ]
Posts: 2994 | From: Minneapolis, Minnesota USA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gort:
Then you would only consider Obama a "black candidate" if he shucked and jived across the stage with a ghetto accent using ebonics?
Of course not. That's sheer prejudice. We should apply the same test of his blackness that he proposed for President Clinton -- we should withhold judgment until we see him dance...
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
quote:
Originally Posted by Choirboy:
This is all pretty dangerous territory [what is blackness], but you can cut jlg a little slack here. Obama has been criticized quietly by some members of the Congressional Black Caucus for being insufficiently vocal on "black" issues, in spite of being happy to take their contributions.
What are "black" issues?
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Choirboy
Shipmate
# 9659
|
Posted
Racial profiling, for one. If you think about it carefully, I'm sure you'll think of some more.
Posts: 2994 | From: Minneapolis, Minnesota USA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
St. Punk the Pious
Biblical™ Punk
# 683
|
Posted
As a practical matter, Obama would be wise to avoid appearing to be "the Black candidate." That's just the way the world is.
On other matter, FWIW, here's a slightly condensed version of what I've posted on my blog this fine morning:
Democrat Nightmare Scenario?
After a rally in El Paso last night, Hillary Clinton is visiting the Corpus Christi area today. You know things must be serious if a presidential candidate is visiting those two places. Heck, even normal people rarely go to those remote environs.
With Hillary so gracing my region (Who said I was normal?), I thought it might be a good time to examine the possible Nightmare Scenario for the Democrats. The scenario goes that Obama wins most of the primaries and more pledged delegates than Hillary, which seems likely now, but that the more establishment super-delegates give Hillary the nomination. This would warm my lib’rul bashing heart but would alienate Obama supporters and greatly harm Democrat chances in November.
In recent days, it’s been argued that the Nightmare Scenario has become less likely with Obama’s winning streak, that the super-delegates aren’t going to tank the party by swinging the nomination to Hillary. And if unless she finishes the primary season strong, I think that’s correct.
But if she wins, say, two out of the three of Texas, Ohio, and Pennsyvania, she at least won’t appear as weak or unpopular a candidate as she does today. She would then give those establishment-mined super-delegates inclined to vote for her a reason/excuse to do so even if Obama still has slightly more of the elected delegates. So the Nightmare Scenario could still happen.
I’m not expecting this to happen, mind you. But it’s more possible than Democrats wish. And, anyway, is this not fun to watch?
Relevant articles may be found here and here.
--------------------
The Society of St. Pius *
Wannabe Anglican, Reader
My reely gud book.
Posts: 4161 | From: Choral Evensong | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Choirboy
Shipmate
# 9659
|
Posted
Yes, we went on about this a bit on the bottom half of page 19.
I agree it could be pretty ugly. But the problem with the big states is that they still award their delegates proportionally. If Clinton wins 53% to 47% in the remaining big states consistently, she still may not profit by it all that much. Too many more of these 60+% wins for Obama, even in more moderately sized states, are really going to put her in a tough position.
Which way the super delegates break will be interesting, but despite predictions based on polls of super delegates, nothing is sure about them until convention.
Posts: 2994 | From: Minneapolis, Minnesota USA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alfred E. Neuman
What? Me worry?
# 6855
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
Of course not. That's sheer prejudice. We should apply the same test of his blackness that he proposed for President Clinton -- we should withhold judgment until we see him dance...
![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif) That was the day I was won over to his candidacy.
[ 13. February 2008, 14:26: Message edited by: Gort ]
--------------------
--Formerly: Gort--
Posts: 12954 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
Hey Punk,
Like Choirboy said, it's a longshot. Hillary could win all three of the OH/TX/PA contests and still be out. Predictions I've heard say that she needs to win 55% of every primary here on out to stay in it, and I think it's safe to say that Obama isn't going to lose every primary between now and the convention. Which means that when she DOES win, she's going to have to push over 60% to get the pledged delegates she needs to stick in it.
The "super-delicate super-delegate" situation is fun to talk about (especially for you as a librul-hater ![[Biased]](wink.gif) ), but these people know what they're doing and how it'll affect things. Unless she pulls off a string of extremely convincing wins of the 60%+ variety (we might call them "Obama-like" wins), the wishy-washy super delegates will begin to reconsider where they want their allegiances to lie.
After all, Obama is going to have a lot of jobs to start handing out in September.
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
non-American perspective he appears to have won a few caucuses and primaries he was expected to win. Nothing newsworthy is happening at the moment so something has to be made up, to keep the (inflated puff)ball rolling.
Its an obvious thing to say, but part of the excitement is because (as recently as when my own parents were at secondary school, over 3,000 miles away here in Britain) in some of the places that Obama is winning Democrat delegates a black man saying the things he is saying would have been hung by the Democrat-voting grandparents of some of those who are now supporting him.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
non-American perspective he appears to have won a few caucuses and primaries he was expected to win. Nothing newsworthy is happening at the moment so something has to be made up, to keep the (inflated puff)ball rolling.
Its an obvious thing to say, but part of the excitement is because (as recently as when my own parents were at secondary school, over 3,000 miles away here in Britain) in some of the places that Obama is winning Democrat delegates a black man saying the things he is saying would have been hung by the Democrat-voting grandparents of some of those who are now supporting him.
Obama's ability to draw the votes of white people just keeps getting better and better. And Sioni Sais is wrong to say what's going on isn't newsworthy, given that Hillary Clinton was the presumptive frontrunner for so long because of her being the candidate of the Democratic establishment. Six months ago no one had any clue Obama would do this well.
quote:
Originally posted by Gort:
I'm in shock. It has occurred to me that this country will actually break the 232-year white man's monopoly on the White House. There is a new day dawning for leadership of this country and I'm beginning to hope it will be much more than a symbolic changing of the guard, be that Clinton or Obama.
There are few points in history when the identity of a people can overcome their diverse interests and focus on change for the common good; not only for the internal concerns of any particular country but for the best interests of all nations.
When I voted last week, I didn't ink in the bubble for Barack Obama immediately, though I'd already made up my mind. I stopped for a second to look at the whole list, because I wanted to savor the moment of having the choice to vote for people -- more than one! a real choice! -- who weren't white guys.
quote:
Originally posted by jlg:
Clinton is still seen as "the female candidate" to a greater extent, I think. Though maybe I'm projecting my own feelings about this; which I find really ironic, being a member of the '70s feminist movement.
I think this is true, though I'm not ready to put it down to the notion that being a female candidate is harder than being a black candidate, which was what Gloria Steinem was claiming in a NY Times op-ed piece in January. I think if Clinton had half the personality and charm that Obama does, she wouldn't have this problem.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Comper's Child
Shipmate
# 10580
|
Posted
You know, I really really like Obama. But I have to say I am waiting to hear something concrete from him. Perhaps I'm a victim of the media who continually play and replay him speaking about hope and unity, but how about some real plans? That's my dilemma. Hillary's got lots of plans but I don't warm to her at all. McCain's not looking too bad to me, but the big question there is who on earth is going to be his VP - Huckabee? -that's where I run for the Democrats when I consider how old and unwell McCain's seen as being.
Posts: 2509 | From: Penn's Greene Countrie Towne | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
I don't know. There's a certain honesty in admitting that you can't really have a hard-core plan for what you set out to accomplish in the presidency.
The president can't micromanage a nation on that level. I think what he/she can do is establish a vision, hire people who know how to implement that vision, and manage them appropriately. he/she can also communicate to the people and be the "face" of the nation to foreign countries.
Policy wonks don't necessarily make good politicians for the same reason accountants don't always make good CEO's. It just takes a different quality of person to do the job.
To that extent, I think the impression I get of Obama's ability to communicate and to inspire and to project a "big idea" image is actually of qualitative importance.
If good plans along was necessary for the presidency, Carter would be remembered very differently, methinks.
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Comper's Child:
You know, I really really like Obama. But I have to say I am waiting to hear something concrete from him. Perhaps I'm a victim of the media who continually play and replay him speaking about hope and unity, but how about some real plans? That's my dilemma. Hillary's got lots of plans but I don't warm to her at all.
Plans are almost always BS. I'm looking for somebody who is committed to changing some of the broken systems we have in place, and who is willing to do the work of compromise, motivation, and inspiration to get those changes to happen.
Someone who claims to have a great plan for healthcare, even if the plan sounds great to me, is going to be in trouble when Congress simply says, "No thanks." But someone who says, "Healthcare needs to be fixed, and I'm going to make it happen. I'll work with Congress and with my staff and with you all to make a new system that works." That's something I can get behind and believe in, somewhat. Especially if the person has shown him/herself to be capable of working with others and effecting change. Ahem.
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Littlelady
Shipmate
# 9616
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Comper's Child:
You know, I really really like Obama. But I have to say I am waiting to hear something concrete from him. Perhaps I'm a victim of the media who continually play and replay him speaking about hope and unity, but how about some real plans? That's my dilemma.
Have you visited his website? I'm sure you probably have. I really got into it the other night and while a lot of it doesn't deal too much in specifics - I think it is foolish to get into specifics until absolutely necessary (but I'm a cynical English woman!) - it does give a strong sense of what the man wants to achieve. Whether he would achieve it all, or even some of it, if he was elected to President is, of course, as ever, anyone's guess. But I found his website pretty informative on a general level and I do think he's pretty inspirational on a personal level. He also appears to be quite personable. That's quite a powerful mix in terms of building relationships, negotiating, etc. IMO, obviously.
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Obama's ability to draw the votes of white people just keeps getting better and better.
I think this is really heartening. It certainly indicates the growing breadth of his appeal.
The reports here say that Obama is now ahead of Clinton in the delegate count. Anyone feeling confident of this being the case post Texas? (Is it Texas next?)
On the Republican side, do peeps think it may be a good idea for the others to hang up their boots and let McCain go it alone?
--------------------
'When ideas fail, words come in very handy' ~ Goethe
Posts: 3737 | From: home of the best Rugby League team in the universe | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Comper's Child
Shipmate
# 10580
|
Posted
Yes, I have visited the website. It's interesting and somewhat vague, but as mirrizin points out it's perhaps unwise to have things all sewn up and so much depends on the make-up of the congress.
Rather than speak to hope alone, however, I'd prefer some more clarity. Perhaps we'll get it if the candidacy becomes assured which it certainly is not as yet.
Posts: 2509 | From: Penn's Greene Countrie Towne | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Littlelady:
The reports here say that Obama is now ahead of Clinton in the delegate count. Anyone feeling confident of this being the case post Texas? (Is it Texas next?)
Wisconsin and Hawaii are next Tuesday the 19th. Obama is expected to easily win Hawaii (a home-state), but Wisconsin is somewhat up for grabs.
Texas and Ohio (and others) are on March 4th. He really only needs to get 45% of both for it to be a victory, and if he can win either then we're going to see a very nervous HillBot CTN2000 unleash her last-ditch Desperation 5.0 Software.
I have to agree with the Punk -- this has been (and continues to be) very fun to watch.
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Og: Thread Killer
Ship's token CN Mennonite
# 3200
|
Posted
Clinton going to Texas right away seems to indicate they are giving up on Wisconsin.
Are there any pseudo events Clinton can use to get back the momentum before March?
--------------------
I wish I was seeking justice loving mercy and walking humbly but... "Cease to lament for that thou canst not help, And study help for that which thou lament'st."
Posts: 5025 | From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Living in Gin
Liturgical Pyromaniac
# 2572
|
Posted
Hillary is pretty much giving up on Wisconsin, and going straight for Texas and Ohio. It's a strategy that worked so well for Rudy Guiliani in Florida.
--------------------
It's all fun and games until somebody gets burned at the stake.
Posts: 1893 | From: Cincinnati, USA | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Campbellite
Ut unum sint
# 1202
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
When I voted last week, I didn't ink in the bubble for Barack Obama immediately, though I'd already made up my mind. I stopped for a second to look at the whole list, because I wanted to savor the moment of having the choice to vote for people -- more than one! a real choice! -- who weren't white guys.
I had a similar experience yesterday in the "Potomac Primaries". It was so unusual to have actual choices that mattered. By the time the Virginia primaries usually occur, the nomination is already sewn up.
--------------------
I upped mine. Up yours.
Suffering for Jesus since 1966.
WTFWED?
Posts: 12001 | From: between keyboard and chair | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
I really don't know which the hell way to vote if it goes to Obama and McCain. Here's why:
I am, in (relative) descending order of importance:
- Fiscally Conservative. Edge: Big Mac
- Pro-Open Trade: Edge Big Mac
- Really pissed at the Republicans for Bush –Edge: Obama
- Pro-Choice - Obama
- Pro-gay marriage - Obama
- Anti-gun control - Mac
- Independent - Mac
- Pro-immigration – Toss up, Obama I think
- Feel something desperately needs to be done with the Healthcare Industry - Obama
- Against anything that is TOO socialist (as determined by ME). - Mac
- Don’t want to get out of Iraq too fast, don’t want to stay too long. - Neither
Given that, I have NO idea who I might vote for. Obama still strike me as too inexperienced, but his campaigning is starting to change my mind. He’s good. I’m just afraid he will spend money like a drunken Bush in a whorehouse.
Please Bloomberg. Run.
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Living in Gin
Liturgical Pyromaniac
# 2572
|
Posted
I don't think Bloomberg would be anything other than a spoiler if he ran as an independent, but I'd give my left testicle to see him as Obama's running mate.
--------------------
It's all fun and games until somebody gets burned at the stake.
Posts: 1893 | From: Cincinnati, USA | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
If the spoiler won, man would it send a message to the TWO parties. I'd LOVE that.
I was just thinking a McCain-Hillary ticket would be perfect for me.
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alogon
Cabin boy emeritus
# 5513
|
Posted
Mad Geo, what do you think of the judges Bush has appointed (Supreme Court and otherwise)? I for one don't like them at all; and I have to think that a number of justices today are hanging on by their fingernails until they can retire in hopes of seeing someone remotely sympathetic succeed them.
These appointees won't go away next January, and many of them won't even by 2012. I really think the issue is whether our children will live in a free country or become slaves.
As a old Wisconsinner, I predict that my native State will go for Obama, aided by the residue of its progressive heritage. My generation grew up listening to a whole state network of elegant public radio, and even the Republicans supported it. My grandfather listened to it in the barn while he was milking the cows. He thought that even the cows liked it. Republicans, or ex-Republicans, pissed off at Bush must be quite common in Wisconsin.
[ 13. February 2008, 20:57: Message edited by: Alogon ]
--------------------
Patriarchy (n.): A belief in original sin unaccompanied by a belief in God.
Posts: 7808 | From: West Chester PA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
New Yorker
Shipmate
# 9898
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alogon:
I really think the issue is whether our children will live in a free country or become slaves.
I agree. Free Americans or slaves to an over-reaching federal government compliments of Hillary or Obama (and maybe even McCain)!
Posts: 3193 | From: New York City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Living in Gin
Liturgical Pyromaniac
# 2572
|
Posted
Yeah, Bush has been such a champion of civil liberties. ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
--------------------
It's all fun and games until somebody gets burned at the stake.
Posts: 1893 | From: Cincinnati, USA | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
I think I'm about to LOVE the next ruling on the Second Ammendment right to keep and bear arms.
That aside, they are incredibly mixed in my opinion. Amngst the worst rulings in recent history was the ruling in favor of imminent domain, and that was from the previous court!
I like some of thier rulings, some, not so much. Pro-life rulings, Pah, bastards! Anti-affirmative action, YEAH!
You're right though, that might be a deal maker. I'd just assume have the court be a tossup than be too liberal or too conservative.
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by New Yorker:
quote:
Originally posted by Alogon:
I really think the issue is whether our children will live in a free country or become slaves.
I agree. Free Americans or slaves to an over-reaching federal government compliments of Hillary or Obama (and maybe even McCain)!
Do you even read the news?
The last 8 years have been far more over-reaching federal gov than the previous 8. By far. Clinton (either one) looks like a raging Libertarian by comparison to Bush.
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Joyeux
Ship's Lady of Laughter
# 3851
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mad Geo:
If the spoiler won, man would it send a message to the TWO parties. I'd LOVE that.
Is it possible that Mad Geo and I agree, politically, on something?! ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Between that comment and the list a couple of posts earlier up, I realize that it isn't politics per se, but how / if government should be involved at all in areas described as moral.
quote:
I was just thinking a McCain-Hillary ticket would be perfect for me.
OTOH, I think that Huckabee - Obama or Obama - Huckabee would be a better fit for me! ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
--------------------
Float?...Do science too
Posts: 4318 | From: over th... no, there! | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
Obama...with Huckabee? ![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif)
Umm...to my liberal-centrist-ish mildly savvy mind that totally does not compute. How do you do it?
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
New Yorker
Shipmate
# 9898
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mad Geo:
quote:
Originally posted by New Yorker:
quote:
Originally posted by Alogon:
I really think the issue is whether our children will live in a free country or become slaves.
I agree. Free Americans or slaves to an over-reaching federal government compliments of Hillary or Obama (and maybe even McCain)!
Do you even read the news?
The last 8 years have been far more over-reaching federal gov than the previous 8. By far. Clinton (either one) looks like a raging Libertarian by comparison to Bush.
Sorry, I really just don't see what all the fuss is about? Bush wants the right to listen in on phone calls with terrorists. Sounds pretty logical to me.
With Clinton/Obama and company we get so much government interference and control that we are reduced to being slaves.
Posts: 3193 | From: New York City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alfred E. Neuman
What? Me worry?
# 6855
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by New Yorker:
Sorry, I really just don't see what all the fuss is about? Bush wants the right to listen in on phone calls with terrorists. Sounds pretty logical to me...
Have you ever tried to dial 1-800-TERROR? The voice-mail directory can be maddening. I can only imagine how frustrating the experience for an eavesdropper.
Posts: 12954 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
New Yorker
Shipmate
# 9898
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gort:
Have you ever tried to dial 1-800-TERROR? The voice-mail directory can be maddening. I can only imagine how frustrating the experience for an eavesdropper.
Gort, I agree. You'll get transferred to India and get lost in the phone queue.
Posts: 3193 | From: New York City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
SeraphimSarov
Shipmate
# 4335
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by New Yorker:
quote:
Originally posted by Alogon:
I really think the issue is whether our children will live in a free country or become slaves.
I agree. Free Americans or slaves to an over-reaching federal government compliments of Hillary or Obama (and maybe even McCain)!
talk about a vision of Ayn Rand
--------------------
"For those who like that sort of thing, that is the sort of thing they like"
Posts: 2247 | From: Sacramento, California | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alfred E. Neuman
What? Me worry?
# 6855
|
Posted
Actually, their call center is in Pakistan. But don't let that stop you from endorsing the destruction of civil liberties in the good ole USofA.
Posts: 12954 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
Rush, I mean New Yorker,
You cannot pillory the liberals for their government slavery while excusing yours. It does not compute. Or explain how you justify it. Bush listening in is against our freedoms in almsot any way worse than I can imagine liberals doing it. You know what Ben said, those that would give up essential liberties for temporary security deserved neither.....
Either call Bush for the bastard rights-grabber that he is, and them for theirs, or vice versa. You can't have it both ways.
Or are you just spewing Repuglican Koolaid for effect?
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
New Yorker
Shipmate
# 9898
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mad Geo:
Rush, I mean New Yorker,
Thanks for the compliment, but I am not as savy as Rush is.
quote:
You cannot pillory the liberals for their government slavery while excusing yours. It does not compute. Or explain how you justify it. Bush listening in is against our freedoms in almsot any way worse than I can imagine liberals doing it. You know what Ben said, those that would give up essential liberties for temporary security deserved neither.....
Either call Bush for the bastard rights-grabber that he is, and them for theirs, or vice versa. You can't have it both ways.
Or are you just spewing Repuglican Koolaid for effect?
It depends on the flavor of the Kool-aid, I guess. Anything but cherry or grape.
I don't think Bush is a civil rights grabber as you say. I just don't see how listening in on telephone conversations among terrorists is that big of an extension of police powers traditionally wielded by the government. I am not a fan of government intrusion on any rights, but sometimes it must do so for the greater good. Whereas, I cannot approve of Hillary and Barack's plans to require me to buy health care or else they'll garnish my pay or expropriate the legally earned profits of American companies to buy votes or to continue to support government schools where kids are basically dumbed down. That is slavery.
Posts: 3193 | From: New York City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Thread closed
Printer-friendly view
