theeedude
Lifer
- Feb 5, 2006
- 35,787
- 6,197
- 126
Absolutely right. I was pretty apolitical before that happened. But the hypocrisy of that fat bastard Henry Hyde and company turned me off Republicans for good. Although I may have supported McCain in 2000, but the way he was smeared and attacked in the GOP primary just reinforced my previous conclusions wrt that party.
The odd thing is Clinton barely beats or loses to McCain in national polls. The last one I saw from CNN/Gallup done this month had Hillary 50 and McCain 48.
Rasmussen had McCain up by about 9 points.
http://www.rasmussenreports.co...n_vs_clinton_and_obama
Extremely odd to say the least. The DNC seems to think that this November is a slam dunk.
Rasmussen had McCain up by about 9 points.
http://www.rasmussenreports.co...n_vs_clinton_and_obama
Extremely odd to say the least. The DNC seems to think that this November is a slam dunk.
Obama is rising. Hillary is sinking.
Grateful Dead To Reunite For Obama Concert
That'll seal it! :laugh:
Grateful Dead To Reunite For Obama Concert
That'll seal it! :laugh:
Obama leads in California, tied in New Jersey, Missouri, 20 point lead in GA... http://www.reuters.com/article.../idUSN0249533620080203
palehorse
Lifer
- Dec 21, 2005
- 11,521
- 0
- 76
Speaking of sleazy tactics, the Washington Post pissed me off this morning. Those fvckwads decided to put a gigantic photo of Bill Clinton, speaking from a podium, on the front page, above the fold, in the fat Sunday edition just before Super Tuesday! If that's not catering to the Clintons, and their message that Hillary = Bill, then I don't know what is!
bah...
bah...
BeauJangles
Lifer
- Aug 26, 2001
- 13,941
- 1
- 0
I'm all for cooperation and respecting opinions when those opinions hold equal validity. In the example of Evolution versus creationism, one is science, the other is not. It's that simple. When it comes to foreign policy, taxes, UHC, military, other education issues, I'm all for working together.
Thump553
Lifer
- Jun 2, 2000
- 12,839
- 2,625
- 136
Hey I may go see Obama and Teddie Kennedy in Hartford tomorrow. Think they'll pipe in the Dead?
PS-I took my wife and kids to a Dead reunion show a few years ago when they called themselves The Others (BTW there were many full families there). They were a huge disappointment-seemed more like a tribute band than the real thing.
Bill won once thanks to Ross Perot and twice thanks to incumbent status and Dole as an opponent. Hell, Bush won in 2004.
Updated: Obama lead widens in California, Missouri: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/200...v9gYJu5iHL03O13PkEtbAF
Zogby also claims that Mitt Romney is up by 8% over John McCain in California. okay. He is either a genius or completely wrong. We will see on Tuesday.
Focused on issues? Heh, in today's Wall St. Journal's Opinion page, Hillary Clinton wrote about her plans and lay it out exactly what she is going to do if she is elected. And on the same page, Obama have 2 governors and 1 Senator batting for him, writing about his "change" and "once in a generation opportunity".
My opinion doesn't count anyway since I am only a Permanent Resident in the US. But from what I've seen, Clinton has been talking about issues and her plan where Obama has been talking fluff like change and how he is the next Kennedy and have bunch of celebrities in his rallies making it more like a concert then a political gathering.
Grateful Dead?
what, are John Kerry and Ted Kennedy going to start a band?
guess that might be Grateful unDead in their case, though.
jonks
Lifer
- Feb 7, 2005
- 13,918
- 20
- 81
A clear eyed Hillary v Obama article (long):
http://nymag.com/news/features/43341/
I found the conclusion pretty accurate:
If you find yourself drawn to the Clinton candidacy, you likely believe that politics is politics, that partisanship isn?t transmutable, that Republicans are for the most part irredeemable. You suspect that talk of transcendence amounts to humming ?Kumbaya? past the graveyard. You believe that progress comes only with a fight, and that Clinton is better equipped than Obama (or maybe anyone) to succeed in the poisonous, fractious environment that Washington is now and ever shall be. You ponder the image of Bill as First Laddie and find yourself smiling, not sighing or shrieking.
If you find yourself swept up in Obamamania, on the other hand, you regard this assessment as sad, defeatist, as a kind of capitulation. You?re perfectly aware that politics is often a dirty business. But you believe it could be a bit cleaner, a bit nobler, a bit more sustaining. You think that paradigm shifts can happen, that the system can be rebooted. Most of all, an attraction to Obama indicates you are, on some level, a romantic. You never had your JFK, your MLK, and you desperately crave one: What you want is to fall in love.
A vote for Clinton, in other words, is a wager rooted in hard-eyed realism. Her upside may be limited, but so is her downside, because although the ceiling on her putative presidency might be low, the floor beneath it is fairly high. A vote for Obama, as the Big Dog said, is indeed a role of the dice. The risks of his hypothetical presidency are higher, but the potential payoff is greater: He could be the next Jack Kennedy?or the next Jimmy Carter. The gamble here entails both the thrill and the terror of letting yourself dream again.
http://nymag.com/news/features/43341/
I found the conclusion pretty accurate:
If you find yourself drawn to the Clinton candidacy, you likely believe that politics is politics, that partisanship isn?t transmutable, that Republicans are for the most part irredeemable. You suspect that talk of transcendence amounts to humming ?Kumbaya? past the graveyard. You believe that progress comes only with a fight, and that Clinton is better equipped than Obama (or maybe anyone) to succeed in the poisonous, fractious environment that Washington is now and ever shall be. You ponder the image of Bill as First Laddie and find yourself smiling, not sighing or shrieking.
If you find yourself swept up in Obamamania, on the other hand, you regard this assessment as sad, defeatist, as a kind of capitulation. You?re perfectly aware that politics is often a dirty business. But you believe it could be a bit cleaner, a bit nobler, a bit more sustaining. You think that paradigm shifts can happen, that the system can be rebooted. Most of all, an attraction to Obama indicates you are, on some level, a romantic. You never had your JFK, your MLK, and you desperately crave one: What you want is to fall in love.
A vote for Clinton, in other words, is a wager rooted in hard-eyed realism. Her upside may be limited, but so is her downside, because although the ceiling on her putative presidency might be low, the floor beneath it is fairly high. A vote for Obama, as the Big Dog said, is indeed a role of the dice. The risks of his hypothetical presidency are higher, but the potential payoff is greater: He could be the next Jack Kennedy?or the next Jimmy Carter. The gamble here entails both the thrill and the terror of letting yourself dream again.
huh. that's like almost spot-on for me (though I don't think republicans are irredeemable... I am one
)for all the rancor of the democratic primary, though, I think the liberals will all have the defeats in '00 and '04 fresh in their minds and turn out to put one of their own in office, regardless of whether it's Hillary or Barack.
Lemon law
Lifer
- Nov 6, 2005
- 20,984
- 3
- 0
An interesting link sirjonk,
But IMHO, the real joker in the deck is the make up of the next congress and the restraint of the next President.
We well could have a Senate with less than 40 GOP Senators, a House that is still democratically dominated, and a democratic President. This scenario could become far more likely if a few more of GWB's far flung chickens come home to roost before the general election in November.
Should that above scenario come to pass as its looks likely to now, a hypothetical President Obama or President Hillary Clinton will likely be able to crank what ever program(s) they want through congress.
Then the danger becomes trying to do too much while ignoring all prudent warnings.
As we have seen with the negative example of President GWB, its partly what a President does and also a large part of Presidential wisdom is in deciding what agenda not to push.
But IMHO, the real joker in the deck is the make up of the next congress and the restraint of the next President.
We well could have a Senate with less than 40 GOP Senators, a House that is still democratically dominated, and a democratic President. This scenario could become far more likely if a few more of GWB's far flung chickens come home to roost before the general election in November.
Should that above scenario come to pass as its looks likely to now, a hypothetical President Obama or President Hillary Clinton will likely be able to crank what ever program(s) they want through congress.
Then the danger becomes trying to do too much while ignoring all prudent warnings.
As we have seen with the negative example of President GWB, its partly what a President does and also a large part of Presidential wisdom is in deciding what agenda not to push.
Awaiting techs response to Billary's fading fortunes. :laugh:
"It's over." - famous last words :laugh:
"It's over." - famous last words :laugh:
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter