Is anybody here for Obama?
biknut 28 Jan 2008
Even though I've never voted for a Democrat I have to admit, Obama is an interesting proposition. I can't really tell why I like him. From what I've heard he's supposed to be even more left wing than Clinton. Still I like the way way he promotes himself. He seems to me like the kind of guy that would surround himself with intelligent people, and maybe even listen to them. He doesn't seem like he'd do things to this country that half of everybody would hate, unlike most.
I really hate the way Clinton has been campaigning against him. I think the Clinton's have tried to set him up as the black candidate against the white one. Just what I'd expect Democrats to do. That's typical dirty tricks, but Clinton could win because of it.
But today news came out that may change that. Ted Kennedy is going to endorse Obama tomorrow. He's also going to announce that he's going to actively campaign for Obama. He said that a big part of his decision to do this is because of the way the Clinton's have run their campaign against him. This is probably the first time in my life that I've agreed with anything Ted Kennedy has done. It reminds me of someone coming to the aide of a person being threatened by a powerful bully. It just seems like the right thing to do, because Obama can't do anything about being black, but he may be able to end up doing a great deal about reducing racial prejudice in this country if he gets the nomination.
Either that, or maybe I'm just going soft in my old age.
Cyberbrain 28 Jan 2008
niner 28 Jan 2008
He's got my vote, biknut. I think he would bring the country together, as opposed to the further division that Clinton would engender. Electing Obama would go a long way toward rescuing America's tarnished image in much of the world. Obama represents the future, while Clinton and any of the Republicans that have a chance of winning represent the past. I don't say this on the basis of their likely policy prescriptions, but rather on the social/cultural baggage they have hanging around their necks. (And their policies, in some cases.) I gotta say, this is just an amazing political season, like nothing in my life.I was wondering how much support Barack Obama has on the forum. He's getting a lot of support from young people, more than Hellery.
Alien65 28 Jan 2008
JonesGuy 28 Jan 2008
biknut 28 Jan 2008
It would be hard to claim repression, if that's the right word, after a black American becomes President of the United States. It would go a long way toward putting the Jesse Jackson's of the world out of business. I think that's a big reason why the black leaders have been so slow to endorse Obama. I think their fear of him is based on an assumption that he might actually improve their lot rather than keep them enslaved on welfare for all eternity like they want do.
28 Jan 2008
I think he's the best choice for improving America's international reputation.
I think that is a bit naive. The cartoon at the following link expresses some of my feelings:
http://www.cartoonis...d.php?iid=15931
Cyberbrain 28 Jan 2008
Well you have to remember 90% of the worlds population is naive with little or no education. The fact that Obama is a half Muslim African American would definitely have some sort of impact in Africa, Asia and the Middle East. While I agree with you that this is very racist and very ignorant ... it's the truth. People are really this dumb. Half of the people who support Hillary Clinton for instance do so simply because she's a famous woman. And people who support Mitt Romney or John McCain do so because they're pro-religion.I think he's the best choice for improving America's international reputation.
I think that is a bit naive. The cartoon at the following link expresses some of my feelings:
http://www.cartoonis...d.php?iid=15931
People should not judge a person simply by looks, sex and religion. We have to look at what they stand for and what policies they support. Simply saying "I'm going to vote Republican because they want to lower taxes" is not enough.
Mind 28 Jan 2008
niner 28 Jan 2008
I don't understand the cartoon... The guy on the tv sort of looks like Bill Clinton... He's implying America under Hillary would be "unreliable"? America under Obama? Needs more context.I think he's the best choice for improving America's international reputation.
I think that is a bit naive. The cartoon at the following link expresses some of my feelings:
http://www.cartoonis...d.php?iid=15931
happy 28 Jan 2008
29 Jan 2008
I don't understand the cartoon... The guy on the tv sort of looks like Bill Clinton... He's implying America under Hillary would be "unreliable"? America under Obama? Needs more context.I think he's the best choice for improving America's international reputation.
I think that is a bit naive. The cartoon at the following link expresses some of my feelings:
http://www.cartoonis...d.php?iid=15931
The context would be the desirability of a speedy withdraw from Iraq without regard to the situation on the ground and how people of various political stripes in the U.S. believe that might affect international opinion of the United States.
Edited by ludongbin, 29 January 2008 - 12:19 AM.
rodentman 29 Jan 2008
I hate all the candidates on all sides. I'm voting for Pedro.
RodentMan
niner 29 Jan 2008
So now all of a sudden those people care about what the rest of the world thinks? That's a switch...I don't understand the cartoon... The guy on the tv sort of looks like Bill Clinton... He's implying America under Hillary would be "unreliable"? America under Obama? Needs more context.I think he's the best choice for improving America's international reputation.
I think that is a bit naive. The cartoon at the following link expresses some of my feelings:
http://www.cartoonis...d.php?iid=15931
The context would be the desirability of a speedy withdraw from Iraq without regard to the situation on the ground and how people of various political stripes in the U.S. believe that might affect international opinion of the United States.
Ghostrider 29 Jan 2008
Theres very little difference between the stances of Hillary and Obama. I'd prefer Hillary, because her gender would piss off Muslims. HAHAHAHAAA
I hate all the candidates on all sides. I'm voting for Pedro.
RodentMan
I don't really care for either one to be honest. I think Romney would do the best job. However, if I had to choose, I would vote Obama over Clinton. Only because of where they draw their support. The upper and educated people are for Obama. The lower and middle class are for Hillary. I'll put my vote with the brains. But at the end of the day, they are both politicians. How come engineers and scientists don't get elected?
Edited by Ghostrider, 29 January 2008 - 05:09 AM.
Alien65 29 Jan 2008
I am voting for Barack Obama. He's change I can believe in.
Change to WHAT? Do you have a clue? The man is a good speaker (like Baptist ministers) but what are his policies? He may be a good candidate but I don't have enough information about his record in the state legislator or senate to know. Our media does not convey information about candidates, only hype.
Hillary, on the other hand, will be a good republocrat like Bill Clinton who had a successful presidency (except for some indiscretions) and is respected the world over.
Americans voted for change in 2002 and look what we bought? God (if he still exists) help us to get out of this mess.
Edited by Alien65, 29 January 2008 - 06:09 AM.
Cyberbrain 29 Jan 2008
I'll take it that you've never lived outside of the United States....and is respected the world over.
Other then a couple of left wing hippies in Europe, the world really doesn't like her.
Alien65 29 Jan 2008
I'll take it that you've never lived outside of the United States....and is respected the world over.
Other then a couple of left wing hippies in Europe, the world really doesn't like her.
Sorry, I'm talking about Bill.
Live Forever 29 Jan 2008
Being a (socially liberal, fiscally conservative, progressively realist foreign policy person) libertarian, I wish that Congress (who holds the purse-strings) was more conservative and the presidency (which has more to do with Supreme Court appointments, foreign policy, etc.) was more liberal. I think they will both be Democratic and swaying liberal in this next election, however. Aaaah, well, I never get what I want anyway.
Cyberbrain 29 Jan 2008
Not to mention that she also supports the death penalty, net neutrality, the No Child Left Behind program, and is against same sex marriages.
The only thing she cares about is party loyalties and lobbyists, much like the Republican Party.
The only good candidates (if you do your research) are:
1. Ron Paul
2. Mike Gravel
3. Barak Obama
Edited by Kostas, 29 January 2008 - 06:28 AM.
Alien65 29 Jan 2008
Btw, Hillary Clinton voted for the Iraq war and even voted to continue funding it. She even voted for the patriot act!
Not to mention that she also supports the death penalty, net neutrality, the No Child Left Behind program, and is against same sex marriages.
The only thing she cares about is party loyalties and lobbyists, much like the Republican Party.
The only good candidates (if you do your research) are:
1. Ron Paul
2. Mike Gravel
3. Barak Obama
If you do your research you will find Barack Obama also voted to continue funding the war.
Now Mike Gravel, I like.
No president will accomplish anything without working within the establishment. That means party, lobbyists and loyalists. The key to a good president is one who can manipulate and compromise with the establishment for results that provide for the common good.
Same sex marriage is silly. I could care less from a religious standpoint because I loath religion. But when it comes to marriage laws regarding taxes and social security, I have a problem. Consensual union laws regarding hospital visitation rights, etc. make sense for any group of people be they straight, gay or just best friends.
Edited by Alien65, 29 January 2008 - 06:59 AM.
Ghostrider 29 Jan 2008
Then why not vote for Ron Paul?I'll put my vote with the brains.
I would actually, but at this point, I don't think he has much of a chance of winning, then again, I don't like the rationality of voting for the 2st or 3nd place pick because he/she has the best chance of winning...it's logical, but insincere. I think these elections should be decided by elimination. That's the only fair way to do it. At least for the primary, they could allow vote by Internet.
Ghostrider 29 Jan 2008
Btw, Hillary Clinton voted for the Iraq war and even voted to continue funding it. She even voted for the patriot act!
Not to mention that she also supports the death penalty, net neutrality, the No Child Left Behind program, and is against same sex marriages.
The only thing she cares about is party loyalties and lobbyists, much like the Republican Party.
The only good candidates (if you do your research) are:
1. Ron Paul
2. Mike Gravel
3. Barak Obama
If you do your research you will find Barack Obama also voted to continue funding the war.
Now Mike Gravel, I like.
No president will accomplish anything without working within the establishment. That means party, lobbyists and loyalists. The key to a good president is one who can manipulate and compromise with the establishment for results that provide for the common good.
Same sex marriage is silly. I could care less from a religious standpoint because I loath religion. But when it comes to marriage laws regarding taxes and social security, I have a problem. Consensual union laws regarding hospital visitation rights, etc. make sense for any group of people be they straight, gay or just best friends.
The main reason that I am against Hillary is because she is endorsed by labor unions...that can't be good.
I think the simplest way to solve the marriage problem is to remove all benefits for being married...just treat people as individuals like they should be treated. I have thought about trying to find a young women from a foreign country just beginning school in the US to marry "only legally". As in it would only be for mutual benefit, nothing long-term. We would basically live separately, probably rarely contact each other, but after marrying her, she would become a resident of the US which then opens up financial aid and much easier job placement after school (it's harder for companies to hire international students vs. resident). For me, since she would not be earning much money, I save on taxes by filing jointly. It could be a win-win.
Edited by Ghostrider, 29 January 2008 - 08:39 AM.
tamalak 31 Jan 2008
I'm going to be canvassing for him in Delaware on Monday/Tuesday. I've never given a damn about the primaries before.
technico 31 Jan 2008
Now that would be an interesting race.
I'd bet on Obama to win that one.
For the record - anybody who still thinks the President is really in charge hasn't been paying attention for the last seven years.
He's a figurehead who can guide certain things in a particular direction - but until they actually invoke EO 11051, his primary role is to make everybody feel safe enough to participate actively in the consumerist economy. After EO11051, well then, whomever heads FEMA is in charge. We don't vote for that person - but the president gets to pick him or her.
That is, if the current regime doesn't invoke EO 11051 prior to the elections...
DukeNukem 31 Jan 2008
s123 01 Feb 2008
Let’s not forget what Clinton once said: “We want to live forever, and we're getting there".
Hopefully Hillary has the same ideas as her husband.
david ellis 01 Feb 2008
I was wondering how much support Barack Obama has on the forum. He's getting a lot of support from young people, more than Hellery.
Obama is a black Lieberman without the experience. Google "Obama Lieberman" and see what I mean. Obama's health plan and social security reform are straight out of the republican playbook. If the republicans weren't so fussy about ideological purity Obama would be a republican. Give Obama time and he will probably end up in the republican party.