US Elections 2008

[Reckoner]

On the topic of Obama, it is hard for me to understand exactly why European countries would like Obama. Mccain's politics are more in line with their interests no? Obama is going to raise tariffs, Mccain isn't for example. The Iraq war is here to stay despite what Obama may like or think.

[Neki Ecko]

Originally Posted by Reckoner

On the topic of Obama, it is hard for me to understand exactly why European countries would like Obama. Mccain's politics are more in line with their interests no? Obama is going to raise tariffs, Mccain isn't for example. The Iraq war is here to stay despite what Obama may like or think.

But you have to remember there is other wars out there and we cant stay in Iraq forever to watch over them, heck even the Iraq wants us to go, so they can take of their own country.

Besides, we(Military) is stretched out as it is, and what is going on in Russia and other places in the world, we cant stay in Iraq, then shuffed off to a another country on a whim with enlistment of all the U.S. Military services is at all-time lows. You will have some tired and beaten military personnel that have to go to a another war after this one.

[Quzor]

So I saw a news article that said Hillary Clinton is planning on turning over all of her delegates to Barack Obama in the coming weeks. Apparently, she hopes that this will cement a permanent spot for her in the Democratic party. What she hopes to accomplish with that "permanent" spot, one can only speculate, but she wants to be permanent.

http://www.comcast.net/articles/news...5/CVN.Clinton/

[cors8]

The Clintons can't be seen as screwing Obama's candidacy or she'll never, ever get the chance to be president one day.

I wouldn't be shocked if she got a cabinet position or a high-profile chairmanship.

[Sazelyt]

Originally Posted by Reckoner

On the topic of Obama, it is hard for me to understand exactly why European countries would like Obama. Mccain's politics are more in line with their interests no? Obama is going to raise tariffs, Mccain isn't for example. The Iraq war is here to stay despite what Obama may like or think.

One reason might be instead of the Republicans' recent not-sharing-of-profits-with other countries policy, Obama's governing may let them get a lot more share from the profits. Of course that is from a government's perspective. From a typical citizen's perspective, they consider Obama as a pigeon, someone capable of bringing peace, unlike the hawk McCain. And, for those people, stopping the deaths of innocent civilians is a major concern, causing the to favor Obama instead of McCain.

Originally Posted by Quzor

So I saw a news article that said Hillary Clinton is planning on turning over all of her delegates to Barack Obama in the coming weeks. Apparently, she hopes that this will cement a permanent spot for her in the Democratic party.

That has been known for some time, since the first time that it was made known to the public that Clinton's name will be on the ballot during the convention. There may be many reasons for that to happen, such as the need to consider the next elections, or the need to unify the party. Whatever the reason is, that will help both sides settle the matters.

Originally Posted by cors8

The Clintons can't be seen as screwing Obama's candidacy or she'll never, ever get the chance to be president one day.

I wouldn't be shocked if she got a cabinet position or a high-profile chairmanship.

Obama losing the election will not be Clinton's fault. It will be Obama's fault. What Clinton doing is helping Obama more than it helps herself. She had the choice to not have done that, and that wouldn't even make her look bad. It will not be Clinton's fault to not unite the party, it will be the fault of the one winning the nomination. And, if that ever happens, he should ask himself the reasons, instead of trying to put the blame on the others. But, of course, I highly doubt he is someone to do that. His wife would definitely do that, but I don't think he himself would.

I think, the only thing Clinton may want to work on is to succeed the issues concerning the health care. And, I believe Obama should help her do that.

[bayoab]

Originally Posted by Fipskuul

Obama losing the election will not be Clinton's fault. It will be Obama's fault.

This depends how things play out. If things continue anything like that Florida speech where she basically ignored the fact that someone else was the nominee and basically spoke about the great democratic platform, it will create more questions.

What Clinton doing is helping Obama more than it helps herself. She had the choice to not have done that, and that wouldn't even make her look bad. It will not be Clinton's fault to not unite the party, it will be the fault of the one winning the nomination.

No, she didn't have the choice after making statements that basically equated to "If I don't get nominated, McCain would be a better pick than Obama". She definitely helped to drive a stake in the party and it is her job to help remove it, if she wants to keep her legacy that is. Her and her husband's legacy would basically be in tatters if they had just sat back and watched.

Also, her supporters (and maybe her) seem to feel that she is entitled something even though she lost the nomination. This is probably in there with the stupidest sticking points I've ever heard of in politics.

Every single word she says during the convention is going to be gone over with a fine tooth comb. Obama and Clinton camps are already fighting in secret.

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by bayoab

This depends how things play out. If things continue anything like that Florida speech where she basically ignored the fact that someone else was the nominee and basically spoke about the great democratic platform, it will create more questions.

No, she didn't have the choice after making statements that basically equated to "If I don't get nominated, McCain would be a better pick than Obama". She definitely helped to drive a stake in the party and it is her job to help remove it, if she wants to keep her legacy that is. Her and her husband's legacy would basically be in tatters if they had just sat back and watched.

that just normal campaigning talk. personally i would have gone in harder earlier against Obama. The Clinton campaign defintely drop the ball there.

Also, her supporters (and maybe her) seem to feel that she is entitled something even though she lost the nomination. This is probably in there with the stupidest sticking points I've ever heard of in politics.

She did get 18 mil votes and no matter how slice it and dice it, that is 18 million voters.

pelosi and dean needs to easy up on the Clinton camp, if they force a break with the Clintons, they can cripple the Dem for the next 10 years.

[Sazelyt]

Originally Posted by bayoab

This depends how things play out. If things continue anything like that Florida speech where she basically ignored the fact that someone else was the nominee and basically spoke about the great democratic platform, it will create more questions.

She has shown her support for Obama many times already. I really wonder what you are expecting more. Erase herself from the memories. So that there will be one and only Obama, with no one else who is as capable around.

No, she didn't have the choice after making statements that basically equated to "If I don't get nominated, McCain would be a better pick than Obama". She definitely helped to drive a stake in the party and it is her job to help remove it, if she wants to keep her legacy that is. Her and her husband's legacy would basically be in tatters if they had just sat back and watched.

I don't know what equates to what, as she had supported Obama a lot of times, if she weren't the nominee. She did the best she can do, she fought as hard as she could. Considering what she and her husband had to go through, thanks to the Obama supporters, many of whome were also Clinton haters, even from the beginning, I wasn't surprised with what we had observed. Considering the ignorance many Obama supporters have shown towards Clinton(s), considering the amount of votes she got, I highly doubt it was only Clinton's fault the situation had become like this. Even during VP selection, she was basically ignored, and I am sure there are not a lot of Obama supporters that would have wanted Clinton as VP. If you think about those you can see the many reason that contribute to that effect.

Also, her supporters (and maybe her) seem to feel that she is entitled something even though she lost the nomination. This is probably in there with the stupidest sticking points I've ever heard of in politics.

If you think that nearly half of the democratic voters supported Clinton, I think, those supporters have a right to want something at the end. It is really difficult to not get offended if Clinton is ignored completely despite all those votes she got.

Every single word she says during the convention is going to be gone over with a fine tooth comb. Obama and Clinton camps are already fighting in secret.

Of course they are and they have to. The amount of discouraging words spelled by both sides' supporters during the nomination process cannot be forgotten that easily. I guess Obama supporters were thinking that the nomination process would be like walking in a rose garden, holding hands together, sending kisses while ignoring the need to show the difference. And, in politics, you cannot show your difference without putting the emphasis on it.

[solomon]

Can someone please explain to me how Clinton was supposedly shafted?

update; I can see what Fipskuul said about Obama advocates being Anti Hilary without good reason. I'm against that. But unfortunetly, if that's what major public sentiment is (or more importantly if thats the most primary feeling resulting in how the voting turned out) then the "people have spoken". It's like how in Metro Detroit, the action news channel did a story on the low voter turnout (20% or less) in the primary for local legislative races, and those votes primarily by those are strongly right or left. By the time the primary is voted on, essentially it's a clear cut window to who the winner will be. If that affects the race or result for the worst (due to people making stupdi choices or sitting on their hands and not voting), what can you do?

I can see how some people say that Obama recieved more attention in the media, but he has many qualities that are more conducive to being more media friendly, like how Reagan did many years ago or JFK did before that.

But it's not like Clinton was very margnilized in the media in terms of air time. Maybe pundits made too much reference to her being a woman or whatever, but people shouldn't pay so much attention to those talking heads on cable news anyways; they mull over minutae far too much sometimes.

Plus while I respect some women's right to be angry, I don't get this whole "if Hilary doesn't get it; I'm voting for McCain." If you vote for Hilary just for being a woman, that's silly. And if you vote for McCain (on the polar opposite of many Hilary stances) just cause you're angry, if you get shafted by his admin's policies; then shame on you. It's just illogical.

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by solomon

Can someone please explain to me how Clinton was supposedly shafted?

She wasn't shafted but the pressure form pelosi and dean on ending the nomination early and on clinton to not throw the kitchen sink at Obama was overboard.

They should have shut thier mouth and let the nomination run its course and not try to end it early.

[Sazelyt]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

They should have shut thier mouth and let the nomination run its course and not try to end it early.

That would not have been a wise decision. By ending early she didn't lose the people supporting her. If it would have continued, that would have been damaging for her, and even worse for the party.

[bayoab]

Quick responses to a couple of your points:

Originally Posted by Fipskuul

Even during VP selection, she was basically ignored, and I am sure there are not a lot of Obama supporters that would have wanted Clinton as VP. If you think about those you can see the many reason that contribute to that effect.

MSNBC was asking the person in charge of the VP vetting job a couple hours ago about this and what was reported in the politico article in my above post. His response basically came down to "She was on the list and we didn't need those documents which politico mentioned." (I think he said they approached her too but I was trying to fall asleep at the time.)

If you think that nearly half of the democratic voters supported Clinton, I think, those supporters have a right to want something at the end. It is really difficult to not get offended if Clinton is ignored completely despite all those votes she got.

Clinton and Obama's platforms are so similar that it's not like they aren't getting a large part of what she stands for. It's just in a slightly different wrapping. And normally it doesn't matter if you have half the people voting for you if you can't win the numbers game. The only difference here is that the opponent actually has some incentive to listen to the other half.

[xxmimixx]

Originally Posted by solomon

If you notice current political campaign talk and what it revolves around, it revolves around HUMANS, because we are voting, not rabbits or bears in the forests. Oh and here's something else; some people don't see us humans anywhere close to animals They wonder if we worry too much about the plight of another horned owl when it can facilitate more land development that we "need". (I'm paraphrasing something Rush Limbaugh said on Nightline in 92). There is still a big debate over weither or not global climate change exists or weither we produce as much pollution as whoever does. As long as politicians and more importantly voters don't think about animals outside of their own dog or cat as worthy of protection when necessary, the ecosystem will continue to be abused.

I know that animals can't vote lol (if they did, that would be funny). I'm just saying with this new president, I hope that they could talk about the environment and whatnot. I'm just a really big fangirl about nature and environmental friendly kind of person, and respect about everything in this crazy a** world. But I see your point.

[ApostleOfGod]

Zz..

Americans complaining about taxes...

Come to Canada when you feel that you're not being taxed enough.

[Neki Ecko]

Today is the start of the DNC in Denver.

It was a very good first day with Michelle Obama stole the show with her words about family and why her husband should be the next President of the United States, she even gave some props to HRC for her performance in the primaries. I think that she did a awesome job doing that (even know that there was a alot of bitching from the Media about Demo not tying to put down McCain and Bush tonight). Also Ted Kennedy was there with a nice and powerful speech tonight. Tomorrow is HRC on Center Stage, what would she do?

[Phantom-Takaya]

Obama's attack on McCain's inability to say how many houses he owns doesn't win points from me. In fact, it makes me wonder what his point was in that one. To show how stupid McCain really is? That's rather immature. When do we start hearing them question each other's VIEW in important matters like oh, say... Iraq, oil and the fact that the US is pretty much in a depression of sorts? There's more other important issues to discuss other than the fact that one of the candidates is refusing to answer how many houses he owns.

[Vexx]

It wasn't that McCain refused to answer... he honestly didn't know. You're too young to remember (but may have read about) the George Bush, Sr moment where he was befuddled by a laser scanner in a grocery store (and later lost the campaign).

It shows just how out of touch with the middle class and the poor these guys are. Having that moment during a major housing meltdown just ignited what otherwise might have slipped by.

So couple that lack of empathy with the vast middle of America (McCain's economics advisor Phil Gramm called Americans a "bunch of whiners") with McCain's repeated demonstration of just how clueless he is about the geopolitics of the Middle East, the real reasons for the improvements in Iraq (hint: the surge was only a small part) and his total misreading of the Russian/Georgian situation..... why is anyone even considering McCain?

Sometimes its the little moments that decide an election though..... like a house count or a scanner.

[SeedFreedom]

Originally Posted by Phantom-Takaya

Obama's attack on McCain's inability to say how many houses he owns doesn't win points from me. In fact, it makes me wonder what his point was in that one. To show how stupid McCain really is? That's rather immature. When do we start hearing them question each other's VIEW in important matters like oh, say... Iraq, oil and the fact that the US is pretty much in a depression of sorts? There's more other important issues to discuss other than the fact that one of the candidates is refusing to answer how many houses he owns.

How funny because i could have sworn Maccain was the one making stupid ads about him being a celebrity instead of talking about the issues. (oh, and FYI its the republicans who made politicians out of Regan, Schwarzenegger, and sonny bono)

[solomon]

Vexx, could you explain how McCain hasn't demonstrated knowledge of Middle East Geo Politics, or point me to some evidence.

Cause i've been devouring media coverage and while I havent heard him be ASTUTE on the subject, I havent seen him be completely ignorant either.

Both candidates have lost points from me cause they are playing the mean spirited game of US politics, out of short term political necessity and not out of reason or morals.

[solomon]

Originally Posted by SeedFreedom

How funny because i could have sworn Maccain was the one making stupid ads about him being a celebrity instead of talking about the issues. (oh, and FYI its the republicans who made politicians out of Regan, Schwarzenegger, and sonny bono)

Wow really good, point. Just goes to show ya, it can go both ways.