28% of Obama voters would vote for McCain over Hillary?

[Vic]

Hey, MTV is not all bad. They had Black Crowes doing Unplugged on MHD the other day. I prefer their older stuff, but it was still good times.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: Vic
Actually, in my case, it's because I vowed years ago that I would never in my life vote for another Bush or Clinton again. This is a democracy, not a hereditary monarchy. No one or even 2 families should be in control, as these 2 have for more than 20 years. I promise I won't vote for McCain either though.

Bitterness is senseamp and is Orwellian-esque "Obama is an empty suit demagogue" rhetoric. If you're an actual liberal and a Democrat, then you're against the war, and you're against this corrupt middle class-destroying wealth redistribution system of budget deficits -- both things that McCain not only represents but supports fully, even more than GW Bush I would say. So if you would vote for that kind of candidate over a Democrat whose views you claim to share... well, then you probably loved GW all along, because McCain would be more of the same.

What keeps most of "the right" voting for that kind of corruption BTW, is the brainwashed belief that budget deficits to fund their defense jobs constitute "free markets," and more importantly, the genuine fear that the Democrats are going to want revenge -- a policy which Hillary fully represents.

Nice! :thumbsup:

I think Senseamp is bitter about Hillary getting defeated, and like an angry toddler, he just wants to knock the whole game off the table if he can't get his way. The truth is that Obama and Hillary's policies are very close, and in dramatic opposition to the insanity of McCain carrying the failed Bush policies. All of his bitching (right or not) about Bush's insane foreign policy and general failures can't be taken seriously if he's willing to vote for more of the same.

I feel exactly as he does with some possible differences. I think Obama has already won and if he is voted out by the super delegates I would see that as a crime. I would not want to vote for such a party.

But I am as passionate about Obama as he is about Hillary and feel the same aggression to the other side. His imbecilic partisanship, however, tells me something about mine.

 

[senseamp]

Originally posted by: Vic
Actually, in my case, it's because I vowed years ago that I would never in my life vote for another Bush or Clinton again. This is a democracy, not a hereditary monarchy. No one or even 2 families should be in control, as these 2 have for more than 20 years. I promise I won't vote for McCain either though.

Bitterness is senseamp and is Orwellian-esque "Obama is an empty suit demagogue" rhetoric. If you're an actual liberal and a Democrat, then you're against the war, and you're against this corrupt middle class-destroying wealth redistribution system of budget deficits -- both things that McCain not only represents but supports fully, even more than GW Bush I would say. So if you would vote for that kind of candidate over a Democrat whose views you claim to share... well, then you probably loved GW all along, because McCain would be more of the same.

What keeps most of "the right" voting for that kind of corruption BTW, is the brainwashed belief that budget deficits to fund their defense jobs constitute "free markets," and more importantly, the genuine fear that the Democrats are going to want revenge -- a policy which Hillary fully represents.

My vote for McCain would not be an endorsement of his policies. On the contrary, I want a Republican in the White House to reap the full whirlwind of Republican policies over the last 8 years. Then in 2012 the country will be much better primed for the types of reforms that we need to accomplished, and I mean nothing less than New Deal 2.0
I may share some of Obama's views, assuming he actually holds of the views he claims to hold. But so what, him being elected is going to damage the Democrat party and revive the GOP. Actually, I am borderline on voting for Clinton for that exact reason. I will pull the lever for her simply because of how emasculating it will be to the Republicans if they cannot even beat Hillary after unleashing all their vitriol at her and pulling out all the stops.
From long term political point of view, it is better for Democrats to not be in the White House when Bush's sh!t hits the fan over the next 5 years.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: senseamp
My vote for McCain would not be an endorsement of his policies. On the contrary, I want a Republican in the White House to reap the full whirlwind of Republican policies over the last 8 years. Then in 2012 the country will be much better primed for the types of reforms that we need to accomplished, and I mean nothing less than New Deal 2.0
I may share some of Obama's views, assuming he actually holds of the views he claims to hold. But so what, him being elected is going to damage the Democrat party and revive the GOP. Actually, I am borderline on voting for Clinton for that exact reason. I will pull the lever for her simply because of how emasculating it will be to the Republicans if they cannot even beat Hillary after unleashing all their vitriol at her and pulling out all the stops.
From long term political point of view, it is better for Democrats to not be in the White House when Bush's sh!t hits the fan over the next 5 years.

So you're saying that FDR should have waited to run until '36?

Your logic makes no sense. The time to be the hero is when the shit hits the fan, not after-the-fact. If McCain wins this year, then he will end up getting credit for the rebound that is certain to come by 2012, regardless of whether he had anything to do with it or not. Contrary to revisionist myth, Reagan didn't reap what Carter sowed, nor Clinton what Bush I.

Given discussions we have had in the past, particularly in prior Housing threads, I think your real motives are other than what you are telling us, now that you have realized that both the Dem candidates intend to offer help to homeowners that will keep the housing market from hitting a hard and fast bottom. In which case, Hillary's position is quite aggressive, Obama has promised a moderate approach, while McCain has promised a "free market" solution. Nothing else IMO, can reconcile all your inconsistent positions. Your actual support lies with McCain, and you just don't want to admit it.

 

[senseamp]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: senseamp
My vote for McCain would not be an endorsement of his policies. On the contrary, I want a Republican in the White House to reap the full whirlwind of Republican policies over the last 8 years. Then in 2012 the country will be much better primed for the types of reforms that we need to accomplished, and I mean nothing less than New Deal 2.0
I may share some of Obama's views, assuming he actually holds of the views he claims to hold. But so what, him being elected is going to damage the Democrat party and revive the GOP. Actually, I am borderline on voting for Clinton for that exact reason. I will pull the lever for her simply because of how emasculating it will be to the Republicans if they cannot even beat Hillary after unleashing all their vitriol at her and pulling out all the stops.
From long term political point of view, it is better for Democrats to not be in the White House when Bush's sh!t hits the fan over the next 5 years.

So you're saying that FDR should have waited to run until '36?

Your logic makes no sense. The time to be the hero is when the shit hits the fan, not after-the-fact. If McCain wins this year, then he will end up getting credit for the rebound that is certain to come by 2012, regardless of whether he had anything to do with it or not. Contrary to revisionist myth, Reagan didn't reap what Carter sowed, nor Clinton what Bush I.

Given discussions we have had in the past, particularly in prior Housing threads, I think your real motives are other than what you are telling us, now that you have realized that both the Dem candidates intend to offer help to homeowners that will keep housing market for hitting a hard and fast bottom. In which case, Hillary's position is quite aggressive, Obama has promised a moderate approach, while McCain has promised a "free market" solution. Nothing else IMO, can reconcile all your inconsistent positions. Your actual support lies with McCain, and you just don't want to admit it.

I will definitely be out of that short position by end of the year and onto a short dollar position. I don't really care, if Dems want to bail housing out, I can switch from short real estate to short dollar, no big deal, will cost me $14 on Scottrade.
I want a free market solution in this case, because I don't think supporting unfordable housing prices is helping the middle class or responsible aspiring home owners. You can't complain about housing affordability with one side of your mouth and then prop up outrageous housing prices with your actions. Also, inflation is not going to be helpful to the poor and middle class who the Democrats should be looking up to. That is why it doesn't really bother me when Hillary is stretching the truth, she has to say a lot of things to get liberal democrat support, but I think she has the common sense to adjust to reality once the campaign is over. I don't think Obama does.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: senseamp
I will definitely be out of that short position by end of the year and onto a short dollar position. I don't really care, if Dems want to bail housing out, I can switch from short real estate to short dollar, no big deal, will cost me $14 on Scottrade.
I want a free market solution in this case, because I don't think supporting unfordable housing prices is helping the middle class or responsible aspiring home owners. You can't complain about housing affordability with one side of your mouth and then prop up outrageous housing prices with your actions. Also, inflation is not going to be helpful to the poor and middle class who the Democrats should be looking up to. That is why it doesn't really bother me when Hillary is stretching the truth, she has to say a lot of things to get liberal democrat support, but I think she has the common sense to adjust to reality once the campaign is over. I don't think Obama does.

Like I've said many times in the past, better that the housing market never "boomed" in the first place, then we wouldn't have to concern ourselves with this pesky "bust" which WILL reach into every sector of the economy if not addressed. Normally, I would agree with a free market solution, but it wasn't free markets that got us here, so that "normal" can't apply.

However, your last sentence continues to demonstrate your disconnect with reality in this race for the Democratic nomination. Hillary has never once admitting to being wrong, much less adjusted to reality on any issue. While OTOH, Obama has a history of admitting his mistakes and actually adjusting to reality. Hell, he's the first Presidential candidate I've ever seen in my lifetime who has had the courage to admit -- while still on the campaign trail -- that he will make mistakes once he becomes President, and has already promised to learn from them.

So... once again, you prove yourself to be a genius... in upside-down world.

 

[senseamp]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: senseamp
I will definitely be out of that short position by end of the year and onto a short dollar position. I don't really care, if Dems want to bail housing out, I can switch from short real estate to short dollar, no big deal, will cost me $14 on Scottrade.
I want a free market solution in this case, because I don't think supporting unfordable housing prices is helping the middle class or responsible aspiring home owners. You can't complain about housing affordability with one side of your mouth and then prop up outrageous housing prices with your actions. Also, inflation is not going to be helpful to the poor and middle class who the Democrats should be looking up to. That is why it doesn't really bother me when Hillary is stretching the truth, she has to say a lot of things to get liberal democrat support, but I think she has the common sense to adjust to reality once the campaign is over. I don't think Obama does.

Like I've said many times in the past, better that the housing market never "boomed" in the first place, then we wouldn't have to concern ourselves with this pesky "bust" which WILL reach into every sector of the economy if not addressed. Normally, I would agree with a free market solution, but it wasn't free markets that got us here, so that "normal" can't apply.

However, your last sentence continues to demonstrate your disconnect with reality in this race for the Democratic nomination. Hillary has never once admitting to being wrong, much less adjusted to reality on any issue. While OTOH, Obama has a history of admitting his mistakes and actually adjusting to reality. Hell, he's the first Presidential candidate I've ever seen in my lifetime who has had the courage to admit -- while still on the campaign trail -- that he will make mistakes once he becomes President, and has already promised to learn from them.

So... once again, you prove yourself to be a genius... in upside-down world.

The Clintons have a track record of getting it right when it comes to actually running this country. I don't really care if they admit mistakes or not, only the end results. I have no doubt that Obama can demagogue his mistakes to death as he does with every other issue. But how long before that gets old? 6 months tops, then what?

 

[senseamp]

BTW, it was the free markets that got us here. Financial companies got the government to stay out and let them do what they pleased. People speculated that market demand would drive housing prices up, they were wrong. In the free markets, you have to live with the downside of your wrong bets. Yes, it will reach into every sector of the economy, just like home equity loans reached into every sector of the economy in a positive way when people used their houses as ATMs. I don't see why the government needs to do anything to stop the sectors of the economy from interacting with each other. Additionally, these bailouts will also reach into every sector of the economy through inflation, and they will punish responsible people who save in favor of speculators who are knee deep in debt.