|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: The political junkie POTUS prediction thread
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gort:
,,,,I'd love to be a fly on the wall in June when Howard Dean, Ted Kennedy and other party heavy-weights drag her, kicking and screaming into that smoke-filled room. Maybe they'll have to water-board her into submission. Maybe they'll offer to pay off her mounting campaign debts. Whatever it takes, I have no doubt Dem leaders will have their candidate in June. It won't be Clinton.
![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif)
Well that was colorful imagery. The only thing wrong with it is that Hillary refuses to go into rooms with CIGARS.
Sorry, I couldn't resist......
--------------------
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
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
There was a senate vote Wednesday on a bill about equal pay for women and remedying pay discrimination. McCain was against it (fear of too many lawsuits), but didn't bother to go back to DC and vote. Hillary and Obama evidently voted for it. The bill didn't pass.
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Littlelady
Shipmate
# 9616
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Littlelady:
Gosh. Pretty cynical stuff. Can only white guilties vote for Obama?
Perhaps you missed the bit where I said, "and a chunk of other folk who perhaps don't fit into any easily-identifiable demographic." Up to you to figure out why that slipped by you.
What? Young people, for instance, don't fit into an easily-identifiable demographic? Yet according to all the reports I've heard, from both sides of the Atlantic, Obama attracts the youth vote big time. But you missed out that obvious one. And that's just one. The demographics you chose to mention were all cynical ones, regardless of your sarcasm.
quote:
Originally posted by Choirboy:
I expect Clinton will do o.k. in Indiana and possibly Kentucky, and will do very well in West Virgina, but will probably lose the remaining contests, and some (especially North Carolina) by very large margins.
Is this the lot then or are there more? I've totally lost track of which states have voted, which are yet to vote. I know Michigan and Florida won't be voting (or I assume they won't, unless the rules are changed) but I can't work out how many primaries are left (and whether there is the odd caucus in there as well).
I confess that from an outsider's POV it was a bit chilling to hear Clinton say she would attack Iran if Iran attacked Israel (even though I would feel angry enough to want the same thing should that happen). I thought she sounded rather Bush-like and I wonder whether a Clinton presidency would keep the Axis of Evil concept going (with all the potential consequences that may hold)?
--------------------
'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
|
|
CorgiGreta
Shipmate
# 443
|
Posted
"Too many lawsuits" has to be the lamest excuse I have ever heard for voting against a bill! If the Republicans are sincere about congestion in the courts, they should fight for no-fault auto insurance, or legalizing sale and possession of marijuana. Perhaps we sahould even legalize prostitution and scratch pornography laws.
Better yet, let's legalize race, age and disability discrimination. That will free up lots of court time.
Drawing a line in the sand when it comes to gender discrimination in the workplace seems rather curious.
Greta (pops another blood pressure med)
[ 24. April 2008, 19:35: Message edited by: CorgiGreta ]
Posts: 3677 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
CorgiGreta
Shipmate
# 443
|
Posted
McCain mumbles that he opposes the bill but manages (for fear of political consequences?) not to have his vote appear on the public record. Sounds like something a coward, rather than a "hero" would do.
Greta
[ 24. April 2008, 19:43: Message edited by: CorgiGreta ]
Posts: 3677 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by CorgiGreta:
"Too many lawsuits" has to be the lamest excuse I have ever heard for voting against a bill!
...
Drawing a line in the sand when it comes to gender discrimination in the workplace seems rather curious.
Except that "equal pay for equal work" is an incoherent phrase. In my field, we have lots of people doing "the same job," each of whom are paid differeng amounts. I could literally be paid half as much or twice as much for doing the same job. Within the same company, I could easily have a range of pay that is +/- 25%. So what is the "real" rate of pay for the job that I do? When one decides that "equal work" means something other than "the same job," the notion gets even fuzzier.
A law that mandates such a thing is not just a magnet for lawsuits, it is without objective substance. The entire nature of the law is to say, "I don't think I'm being treated fairly, and I want a law to club someone with." It is idiotic.
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
CorgiGreta
Shipmate
# 443
|
Posted
Wouldn't the same logic apply to race, age, and disability discrimination lawsuits? It would come down to a matter of proof and indeed would have to be settled in court where the plantiff has the evidentiary burden. Unmeritorious claims would hopefully not prevail.
Of course, there can be pay diferentials related to various levels of skill, efficiency, company loyalty demonstrated by seniority, etc., but if those factors are equal, a man should not be paid more than a woman, and I think that in a multitude of instances that is not the situation.
I am willing to let the courts sort this out, and I would oppose senseless time ebarriers erected to impede this process.
Greta
Posts: 3677 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by CorgiGreta:
Wouldn't the same logic apply to race, age, and disability discrimination lawsuits? It would come down to a matter of proof and indeed would have to be settled in court where the plantiff has the evidentiary burden. Unmeritorious claims would hopefully not prevail.
No, the way the original anti-discrimination laws were written and enforced, if someone from a protected group claimed to be the victim of discrimination, the following thing happened (I know because I was not allowed to be hired until the process was gone through a number of years ago):
1. The hiring body needed to establish that the protected group was represented at the population frequency rate in the given kind of job. For example, if the person who said they were discriminated against was a woman, and the job was for a programmer, the organization would ahve to establish that at least half of their programmers were women. If not, they would have to hire a woman (although not necessarily THAT woman).
2. If the organization already employed at least 50% women in the given class of job, they would have to show that THIS woman failed to meet the qualifications as posted for the given position. If she did, I would not have been able to be hired, even with the statistical distribution meeting the goal.
3. If she did not meet the qualifications, the organization would have to establish that she could not be trained to meet the requirments in a reasonable amount of time. If she could be, it would still be deemed discrimination.
In the particular case that I was involved with, the woman (it was a woman in my case) failed all three criteria. The fact that she was so wildly unqualified was why the organization was willing to endure the process of establishing that there was no discrimiation involved.
This was back in the 1970s, when the anti-dscrimination laws were actually enforced. Now the whole thing is much more a matter of pretense. Nonetheless, one of the things that is true of the sequence that I spelled out is that it was reasonably clear what counted as being in violation of the law. I don't particularly like the way that law was structured, but it certainly placed a very strong weighting on hiring people from the protected groups. It may have been a bureaucratic nightmare to collect the necessary statistics to establish the facts, but they were not wildly subjective, with the exception of the third point -- that a person might be able to be trained to do a given job in a reasonable amount of time. None of that is true for "equal pay for equal work." It is such a fuzzy notion that one would never know whether one were in compliance or not.
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
moron
Shipmate
# 206
|
Posted
quote:
Welcome to the "Re-create 68" website, your virtual activists' Convergence Center for the Denver Democratic National Convention of 2008. This website was created for all the grassroots people who are tired of being sold out by the Democratic Party.
R-68 agrees with the proposition, POTESTAS IN POPULO, "all power comes from the people." What stands between the people and power are the party machines. The parties were devised as a means to represent the people. Today they represent nobody, not even party members, but only party bureaucracy.
Sounds reasonable to me.
My daughter lives in Denver and I'm thinking a late August visit might be quite an experience.
Posts: 4236 | From: Bentonville | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Littlelady:
What? Young people, for instance, don't fit into an easily-identifiable demographic? Yet according to all the reports I've heard, from both sides of the Atlantic, Obama attracts the youth vote big time. But you missed out that obvious one. And that's just one.
I'm sorry. I'll try to never make a list again if I can't think of every single item that might go on it. How could I have been so foolish? ![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
Oh hey. I apologized too soon. I went back and read what I had written and I see "fresh faces" was among my items. This I meant to stand in for youths (the reference to their voting frequency might stand in for a clue). I wonder what you thought I meant by that term?
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
quote:
Originally posted by CorgiGreta:
"Too many lawsuits" has to be the lamest excuse I have ever heard for voting against a bill!
...
Drawing a line in the sand when it comes to gender discrimination in the workplace seems rather curious.
Except that "equal pay for equal work" is an incoherent phrase.
This is entirely beside the point, because what's at issue with this law is how long someone has to file a suit. The law had originally been interpreted to mean that every time a paycheck was issued to a woman and she was screwed, it constituted a new violation of the law and the 180-day clock started running again; i.e., a woman had 180 days from that point to file a suit. Now women only have 180 days from the first time they get screwed, which is fucked up in the extreme considering that frequently women don't realize right off the bat that they're not being paid fairly.
Dahlia Lithwick has a great article on Slate about how unbelievably insulting this is to women.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
How comforting to know that if you can screw somebody for 180 days running, you're immune to prosecution. God what a travesty. Why not just have the balls to repeal the law? If I ever thought of voting for McCain, that's over.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Choirboy
Shipmate
# 9659
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Littlelady:
Is this the lot then or are there more? I've totally lost track of which states have voted, which are yet to vote. I know Michigan and Florida won't be voting (or I assume they won't, unless the rules are changed) but I can't work out how many primaries are left (and whether there is the odd caucus in there as well).
The New York Times has a pretty good calendar of contests here. You have to do some scrolling to see the 9 remaining contest (501 total delegates, but this includes the 'super delegates' from those states/territories). I'm not sure which are caucuses and which are primaries; but at this point, it really doesn't matter. The delegates are awarded proportionally. Even if Clinton got 60% of the remaining contests, I don't think she'd be ahead in terms of total pledged delegates. And she is going to get her arse well and truly handed to her in North Carolina, the single largest remaining contest (134 total delegates).
No doubt her staff are working on some new calculus to make her look shiny to the super delegates. Oh look, here it is.
Posts: 2994 | From: Minneapolis, Minnesota USA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dumpling Jeff
Shipmate
# 12766
|
Posted
I'm sorry, but I'm not going to read 38 pages, so I haven't done my homework here.
I'm not really satisfied with any of the remaining candidates. I will be writing in a candidate this fall. Does anyone have any suggestions?
--------------------
"There merely seems to be something rather glib in defending the police without question one moment and calling the Crusades-- or war in general-- bad the next. The second may be an extension of the first." - Alogon
Posts: 2572 | From: Nomad | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alfred E. Neuman
What? Me worry?
# 6855
|
Posted
Since your vote will have absolutely no effect on the outcome of the election, why not save yourself the hassle and stay home to practice your internet forum communication skills?
Posts: 12954 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
SeraphimSarov
Shipmate
# 4335
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gort:
Since your vote will have absolutely no effect on the outcome of the election, why not save yourself the hassle and stay home to practice your internet forum communication skills?
with that bedside manner, shouldn't you be managing a phone bank or registering voters??
--------------------
"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
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by DmplnJeff:
I'm sorry, but I'm not going to read 38 pages, so I haven't done my homework here.
If you won't read what we've written, why should we converse with you?
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dumpling Jeff
Shipmate
# 12766
|
Posted
Gort, I feel a moral obligation to vote.
I don't see a moral obligation to vote for: - A mob doll (Hillary)
- A goofball who managed to blow up his own aircraft carrier through bad luck. (I consider good luck to be an important quality in a leader. It is often an indication of other good qualities.) I didn't vote for George II in the second election because he signed McCain's bill. I'm not voting for the man who wrote it.
- A terrorist. I've checked on Obama's early supporters. The media attacks on selected supporters are not the worst of them, just the easiest to document.
If my vote is useless, then that's better than the alternatives.
--------------------
"There merely seems to be something rather glib in defending the police without question one moment and calling the Crusades-- or war in general-- bad the next. The second may be an extension of the first." - Alogon
Posts: 2572 | From: Nomad | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dumpling Jeff
Shipmate
# 12766
|
Posted
Ruth, 38 pages is a lot. Much of what was written has been overtaken by events. I'm not sure what good reading your opinion on the upcoming New Hampshire primary (or whatever) would do me since it's been over for several months.
I don't mind hearing your political philosophy, but please don't torture me with things that might have been.
If you still don't want to read my posts, then don't.
--------------------
"There merely seems to be something rather glib in defending the police without question one moment and calling the Crusades-- or war in general-- bad the next. The second may be an extension of the first." - Alogon
Posts: 2572 | From: Nomad | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
malik3000
Shipmate
# 11437
|
Posted
To support a charge such as charging that Obama is a "terrorist" is a line of thought that takes this discussion away from the realm of rational discussion. How very sad.
Also, self-defined "white people" who are upset about Rev. Wright need perhaps to decide in what order they would rank the following 3 priorities:
- loyalty to the fellow members of the human race
- loyalty to a particular political entity
- loyalty to a self-defined "race"[sic. - race is not a scientifuc concept but one created by European 'scientists' of the 19th century seeking to justify European colonialism of Africans, Asians, etc.]
--------------------
God = love.
Otherwise, things are not just black or white.
Posts: 3149 | From: North America | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
DmplnJeff: So don't read the whole 38 pages. Read the last 5 to see if anyone is talking about other candidates -- maybe someone here is hot for Michael Bloomberg, for instance. But don't jump in without reading any of the preceding conversation, because it's just rude.
ETA: What malik3000 said about calling Obama a terrorist.
[ 26. April 2008, 18:28: Message edited by: RuthW ]
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hiro's Leap
Shipmate
# 12470
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by DmplnJeff:
A terrorist. I've checked on Obama's early supporters. The media attacks on selected supporters are not the worst of them, just the easiest to document.
![[Eek!]](eek.gif) Can you defend this, or are you just throwing a loony incendiary post into the mix every now and then to keep us confused?
Posts: 3418 | From: UK, OK | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Comper's Child
Shipmate
# 10580
|
Posted
Lot's of people have "supporters" they do not especially welcome. I don't get this thing at all... ![[Mad]](angryfire.gif)
Posts: 2509 | From: Penn's Greene Countrie Towne | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dumpling Jeff
Shipmate
# 12766
|
Posted
Comper's Child, it's one thing to accept a semi-anonymous donation from someone. It's another to serve on a board of directors with them.
Of course one could serve on a board and still disagree, but then one wouldn't accept political help that needed to be paid back. The argument that he didn't know doesn't cut it.
I am a firm believer in horse sense. I will not vote for McCain because he's "snake bit". Bad things keep happening to him through no fault of his own. So even though I have nothing against the man personally, that's not what I want for our country.
Hiro, do you know who Tony Rezko is? Maybe you should look into the senator's state legislative campaign history. In any case his early backers seem slimy and Middle Eastern. (Not as bad as the Bush's with Saudi Arabia, but so what?)
Still if I were forced to vote for one of the three it would be him. He is smart and has a good understanding of the lower classes as well as our Islamic enemies and friends.
Thanks for the Bloomberg tip RuthW.
--------------------
"There merely seems to be something rather glib in defending the police without question one moment and calling the Crusades-- or war in general-- bad the next. The second may be an extension of the first." - Alogon
Posts: 2572 | From: Nomad | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by DmplnJeff:
A terrorist. I've checked on Obama's early supporters. The media attacks on selected supporters are not the worst of them, just the easiest to document.
Oh you have checked on them have you? You and whose KGB?
Why should we listen to the racist lies of someone whose main contribution to this forum has been to waste hundreds of posts crusading for the right of white proprty-owning men with guns to imprison, enslave and rape any men, women, children and sheep that happen to be within range?
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by DmplnJeff:
Hiro, do you know who Tony Rezko is? Maybe you should look into the senator's state legislative campaign history. In any case his early backers seem slimy and Middle Eastern.
It's not bad enough that they were slimy.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dumpling Jeff
Shipmate
# 12766
|
Posted
No Ken, don't hold back. Tell us how you really feel.
--------------------
"There merely seems to be something rather glib in defending the police without question one moment and calling the Crusades-- or war in general-- bad the next. The second may be an extension of the first." - Alogon
Posts: 2572 | From: Nomad | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alfred E. Neuman
What? Me worry?
# 6855
|
Posted
Umm, he did tell you how he really feels. Have you any response other than worn out platitudes?
Posts: 12954 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
[tangent to talk about potus candidates rationally]
Strikes me that one interesting thing about the Hilary/Obama race is the nature of their campaign gaffes. When Hilary has 'mispoken' she has lied, when Obama has 'mispoken' he's been a bit tactless. It is rather as if the coverage gives the same weighting to any error, without really considering its nature.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Trudy Scrumptious
BBE Shieldmaiden
# 5647
|
Posted
Hostly Warning:
The tenor of debate here is once again starting to slide into the territory of personal attack, particularly in ken's characterization of DmplinJeff's posts as "racist lies." Politics arouses strong feelings, but please remain on the civil side of debate. Refrain from either making personal attacks, or from deliberately baiting people in ways that are calculated to produce personal attacks. As ken has now opened a Hell call, please keep all personal comments in the nether regions where they belong.
Trudy, Scrumptious Purgatory Host
[ 27. April 2008, 12:09: Message edited by: Trudy Scrumptious ]
--------------------
Books and things.
I lied. There are no things. Just books.
Posts: 7428 | From: Closer to Paris than I am to Vancouver | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
moron
Shipmate
# 206
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
When Hilary has 'mispoken' she has lied, when Obama has 'mispoken' he's been a bit tactless. It is rather as if the coverage gives the same weighting to any error, without really considering its nature.
If I'm following your meaning I think you've hit on an interesting dynamic in this nomination race: ISTM there's so much 'hope' invested in Obama and so much antagonism toward Clinton he's getting passes she's not. It's obviously subjective but I perceive this in media coverage particularly - it's like the guy can do no wrong.
Assuming he gets the nod it's going to be interesting to see how much skeptical scrutiny Obama receives during the general election, and how well he fares. Beating a worn out drum but I still can't get the idea out of my little brain that once the Repubs start really unleashing Clinton could be better positioned to contend with McCain.
Posts: 4236 | From: Bentonville | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Swish
Shipmate
# 8566
|
Posted
Has anyone else been playing around on thiswebsite? Been having great fun on it. Also hadn't realised until now but it is possible to get a tie of 269 Electoral Votes each. Found this out completely accidentally by just working out what I thought the result of a Clinton McCain contest would be. Constitutionally, what would happen if this result came out?
--------------------
Sorry Ted. I was concentrating too hard on looking holy.
Posts: 114 | From: Sheffield | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
SeraphimSarov
Shipmate
# 4335
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Swish:
Has anyone else been playing around on thiswebsite? Been having great fun on it. Also hadn't realised until now but it is possible to get a tie of 269 Electoral Votes each. Found this out completely accidentally by just working out what I thought the result of a Clinton McCain contest would be. Constitutionally, what would happen if this result came out?
it would be thrown to Congress in particular, the House of Reps.
--------------------
"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
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mjg:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
When Hilary has 'mispoken' she has lied, when Obama has 'mispoken' he's been a bit tactless. It is rather as if the coverage gives the same weighting to any error, without really considering its nature.
If I'm following your meaning I think you've hit on an interesting dynamic in this nomination race: ISTM there's so much 'hope' invested in Obama and so much antagonism toward Clinton he's getting passes she's not. It's obviously subjective but I perceive this in media coverage particularly - it's like the guy can do no wrong.
ISTM that the nature of the statements in question needs to be considered. When HRC repeatedly says that she vividly remembers being under sniper fire, it is hard to characterize that as a "mis-speaking." She is claiming a factual state that she personally knew to not be factual. That is what it means to lie.
When BHO stated that a group of people were bitter in response to a social situation, he is characterizing a more nebulous thing that is able to be characterized by any of a number of locutions. He may well wish that he had characterized the problems of blue-color workers in different terms. There is not a lie involved in his statements, but a mode of description. It is entirely appropriate to characterize each of these two locutionary facts using different descriptions.
ISTM that HRC was receiving withering press coverage because she was doing much worse than she was expected to do -- the press was trying to explain that fact. Now, when BHO is doing worse than expected, you are seeing the same kind of hard coverage of his campaign. I don't think that the press has favored either, except as their fotunes rise and fall within the intra-press narative of the campaigns.
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
moron
Shipmate
# 206
|
Posted
quote:
Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean said today that the race is ``essentially pretty close to a tie.''
Dean called on the almost 300 uncommitted so-called superdelegates, elected and party officials who are allowed to vote at the nominating convention, to choose a candidate by the end of June, after the remaining nominating contests end.
Dean said the loser will play a critical role in ensuring that the Democratic Party is united in the general election.
The loser ``has to believe that they were treated fairly,'' Dean said. ``Otherwise we can't win.''
Dean predicted that the choice of a nominee will be made based largely which one appears to have the best chance of beating Arizona Senator John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee, in the November general election.
``There's going to be some feeling at some point after these last few weeks that one of these candidates is more likely to win than the other and I think that's who is going to get the nomination,'' Dean said today on NBC's ``Meet the Press.''
Posts: 4236 | From: Bentonville | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Littlelady
Shipmate
# 9616
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Choirboy:
No doubt her staff are working on some new calculus to make her look shiny to the super delegates. Oh look, here it is.
Well, she sure doesn't give up! I wonder what she'd be like with a policy she really wanted but which wasn't generally popular. Would she keep on calling for a change in the rules to suit her purpose? I wonder how far she would go to try and fix things her way.
Nine to go, huh? It looks like it's going to be pretty much a draw unless there are some serious surprises among those nine. It seems somewhat ironic that having formulated a process that is supposed to be more in touch with grass roots voters, it's the guys in smoke filled rooms who will get to have the final say.
--------------------
'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
|
|
CorgiGreta
Shipmate
# 443
|
Posted
If memory serves, there was not an intense uproar over matters in a candidate's church when it was disclosed that Mr. Carter's church would not admit African-Americans to worship, or that Mr. Nixon's cradle church was pacifist, or that George Romney's church was arguably bigoted regarding the entire Black Race, or that Mitt Romney spent a good many years hearing the same teachings although of late, I understand that they have been pretty much abandoned.
People attend a particular church for a wide variety of reasons, and it is possible for one to attend a church for years, or even a lifetime, without buying into everythin, or even anything, shouted from the pulpit.
Greta
[ 27. April 2008, 23:09: Message edited by: CorgiGreta ]
Posts: 3677 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by DmplnJeff:
I am a firm believer in horse sense. I will not vote for McCain because he's "snake bit". Bad things keep happening to him through no fault of his own. So even though I have nothing against the man personally, that's not what I want for our country.
Hiro, do you know who Tony Rezko is? Maybe you should look into the senator's state legislative campaign history. In any case his early backers seem slimy and Middle Eastern. (Not as bad as the Bush's with Saudi Arabia, but so what?)
Would you please give an example about McCain? The only thing I know of is being a POW.
And what do you mean about Obama's early backers? Were they from the Middle East, or of ME ancestry, or did they simply look Middle Eastern?
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
wombat
Shipmate
# 5180
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Choirboy:
The New York Times has a pretty good calendar of contests here. You have to do some scrolling to see the 9 remaining contest (501 total delegates, but this includes the 'super delegates' from those states/territories). I'm not sure which are caucuses and which are primaries; but at this point, it really doesn't matter.
They're all primaries now.
--------------------
John Walter Biles
Historian in Training
Posts: 363 | From: Maryland | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
wombat
Shipmate
# 5180
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Swish:
Has anyone else been playing around on thiswebsite? Been having great fun on it. Also hadn't realised until now but it is possible to get a tie of 269 Electoral Votes each. Found this out completely accidentally by just working out what I thought the result of a Clinton McCain contest would be. Constitutionally, what would happen if this result came out?
Okay, first of all, the election goes to the House of Representatives for the President and for the Senate for the Vice President. The House votes by State (IE, whoever the majority of Representatives for a single state pick becomes the 1 vote that state gets to cast.) Whoever is chosen by a majority of States becomes President.
For the Senate, the senators vote as a whole, not by state, and the person who gets the majority becomes VP.
And you keep balloting until a majority emerges.
--------------------
John Walter Biles
Historian in Training
Posts: 363 | From: Maryland | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dumpling Jeff
Shipmate
# 12766
|
Posted
Golden Key:
McCain managed to blow up his own aircraft carrier. If I understand the scuttle butt, some pilot pulled the trigger on a missile while his plane was sitting on deck. The missile had two safeties, so it couldn't launch, but the safeties both failed. The missile hit another aircraft loaded with bombs and blew it and a third aircraft up.
McCain was a pilot of one of the three planes (I think one that was hit.). Over 100 seamen died. Now that's a lot of bad luck. (Of course his survival when so many died shows a level of heroism that even being a POW doesn't. He kept flying.)
Obama's early supporters included one of the weathermen (a terrorist organization)as well as a Syrian American (naturalized). The Syrian gives some indication of his foreign policy leanings in much the way an astute observer could have predicted Bush's staunch support of Saudi Arabia after so many of their nationals attacked us on 9/11.
This is not a bad thing (well in Obama's case anyway) assuming you like Syria.
Remember that one of the fundamental rules of American politics is, "You dance with the ones who brought you". Good politicians can say nothing at great length, but they usually repay their early supporters very well.
With the internet, research is easy. (This means do your own and draw your own conclusions, don't rely on my say so.)
--------------------
"There merely seems to be something rather glib in defending the police without question one moment and calling the Crusades-- or war in general-- bad the next. The second may be an extension of the first." - Alogon
Posts: 2572 | From: Nomad | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
comet
Snowball in Hell
# 10353
|
Posted
because some guy is a former Syrian citizen he is assumed to support the Syrian policies?
That's nuts.
--------------------
Evil Dragon Lady, Breaker of Men's Constitutions
"It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.” -Calvin
Posts: 17024 | From: halfway between Seduction and Peril | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
infinite_monkey
Shipmate
# 11333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by DmplnJeff:
Obama's early supporters included one of the weathermen (a terrorist organization)as well as a Syrian American (naturalized). The Syrian gives some indication of his foreign policy leanings in much the way an astute observer could have predicted Bush's staunch support of Saudi Arabia after so many of their nationals attacked us on 9/11.
This is not a bad thing (well in Obama's case anyway) assuming you like Syria.
...
With the internet, research is easy. (This means do your own and draw your own conclusions, don't rely on my say so.)
Bill Ayers, your terrorist, is now a respected University professor and authority on school reform who, like many of his generation, currently regrets a number of naive and ill-advised things he did in college.
I'm so utterly baffled by your singling out an unnamed naturalized Syrian American as an example of the horrors of Obama supporters that I don't know how to even begin to go there.
You make an interesting point about the Internet and drawing conclusions. Given the vast amount of truly crazy shit masquerading as fact on the Internet, I'm leaning towards scare quotes on the "research" one can conduct with this medium alone.
But it's hard to say that any other media are fully able to avoid those pitfalls. I guess you pays your money and you takes your chances.
[ 28. April 2008, 05:50: Message edited by: infinite_monkey ]
--------------------
His light was lifted just above the Law,
And now we have to live with what we did with what we saw.
--Dar Williams, And a God Descended
Obligatory Blog Flog: www.otherteacher.wordpress.com
Posts: 1423 | From: left coast united states | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by DmplnJeff:
With the internet, research is easy. (This means do your own and draw your own conclusions, don't rely on my say so.)
You're the one making crazy-assed claims, so it's up to you to do the research and find evidence to support them.
Good luck with that.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
Interesting thing about naturalised citizens who have left fairly repressive states - they sometimes leave because of the repression. You know, like all those Germans who fled before 1939.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by DmplnJeff:
Golden Key:
McCain managed to blow up his own aircraft carrier. If I understand the scuttle butt, some pilot pulled the trigger on a missile while his plane was sitting on deck. The missile had two safeties, so it couldn't launch, but the safeties both failed. The missile hit another aircraft loaded with bombs and blew it and a third aircraft up.
McCain was a pilot of one of the three planes (I think one that was hit.). Over 100 seamen died. Now that's a lot of bad luck. (Of course his survival when so many died shows a level of heroism that even being a POW doesn't. He kept flying.)
Er...Jeff? How in the world does that story translate into [b]McCain[/i] blowing up his own aircraft carrier?
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
moron
Shipmate
# 206
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
ISTM that the nature of the statements in question needs to be considered.
Agreed. I was specifically referring to Obama's original statement where he said he'd never heard Wright say anything outrageous and his later clarification.
quote:
Obama, in an interview broadcast on "Fox News Sunday," said he's been on hand for worship services that included "provocative" messages delivered by Wright that have touched on race and issues plaguing the black community.
"He will talk about the failure of fathers to look after their children in ways that, sometimes, people might be taken aback by. He can use street vernacular in his sermons in ways that people wouldn’t expect to hear," Obama said.
Obama continued, "He has certainly preached in the past, when I was there, about the history of race in this country in very blunt terms, talking about slavery and talking about Jim Crow. The problem -– and I’ve pointed this out in my speech in Philadelphia -– was, where often times he would error, I think, is in only cataloging the bad of America and not doing enough to lift up the good. And that’s probably where he and I have the biggest difference."
Either Obama has a faulty memory on the topic or he was doing what many politicians do with his original denial: being disingenuous. Regardless, IMO if Clinton or McCain were in a comparable situation they'd have taken more media heat.
And before I'm summarily dismissed as a 'Republican' or a Fox news sycophant for posting this I suggest my critics should read Obama's statement in the interview I linked to yesterday where he said the Wright situation was a 'legitimate' concern in this race.
Additionally, I'll go on record that I like a lot of what Obama says. I'm just not convinced the fervor he's generating isn't going to be disappointed to some extent down the road.
Posts: 4236 | From: Bentonville | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
bonabri
Shipmate
# 304
|
Posted
Oh my goodness. The Syriac Orthodox Church has just started worshipping in the church I attend (Anglican). I'd better tell the Vicar about the Semtex in the Sacristy.....
Posts: 274 | From: Brighton and Hove, UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Thread closed
Printer-friendly view
![[Biased]](wink.gif)
