Tysyacha Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 Now that Hillary Clinton's out... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pho3nix Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 I'm rooting for Obama. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arcesious Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 I'm tempted to vote for Yoda, but, in all seriousness, I'd vote for Barrack Obama if I was old enough... Come 2012 I'll finally be able to vote. All I can do is contribute some discussion about it, and participate in some polls on CNN and such... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Litofsky Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 I agree. If Barack Obama chooses Hillary, he's going to have a tough time losing. If he doesn't, he'll be hard-pressed to win. Anyways, I voted for Barack Obama. I,truthfully, don't want McSame McCain in the White House. Perhaps Obama will bring a new attitude to the White House, other than lust for power (however, I've yet to see that happen). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corinthian Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 I hope McCain wins. Unfortunately, I suspect Obama will win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HodgePodge Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 Honestly, both candidates scare me to death. McCain wants to destroy Net Neutrality, and Obama wants to federalize the oil companies. However, I suspect that Obama will win because he'll get the uninformed vote (not that people that vote for Obama are uninformed, but people that are uninformed will probably vote for Obama.) Ask 5 Obama supporters on the street why they support him, and you'll get at least one answer saying either, "Because he's black" or "Because he's charismatic." Neither of these are really valid reasons to vote for someone, but that doesn't seem to stop people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Web Rider Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 Being totally undemocratic-party for a change, I'm all for solidarity and will be voting for Obama, even though I would have preferred Hillary, low as she really ranks on my preferences for presidents. Knowing the Democrats, Obama will pick the wrong person, and the Democrat supporters of Hillary will refuse to vote for him, and the Democratic party will shoot themselves in the foot...AGAIN. Well...at least they're keeping to their strengths. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miltiades Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 Whoever I'd vote for (probably neither if I was American), I think Obama will win, and I do prefer him to McCain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Litofsky Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 Being totally undemocratic-party for a change, I'm all for solidarity and will be voting for Obama, even though I would have preferred Hillary, low as she really ranks on my preferences for presidents. Knowing the Democrats, Obama will pick the wrong person, and the Democrat supporters of Hillary will refuse to vote for him, and the Democratic party will shoot themselves in the foot...AGAIN. Well...at least they're keeping to their strengths. I agree. However, I think that this race is about "The Lesser of Two Evils." Both of the Nominee's have some views that scare me, though I think that similar events will happen if either is elected. They'll just be disguised under different names. Of course, that's my pessimistic side, and I'd like to be optimistic for a change: I hope that Obama chooses Hillary. I wanted her in the first place, if only for the reason that she seems like a very... cunning person. She seems to know how to handle herself, and that is an asset in the White House. Of course, she had to go and ruin it by doing a bunch of terrible things *Cough* Sniper-fire in Serbia. *Cough* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mimartin Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 Honestly, both candidates scare me to death. McCain wants to destroy Net Neutrality, and Obama wants to federalize the oil companies. However, I suspect that Obama will win because he'll get the uninformed vote (not that people that vote for Obama are uninformed, but people that are uninformed will probably vote for Obama.) Ask 5 Obama supporters on the street why they support him, and you'll get at least one answer saying either, "Because he's black" or "Because he's charismatic." Neither of these are really valid reasons to vote for someone, but that doesn't seem to stop people.Yea ok. Could the 5 Obama supporters also be revolting from their uninformed decision to put the last guy in office, twice? Most uninformed voters I know are not supporting Obama and when asked the reason they say, “Because he is a Muslim.” I’ll be voting for Obama, at the beginning of the process I was a Clinton supporter mainly because I thought the country and me personally prospered under her husbands leadership. I liked McSame before the campaign and his transformation into a Bush clone. I’ve had enough of that over the last 8 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Achilles Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 ^^^^ Agreed. Most people that I've spoken with that don't like Obama either can't come up with a good reason for disliking him or have bought into some strawman about him that they picked up from some talking head. Both of which, I suppose, could do a pretty good job of not sounding like "I don't like him because he's black" if the person making the statement tries hard enough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tysyacha Posted June 7, 2008 Author Share Posted June 7, 2008 I think federalizing (nationalizing) the oil companies is a colossally bad idea. I also think continuing the war in Iraq, and POSSIBLY beginning one with Iran, is a colossally bad idea. So, which way do I turn? I'm rooting for Obama, although I honestly wonder how he plans to put his ideas into place during his term as President if elected. As for McSame...he scares me. Doesn't he realize that the War on Terror will never end? Even if we wipe out every single terrorist in Iraq, there will still be terrorists in Iran, North Korea, Syria, Russia, Britain, Spain, and even here in the United States. Perhaps he knows the scope of the War on Terror all too well, and will not be satisfied until the whole world is at war again, "fighting terror" on one hand while inspiring it on the other. I'm keeping my fingers crossed and my chin up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arcesious Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 ^ Agreed. Some change is better than no change at all. That's one of many reasons why I'm not voting for Mccain. Or is it, McSame? Simply put, Obama and Clinton aren't all that great, but they will bring change that will be for the better. The crowds they speak to are too gullible. The democrats, if they win, will improve the country's economy somewhat, but it won't be as great as the people in these cheering crowds assume. We're still going to be stuck with a lot of big problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MdKnightR Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 You didn't include everyone who's still in the race in your poll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corinthian Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 When has any Non-Party affiliated candidate ever won an election? Oh, that's right. Never. And Hell hasn't frozen over yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Achilles Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 I think federalizing (nationalizing) the oil companies is a colossally bad idea. If it helps with your decision, Obama has not suggested that we nationalize the oil companies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Totenkopf Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 Frankly, Obama is not qualified to be president based on any of his accomplishments, though he obviously meets the minimum requirements to run for it. Unfortunately for Republicans, McCain is a bad choice as well. Right now, with four months to go, there is still sufficient time for either candidacy to implode or be torpedoed. It will be somewhat interesting to see who their running mates will end up being. It was Maxine Waters (D, CA)that was calling for nationalizing (or at least said she'd favor that approach) "big oil". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUaY3LhJ-IQ She's such a blithering idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mimartin Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 Frankly, Obama is not qualified to be president based on any of his accomplishments, though he obviously meets the minimum requirements to run for it. What makes Obama under qualified? The D next to his name? Was President Bush more or less qualified than Obama 8 years ago? Don't worry I will answer that one. Less, a lot less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Totenkopf Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 On what do you base your assessment of Obama's apparent (to you, anyway) qualifications? His being a Democrat? Not being Bush? Being a mixed race candiddate? Just curious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MdKnightR Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 When has any Non-Party affiliated candidate ever won an election? Oh, that's right. Never. And Hell hasn't frozen over yet. If that was directed at me, you need to do some research. Ron Paul is affiliated with the Republican party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Totenkopf Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 While he is affiliated with the Rep party, he'd clearly have to run as an independent candidate for the Nov election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mimartin Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 On what do you base your assessment of Obama's apparent (to you, anyway) qualifications? His being a Democrat? Not being Bush? Being a mixed race candiddate? Just curious. George Bush only public service experience before entering the White House was being the Governor of Texas. The Governor of Texas has no real power. The Lieutenant Governor of Texas holds the true power in state government. The governor is more of a cheerleader, yelling on to get the bills his party is endorsing passed. The governor does have the power to pardon or stop executions, but since Bush did neither during his time in office, abiding by the decisions of the board of pardons, I do not consider that experience. I will admit he was a very good cheerleader, he got the Democrats and the Republicans to work together and got the bills the special interest (insurance companies) wanted passed (too bad he did not use that skill once he got to Washington). Bush spent 6 years as Texas Governor, but really it was 5 since the last year he was running for president. Obama was elected to the Illinois Senate in 1996 and then elected to the U.S. Senate in 2004 and took office January of 2005. Again, I would subtract one year for the Presidential election. Therefore, Obama has 10-year experience in government to Bush’s 5-years experience. Obama has experience both at the federal and state level. Bush only had state level experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corinthian Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 Geez, Mdknight, do you think I'm a complete idiot? I KNOW Paul is in the Party, but the fact remains that it doesn't matter any more so than the fact that Teddy Roosevelt was in the party - The Republicans aren't going to give Paul his own special ticket, not unless someone recently gave them a cranial drill intrusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Totenkopf Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 And if Obama wants to run for the legislature, you might have a point. Since I wasn't comparing him to Bush (we both agree that we wasted our votes on him, 2x--though the alternatives we're still worse IMNSHO), Bush's experience (or lack thereof) isn't particularly relevant here. Oddly enough, the big three contenders till this past were all senators. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mimartin Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 Was President Bush more or less qualified than Obama 8 years ago? Don't worry I will answer that one. Less, a lot less. On what do you base your assessment of Obama's apparent (to you, anyway) qualifications? His being a Democrat? Not being Bush? Being a mixed race candiddate? Just curious. Since I wasn't comparing him to Bush (we both agree that we wasted our votes on him, 2x--though the alternatives we're still worse IMNSHO), Bush's experience (or lack thereof) isn't particularly relevant here. You asked for my assessment of Obama's apparent qualification and I was comparing him to Bush. I just don't understand why experience is an issue now when they were not an issue in 2000 when Bush was running. Back then people wanted someone from outside the beltway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.