Please Answer This Question Obama Supporters

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

I don't have any faith that he can successfully implement real change and I certainly don't think I'm any smarter than he.

Did you have faith that any candidate that ran this year could implement real change?

0 Replies

yes....hillary.

0 Replies

But how could that be? You just said that the way a person runs his/her campaign is a great indicator of how they will be as president. In her campaign, she was disorganized, overconfident, used all the same tricks that Obama has, along with some even more questionable ones, and in the end, Obama bested her at all of it.

Which part of that makes you believe she'd be better at implementing change?

0 Replies

Woah, with the logic!

It's not a logical position. It's an emotional one.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

yes....hillary.

I'm sorry that didn't work out for you. (Sincerely, without sarcasm.) But now you have a decision to make, the one you asked in several other posts: What are you going to do with your vote now that Clinton is out of the running? You are not equal opportunity sniping here. In the last month, you've been slamming one candidate while letting the other pass. It sure doesn't look like you dislike both candidates. Is that your symbolic vote (regardless of how you cast the real one)? Senator Clinton put aside her disappointment to endorse the candidate she feels will help her see her agenda to completion, who will help her achieve real change from her position in the Senate. Is McCain going to help her achieve real change?

0 Replies

she and obama were 95% in agreement on policy. Hillary is at her best when dealing with issues and knows her way around the system better.
She is a bigger shark. She also ran not only against Obama but everyone else including the press and media and still damn near did it.
Obama has not proven to me he's tough or he can withstand years and years of piling on.

Is she moral and forthright. No, and i don't care. i just want the person who will run my country the best in charge.

0 Replies

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

i just want the person who will run my country the best in charge.

And you thought that person was Hillary based on... certainly not the way she ran her campaign. So what was it then? Her Senate record? Debate performance? Age?

0 Replies

jeez freedeuck you'r4e asking me to restate my reasons... I just answered your question in my statement above...

0 Replies

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

jeez freedeuck you'r4e asking me to restate my reasons... I just answered your question in my statement above...

Weeell....

But you just said that you didn't care whether she was moral and forthright. And given her failed attempt at working out a universal health care plan while Bill was in office, past failure or success also isn't the only criteria.

So, on the pro-side for Hillary, you have:

- she knows her way around the system
- she is a bigger shark
- she fights for what she believes is right, against all odds

That sounds a bit like what you want is a Democratic Dick Cheney.

0 Replies

I can't deny that that part of Hillary's message - "They fight dirty, and you've seen where that ends - so we have to stand up and fight back" - is entirely attractive, on an emotional level.

After all, the right was not particularly whimsical in pushing its agenda through, come hell or high water. Literally.

A certain desire to "pay them back" - yeah. I can see that.

0 Replies

"she is a bigger shark" is the only reason I saw there. I'm asking why you think that. What did she do or say to make you believe that she can run the country better?

0 Replies

Hillary is no longer an option. The choice is Obama or McCain. Let's be perfectly clear. Attacking one of these two candidates is helping the other.

The so-called PUMAS ("Party unity my ass") really piss me off. Why they are doing it doesn't matter... the fact is they are helping McCain get elected.

Helping a pro-life candidate who will prolong the Iraq war, appoint conservative judges (presenting a real risk to Roe v. Wade), oppose universal health care and make tax cuts that benefit the rich is unconscionable.

These are standard Republican tactics... relying on fear, vague innuendo and slime to hurt the Democratic candidate. They are to be expected from conservatives.

That "former Hillary supporters" (who allegedly oppose the war, want universal health care and care about womans rights) are joining in the slime hurling, helping McCain get elected; this is pure idiocy.

Fortunately this is, by all accounts, a small lunatic fringe. But, it is still maddening.

0 Replies

LGM has it perfectly right on this one.

http://lefarkins.blogspot.com/2008/06/you-are-sucker.html

Quote:

Of course, alleged "progressives" with an apparent preference order of Clinton > McCain > Obama are idiots by definition, so this isn't surprising.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

the smarmy insulting remark train....right on time.... being driven by Ms. Cyclo....

0 Replies

ebrown_p wrote:

Hillary is no longer an option. The choice is Obama or McCain. Let's be perfectly clear. Attacking one of these two candidates is helping the other.

"You are either for us or against us". I would have said this kind of thinking needs a change. Change we can believe in.

0 Replies

Experience which was trumped by change but no Experience to speak of. But of course he can ask for help from all the D.C. politicians who will be more than happy to do away their financial play house.

0 Replies

Insert "with" after away and before their. Sorry!

0 Replies

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

i just want the person who will run my country the best in charge.

And of the two remaining, that is....?

If you hate both equally, by all means slam both equally. Go get them! I could understand your attacks on Obama a little more if you went after McCain with equal vitriol. Someone who delights in stirring the pot should enjoy such a target rich environment.

0 Replies

Well, you aren't really interested in advancing progressive policies, if you don't support the most progressive candidate. So it's fair to say that those who place their loyalties in the wrong order have some serious confusion about their identities.

Btw, those two ladies who were discriminated against?

Quote:

They released a statement about it to The New York Times:

At the rally for Senator Obama in Detroit on Monday, June 16, two volunteers denied us seating behind the stage the Senator would soon take. The volunteers informed us that we were not allowed to sit in that area due to the hijab, the headscarf that each of us was wearing.

This incident was unfortunate and extremely disappointing. Senator Obama has called us each to personally convey his deepest apologies and acknowledge that this was inexcusable. We both immensely appreciate the Senator's phone call and his commitment to remedy this issue. We commend him for displaying qualities befitting an effective President. We acknowledge that this injustice has been taken seriously and that Senator Obama does not tolerate discrimination against Arabs, Muslims or any community. We are assured that he and his staff are committed to upholding the principles of justice for all peoples and bringing about change we can believe in. The infringement on our rights occurred and has been addressed; now we are ready to move forward. We will continue to support Senator Obama in his campaign and wish him the best as the race continues.

Regards,
Shimaa Abdelfadeel
Hebba Aref

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Well, you aren't really interested in advancing progressive policies,

Then why didn't you support Kucinic?

0 Replies

Please Answer This Question Obama Supporters

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know