U.S. Presidential Race: Official Thread

Obama or McCain/Democrat or Republican..you decide

  • McCain

    Votes: 14 7.5%

  • Obama

    Votes: 173 92.5%
  • Total voters
    187
  • Poll closed .

Raoul

Admin
Staff
Joined
Aug 14, 1999
Messages
132,933
Location
Hollywood CA
Obama claims big win in South Carolina

(CNN) -- Sen. Barack Obama claimed a significant victory in the South Carolina Democratic primary on Saturday, telling supporters "we are hungry for change."

The Illinois senator earned more than twice the vote that rival Sen. Hillary Clinton did, 55 percent to 27 percent, unofficial returns showed.

Former Sen. John Edwards was third with 18 percent.

"Tonight, the cynics who believed that what began in the snows of Iowa was just an illusion were told a different story by the good people of South Carolina," Obama said to supporters Saturday. Watch a recap of Obama's big win »

A win in South Carolina was considered crucial for Obama, who won Iowa but finished second to Clinton in New Hampshire and Nevada. See what the results mean »

"I did not travel around this state over the last year and see a white South Carolina or a black South Carolina. I saw South Carolina," he said.

"The choice in this election is not between regions or religions or genders," Obama said. "It's not about rich versus poor; young versus old; and it is not about black versus white.

"It's about the past versus the future." Watch Obama speech

With 99 percent of precincts reporting, Obama had 55 percent of the vote. Clinton was second with 27 percent, followed by Edwards, with 18 percent. Obama's victory capped a heated contest in South Carolina, the first Democratic primary in the South and the first with a largely African-American electorate.

Obama, who is hoping to become the the nation's first African-American president, did well with black voters, who made up about half of Saturday's electorate, according to exit polls.

Black voters supported the Illinois senator by a margin of more than 4-to-1 over his nearest rival, exit polls indicate.

Among white voters, Obama took about a quarter of the vote, with Clinton and Edwards roughly splitting the remainder, according to exit polls.

Clinton congratulated Obama and said she was excited to move forward to the Super Tuesday contests on February 5.

"Millions and millions of Americans are going to have the chance to have their voices heard and their votes counted," she told supporters at Tennessee State University. Watch Clinton speak to supporters »

Edwards also looked ahead to the next contests.

"Now the three of us move on to February 5, where millions of Americans will cast their vote and help shape the future of this party and help shape the future of America," he said. Watch Edwards rally supporters »

"Our campaign from the very beginning has been about one central thing, and that is to give voice to the millions of Americans who have absolutely no voice in this democracy."

Clinton beat Obama only among elderly voters, according to exit polls.

Among voters 65 and older, Clinton beat Obama 40 to 32 percent. But Obama handily defeated Clinton in every other bracket, and overall garnered 58 percent of the vote among 18 to 64-year-olds while 23 percent of those voters picked Clinton.

And half of those polled said both candidates shared blame for the rancor between the two camps. Of those who said one of the contenders was more to blame than the other, 21 percent blamed Clinton, and 6 percent said Obama.

"It's fairly obvious it's not going to be over February 5," Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs said.

Edwards was born in South Carolina and won the state's primary four years ago, when he was making his first bid for the White House. See voters head to the polls in South Carolina »

Edwards had touted his native status, and as the Clinton and Obama camps have squabbled, Edwards continued to talk about the issues and suggests he's the only adult in the field. Watch Edwards reach out to voters »

"I'm keeping moving no matter what, but I feel good about how things are moving right now here today," Edwards told reporters Saturday morning. "I feel there's a lot of energy behind my campaign."

On January 15, Edwards pledged, "I'm in this for the long haul. We're continuing to accumulate delegates. There's actually a very narrow margin between Sen. Obama, Sen. Clinton and myself on delegates."

The state Democratic party estimated that more than 530,000 Democrats turned out for Saturday's primary, as compared with 445,000 voters who showed up to vote last weekend in the state's Republican primary.

The Democratic numbers topped the GOP turnout for the first time since 1992, when 445,000 Republicans turned out to renominate President George H.W. Bush.

Obama attracted more than 290,000 votes -- nearly matching the total turnout of the 2004 Democratic primary.

"This is an enormous turnout," CNN analyst Jeffrey Toobin said. "Democrats are wildly motivated in this election."

As South Carolina's Democratic primary voters went to the polls Saturday, almost half of them had made up their minds more than a month ago, according to exit polls.

In the 2004 primary, nearly a quarter decided either the day of the primary or in the three days prior who they would support, but this year, only 10 percent of this year's voters waited until Saturday to choose.

Another 10 percent decided only in the last three days, and 32 percent decided in the last month.

Forty-seven percent made up their minds at least a month ago, more than double the percentage of 2004.

The early exit polls were taken from a sampling of 1,269 voters statewide.

Following a rough campaign between Clinton and Obama, the two camps toned down the rhetoric in the past two days, returning to the issues and concentrating their firepower on the Republicans rather than on each other.

"I think they [the Republicans] should be gracious and just say, "We have messed this thing up so much we are just going to quit and ... we shouldn't be re-elected,' but I don't think that is what they are going to do," Clinton said.

South Carolina is the last big test for the Democrats before Super Tuesday, February 5, when nearly two dozen states will hold either primaries or caucuses -- including such delegate-rich states as California, New York, New Jersey and Illinois.

Florida holds its primary on Tuesday but no Democratic delegates are being awarded there because the national party is penalizing the state for moving its primary up earlier in the year.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Looks like this is shaping up to be a bruising heavyweight fight between Obama and Hillary. Expect it to get very nasty soon.
 
Looks like McCain is taking charge on the Republican side. Can't see Romney recovering if McCain takes Flordia next.
 
Looks like Rudy is fecked big time. I'd like to see Obama win just to see if anything will actually be different. Can't see it happening though. Hillary vs McCain with Hillary winning imo.
 
Obama wins Kennedy backing (no, another one)

Barack Obama will announce today that he has won the support of senator and Democratic powerbroker Edward Kennedy, which could pay lasting dividends in the candidate's battle against Hillary Clinton.

In addition to Kennedy's symbolic importance as part of a beloved American dynasty, the Massachusetts senator has the ability to help Obama erase his deficit with Latino voters. Polls show Clinton leading in California, which holds its primary next week, based largely on her popularity with Latinos. Kennedy holds enormous sway with the largest US minority group because of his career-long push for immigration reform.

Obama and Kennedy will make their first joint appearance today at American University in Washington, followed by a busy schedule of cross-country campaigning, according to the Washington Post. Although the Clinton camp tried to temper the moment with a statement of support from the daughter of the late senator Robert Kennedy, the power of the Kennedy name was evident right away as Republicans rushed to attack Obama.

The Republican national committee sent reporters a memo titled "The Liberal Endorsement", going after Obama's appeal to independent voters by linking the Illinois senator to Kennedy. Still, any drawbacks that Obama faces in aligning with Kennedy, a favourite target of conservatives, pale in comparison to the advantages of undercutting Clinton. The former first lady and her husband have cultivated close ties to Kennedy for years, giving his endorsement of Obama the appearance of a personal slight.

Only one Democratic endorsement is considered as potent as Kennedy's this year: that of former presidential nominee and Nobel peace prize-winner Al Gore. Whether Kennedy's alliance will persuade Gore to end his neutrality remains to be seen.

In an interview with ABC news timed to capitalise on his victory in South Carolina, Obama aimed to move beyond the racial debate that has dominated the Democratic contest.

"I think that the press has been very focused, almost manically, on the issue of race here in South Carolina," Obama said. "But as we move forward after this contest, I'm very confident that we're going to continue to build the kinds of coalitions that we've been seeing all across the country."

Both Clinton and Obama will appear today in the capital to watch George Bush deliver his final state of the union speech, but their senatorial colleague John McCain likely will remain on the campaign trail in Florida. McCain and Mitt Romney are in a dead heat in the southern state as tomorrow's Republican primary approaches.

That dynamic in Florida has led many to suspect that former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani could end his campaign if he finishes a distant third or even fourth, behind Mike Huckabee. But Giuliani tamped down speculation about his demise, arguing today that he will make a strong showing in Florida that will help reverse his slide in his home state of New York.

"I think that the situation in polls has all to do with, you know, who wins which primary," Giuliani told CBS news. "I win the primary in Florida, we'll be right back on top in a lot of these polls."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections08/barackobama/story/0,,2248293,00.html

A Benitezesque quote from Guiliani there
 
There was a panel of some 'experts' doing reaction to the South Carolina Primary i think it was, this was the other day of course, but one of them said that a rumour doin g the rounds is that Condoleezza Rice will be McCain's running mate if he wins the nomination.

What do you make of that? Likely? And how effective could it be?
 
Edwards to quit White House race

Democrat John Edwards is exiting the race for the White House after failing to win any of the four party nomination contests held so far, officials say.

His team said the former North Carolina senator had decided not to continue.

He lost Iowa's caucuses, came third in New Hampshire, admitted getting his "butt kicked" in Nevada and came third in his native South Carolina.

In the Republican field, ex-New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani is expected to drop out later and endorse John McCain.

Mr Giuliani came a distant third in Florida's primary on Tuesday.

It is not yet clear if Mr Edwards will endorse either of the two current Democratic front-runners, Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama.

He is expected publicly to announce the end to his White House bid in New Orleans, where he formally launched the campaign in 2006.

His website said he was to make a speech on poverty at a community project in the flood-ravaged Louisiana city on Wednesday at 1300 local time (1900 GMT).

The 54 year-old's withdrawal leaves the Democratic contest a two-horse race, say correspondents, pitting the New York senator and former First Lady, Hillary Clinton, against Illinois Senator Barack Obama.

The BBC's Vincent Dowd in Washington says if Mr Edwards urges supporters in one direction or another that could be an important influence in the race for the nomination.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7217838.stm
 
Giuliani's political gamble costs dear

The tourist paradise of Orlando is a place of fantasy where dreams are woven between the garish laser beams that poke up into the dark tropical sky from a thousand theme parks and attractions.

It is also, as Rudy Giuliani can now confirm, a place where dreams can be cruelly shattered.

The former New York mayor chose one of the plushest hotels in town for the post-primary gathering where he hoped he would be celebrating victory in Florida.

Instead, he found himself addressing a kind of political wake, where weeping supporters cheered his stump speech one last time and left disconsolately discussing where it all went wrong.

We always knew that Mr Giuliani's strategy of focusing his time, energy and money in the first big state to vote was one of two things; either a stroke of political genius that would rewrite the rule book about how you run for the presidency, or an act of madness that would see the long-time Republican front-runner fall at the first hurdle.

Now we know which it was.

As he took the stage, he paused before speaking to acknowledge the cheers of the faithful.

A woman in the crowd shouted encouragingly: "It isn't over till it's over." There were a few cheers and Mr Giuliani briefly looked encouraged, but he knew that it was over, and so did his audience.

America's Mayor

Mr Giuliani spoke well, perhaps because he was free of the pressures of running for office with a realistic chance of victory.

He touched on the familiar themes of his candidacy like tax reduction and the historic importance of the "War on Terror". When he paused towards the climax of the speech the voice of the same woman piped up again to shout: "They'll be sorry."

Mr Giuliani laughed and told her: "You sound like my mother."

If he had managed to sound as relaxed and light-hearted when he was in the race as he did in the moments when we began to realise he would be quitting it, then he might have fared a little better. We'll never know.

The man who was once styled "America's Mayor" couldn't quite bring himself to announce from the stage that he was out of the race, but no-one was in any doubt that his campaign was over.

Running for office in America is a costly business.

There were stories that Mr Giuliani had been spending up to a million dollars a week on TV advertising in Florida alone.

Add in the costs of chartering planes, hiring offices and paying staffers and you can see why even the most convinced Giulianistas knew their man was finished.

The costs of fighting on through Super Tuesday would be multiplied at least tenfold, maybe more, and no-one is going to keep pouring money into the campaign of a man who finished third in a state where he'd spent more than 50 days on the campaign trail.

Overplayed legacy?

The supporters who chatted with me as we wandered back into the night over a floor carpeted with discarded posters that proclaimed "Florida is Rudy Country" all made the same point.

Rudy, they said, was a leader and had shown character under pressure in leading New York through the aftermath of 9/11 that none of the others, not even John McCain, could match.

But those two strengths also give you an insight into the problems that Mr Giuliani began to encounter after settling on putting all his eggs in the Florida basket.

First the question of character. Many Republicans don't like Mr Giuliani's attitudes on social issues like abortion and, in more than one state, Republican voters have told me they don't like his personal lifestyle - the divorces, and the reportedly difficult relationships with his own children.

Unfair perhaps, but that's conservative politics - any Republican president is going to have to offer America a first family with a degree at least of conventional stability. That was never Rudy Giuliani.


American politics is a gladiatorial drama of winning and losing, and now 2008 has its first big loser

And he may have overplayed the 9/11 legacy. One Democrat parodied his speaking style as "Noun, Verb, 9/11".

Not that anyone was doubting the quality of the leadership he offered in that crisis, it's just that as the campaign got under way it became increasingly clear that middle-class jitters over the possibility of recession were the key issue.

Mr Giuliani never quite tuned into that fear, even though he talked repeatedly about the need to cut taxes and pointed to his stewardship of the New York economy.

Winners and losers

But in the end, the simplest reason is the most convincing.

Mr Giuliani thought he could avoid toiling through the snows of Iowa and New Hampshire - states where he never expected to do well - and make up the lost ground in Florida.

He will pop up in political science text books for years to come as an example of "How Not to Do It".

You can guarantee that the presidential hopefuls in 2012 will all be in Iowa - not much of a legacy for a man whose campaign has cost millions.

John McCain's narrow victory over Mitt Romney probably makes him a slight front-runner in the Republican race, but Mr Romney will be encouraged too by the closeness of the race - we can expect things to be equally tight on Super Tuesday.

But in a curious way, the night belonged to Rudy Giuliani. American politics is a gladiatorial drama of winning and losing, and now 2008 has its first big loser.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7216834.stm

Poor Rudy. He will go down in history for all the wrong reasons! I'm very happy McCain took Florida though, I'd rather him than Romney - something about Mitt scares me slightly.
 
Some very amusing anti Ron Raul propaganda has now hit my campus after the earlier pro Ron Paul stuff. Stuff like 'Ron Paul hates Fish Camp', 'Even Ron Pal hates Ron Paul', 'Ron Paul hates midnight snacks' has been chalked all over.
 
mehro said:
Some very amusing anti Ron Raul propaganda has now hit my campus after the earlier pro Ron Paul stuff. Stuff like 'Ron Paul hates Fish Camp', 'Even Ron Pal hates Ron Paul', 'Ron Paul hates midnight snacks' has been chalked all over.
Click to expand...



if I went to your school there would be an impromptu "mehro for president" campaign.

I ran a resonably successful campaign for Bart Simpson in High School. I heard he got 27 votes and he wasn't even nominated.

Seriously mehro, I'm the campaign manager you want.
 
mehro said:
I don't need a campaign manager. I need a job. Get me a job, Doc.
Click to expand...

why else would you run for president, mehro?

christ, you really do need a campaign manager.

make sure the reporters who want to interview you run the questions by me first so I can tell you what to say.

mehro for president.
 
Obama has about 10k supporters directly outside my window, which I had to open to tell them to feck off since 7 am this morning assholes
 


"Listen to me... there's only the two of us left... Do you want to join my crew?? otherwise I will DESTROY YOU!"
 
Ah, so as no-one answered this in the other thread, because it was off-topic :rolleyes:...

Brad Cantona said:
I've spent the morning aquainting myself with how the primary delegate system works. Given none of the media outlets can be arsed doing their jobs and explaining the process over here. My conclusion is that it's a pile of nonsense, especially the involvement of superdelegates who can vote for whoever they please irrespective of the popular vote. And they carry 1/5th of the voter weight, so in a tight contest like the democrats have, they likely elect the party runner for the presidency. While Obama has a narrow delegate majority from the popular vote so far, he's actually quite far behind because so many superdelegates have already come out in favour of Clinton. Although I believe they can change their minds, which is nonsense. Obama is also claiming despite losing Nevada, he has more delegates from the state, which I haven't quite worked out how can happen yet. To the Republicans credit, I believe they have scrapped the superdelegate system their side

If anyone can concisely explain the system, please do so I can cement my knowledge. I wouldn't mind a list of how many delegates belong to each state, such knowledge still evades me thus far. I have seen 2004 results, so I assume the proportions will be somewhat similar. You really want to be winning California!
Click to expand...
 
does it really matter, neither obama or clinton will do feck all anyway but maintain the status quo.

until that feck up of a nation gets a president and enough senators that aren't funded by companies the whole place will continue to be run for the benefit of the very rich while every one else in the world suffers because of it.
 
That is basically true but lets not be too holier than thou about it, the UK is also run for the benefit of the rich and politicians are also beholden to corporate interests here, and in many places around the world.

I am also very pessemistic that this could ever change. Ultimately the system works because people are greedy. People tolerate the country being run in line with the interests of the rich because they aspire to break into the elite themselves. People have had myriad chances to vote for something different over the years but they dont. And when Labour (the party of the working class, we are supposed to believe) got in, it was because they reinvented themselves as a pro-business party.
 
It's very disappointing to see that John Edwards has bowed out of the Presidential race. Watching the Clinton News Network, yesterday evening, CNN made no mention of John Edwards in the 2 hours leading up to the Debate in Hollywood.

It's sucks that Edwards who had won the previous debate in Nevada by an overwhelming majority ~ is suddenly gone. He should have stuck with it until the coming Tuesday when a cluster of states vote, on what they call Big Tuesday.

Shameful

Still... knowing Hillary's backround - Barak Obama blew Hillary out of the water in last night's debate.

*It has been incredible to see how Hillary's wikipedia page has morphed from her dark past to this sugary glazed covered donut shape, shit filled though.
 
My guess is Edwards dropped out because he was splitting the non-Hillary vote. He wasnt going to win, while (I presume) people who would vote for him would pick Obama as their second choice, on the whole. So his absence strengthens Obama's hand going into Tuesday.
 
Simon Adebesi said:
My guess is Edwards dropped out because he was splitting the non-Hillary vote. He wasnt going to win, while (I presume) people who would vote for him would pick Obama as their second choice, on the whole. So his absence strengthens Obama's hand going into Tuesday.
Click to expand...

If Hillary wins, there will be no doubt that the voting machines are rigged.

All throughout the internet people are hating on Hillary rrrrrrrrrrreal hard. The few posts I've seen that are pro-Hillary appear to be bland and campaign organizer generated.
 
ooeat0meoo said:
If Hillary wins, there will be no doubt that the voting machines are rigged.

All throughout the internet people are hating on Hillary rrrrrrrrrrreal hard. The few posts I've seen that are pro-Hillary appear to be bland and campaign organizer generated.
Click to expand...

Obama is closing the polls....it will be close...it wont be decided this Super Tuesday...

we have a great opportunity...lets hope we dont settle for the status quo...
 
Brad Cantona said:
Yeh I read that, it doesn't answer my question penis head
Click to expand...


It is split up by Congressional district.

Obama won more districts (hence delegates), but Clinton won the districts that she won by wide majorities, thus winning the state's popular vote.

It's like a mini Electoral College.

And yes, the Republicans do not have a super-delegate system. The Democrats do it as a firewall against a non-system candidate winning. There were riots on the streets of Chicago in 1968 in which the Mayor ordered the protestors beaten, specifically because they refused to allow the very popular non-system candidate (Eugene McCarthy) to even enter the hall in spite of having seated some delegates and thus automatically supposedly having the right to enter and speak.

They try as hard as they can to choose their nominee in the infamous smoke-filled back rooms whereas the Republicans tend to either coalesce around one candidate fairly quickly or to duke it out until the bitter end at the convention (most recently with Reagan losing the nomination to incumbent Gerald Ford in 1976, and quite possibly this time).

The system wants Clinton - she and her husband put much of the current apparatus and people in place to prepare for this, although they expected it to be 2004 before 9/11 happened. The people - especially the young - largely want Obama - and they want him more and more as they see him grow as a candidate and her slip into pathetic and outdated racial politics to try to win.
 
ooeat0meoo said:
If Hillary wins, there will be no doubt that the voting machines are rigged.

All throughout the internet people are hating on Hillary rrrrrrrrrrreal hard. The few posts I've seen that are pro-Hillary appear to be bland and campaign organizer generated.
Click to expand...


Hillary is staggeringly artificial and organised.

Obama really has a growing groundswell by the people of both parties - some of us Republicans would rather have four years of gridlock and a genuinely nice guy than return to the horribly divisive and disgusting politics of the Clintons.

The Republicans are very likely to take back at least one branch of Congress either this time or at the mid-term, and even if they don't the so-called Blue-Dog Democrats - who are Democrats in name only - won't support some of Obama's more sweeping changes.

Clinton craves power like nobody's business. Obama craves change for the country. She changes with the wind, and while she is desperately trying to paint her policies as being exactly the same as his, if she wins the nomination her politics will suddenly become virtually exactly like McCain's and she will portray him as an evil murderous racist who starves small children. Her husband really did claim that the Republicans wanted to starve children, and that they hated old people, all while they supported positions he took in his first election. Obama will actually run as a leftist and the country will have real choice.

I'm disappointed in her although I should have known better. I thought she would have the courage to run based on her real political leanings, which are much further left than she will make out in the general election. Instead winning is much much more important to her than any principles. Based on their behavior during their co-presidency, I should have known better.

A year ago I thought Obama was just a hair-cut with no substance, just like Romney. But Obama has grown more and more throughout the campaign, and I can now see him as president without having to have a coronary every other day as Clinton spews more hatred towards those who are on her 'enemies list'.

She's the Democrat's Nixon. He's the Democrat's Reagan.
 
Red Dreams said:
Obama is closing the polls....it will be close...it wont be decided this Super Tuesday...

we have a great opportunity...lets hope we dont settle for the status quo...
Click to expand...

The Republican race may very well be decided this next coming week.

The fact is that there are less and less hard-line conservatives, and their influence is waning with the average Republican.

Those of us who are economic and foreign policy Republicans, as opposed to so-called 'social conservatives', were convinced on Bush by the likes of Limbaugh, Hannity, and other influential Clinton-era Republican voices. We ditched McCain because we were promised that Bush would be conservative on both economic and foreign policy.

We were sent down the river, ending up with a social conservative who tripled the size of government and whose adventures in Iraq prevented us from dealing with real problems - like trying to negotiate with the Palestinians and Israelis, trying to prevent genocides in Africa, and in keeping an eye and pressure on Russia to stay democratic instead of slipping into a cult-of-personality autocracy.

This time as much as they rail against McCain - largely due to personal hatred or being wined and dined by Romney - the more the average Republican is willing to take a look at him.

McCain was wrong on Campaign Finance Reform, but sacred-cow George W Bush signed it, and their precious 'conservative' Supreme Court justices refused to strike it down. So that can't be laid at his door, while Romney never had the guts to take a position and won't even tell us exactly what he has personally spent on his campaign.

McCain was wrong on giving straight-out amnesty to illegal aliens, but the claim of Romney (who used to support McCain's position until he looked at poll numbers) that he would deport them all is staggeringly full of it and simply a flat out lie as well as being completely impractical.

McCain was right on the so-called 'Gang Of Fourteen', which blocked Republicans being able to end debate in the Senate based on a fifty-fifty vote. The whole point of the Senate is unlimited debate if necessary, and it currently takes 60 votes and a certain length of time before a vote on a bill or judicial nominee can be forced. I bet the 'conservatives' who rail about this would be railing about the closure of debate if a liberal judge was placed on the Supreme Court based on a 50-50 tie in the Senate.

McCain's global warming plan is pretty reasonable. He wants to look into the carbon credit system, and to negotiate with the international community to do something about reaching agreement. Those who are backing Romney because they don't believe in Global Warming seem to have missed out the fact that Romney slipped in a line in Wednesday's debate affirming man-made Global Warming and promising to act. He did this because he counts on the 'conservative' media to drum up hatred for McCain no matter what in the South, while he can now quietly campaign in more liberal Super-Tuesday states such as California claiming to support action. He did this in Michigan promising billions to 'bring back' the American auto industry and no one called him on it.

Romney is a staggering dirt-ball who will support ANYTHING at any time, and who will literally change from day to day based on poll numbers, audiences, and political expediency.

The 'conservative' media is backing him due to personal dislike of McCain, but the average Republican who was sold Bush in spite of our reservations in 1999 don't share this hatred and don't trust the 'conservatives' to not sell us a bum steer again.
 
McCain is the best bet for the Republicans and imo is OK.

it is a real pity for this country he did not beat Bush in 2000.
the whole world would have been better off.
he may be 8 years too late.
Bush is the best thing that happened for the Dems...

no matter how capable Obama or Hillary may be....they would have a lot less chance of being President without Bush....

the early signs are the Democrats are going to be voting in high numbers in the elections...

so it will be one of them....I just hope it is not the witch....of the three...she is by far the worst......and Bill Clinton's desperation...he is frothing at the mouth.....to get back in for more blowjobs.......

lets hope it is Obama v McCain....

we would have turned a huge corner then.....
 
jasonrh said:
Hillary is staggeringly artificial and organised.

Obama really has a growing groundswell by the people of both parties - some of us Republicans would rather have four years of gridlock and a genuinely nice guy than return to the horribly divisive and disgusting politics of the Clintons.

The Republicans are very likely to take back at least one branch of Congress either this time or at the mid-term, and even if they don't the so-called Blue-Dog Democrats - who are Democrats in name only - won't support some of Obama's more sweeping changes.

Clinton craves power like nobody's business. Obama craves change for the country. She changes with the wind, and while she is desperately trying to paint her policies as being exactly the same as his, if she wins the nomination her politics will suddenly become virtually exactly like McCain's and she will portray him as an evil murderous racist who starves small children. Her husband really did claim that the Republicans wanted to starve children, and that they hated old people, all while they supported positions he took in his first election. Obama will actually run as a leftist and the country will have real choice.

I'm disappointed in her although I should have known better. I thought she would have the courage to run based on her real political leanings, which are much further left than she will make out in the general election. Instead winning is much much more important to her than any principles. Based on their behavior during their co-presidency, I should have known better.

A year ago I thought Obama was just a hair-cut with no substance, just like Romney. But Obama has grown more and more throughout the campaign, and I can now see him as president without having to have a coronary every other day as Clinton spews more hatred towards those who are on her 'enemies list'.

She's the Democrat's Nixon. He's the Democrat's Reagan.
Click to expand...



I agree with everything in your post, here.:eek:

Obama's belief in a cabinet of people with integrity and an understanding of principal is something Hillary is not saying nor capable of doing. If we recall the Clinton years in office, he had a closed door policy that infuriated much of his own staff.


Jason for Vice President '08
 
You must log in or register to reply here.