cyphercat
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Mar, 2006 01:17 pm
Mostly just a bookmark, but with a quick comment:

Seems to me the Dems don't have a whole lot of a shot with most of the potential candidates being offered. I think the biggest chance they have is to go with someone who is just attention-getting and surprising and who might get people a bit excited.

The excitement factor has a chance of overcoming the inexperience factor; and if Hillary is the main other choice- well, I think they're sunk anyway.
0 Replies
 
Green Witch
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Mar, 2006 01:17 pm
Lash wrote:

I understand greenwitch's comments. One says the country won't consider race as an issue in a vote, but that our society, including blacks, prefer lighter skin. They also prefer women that wear a size 1.
~~~~~~~~~~~


Yes, I think if Obama's wife was a size 26 she would be liability for him (true of a white candidate too).
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Mar, 2006 01:19 pm
Green Witch wrote:
snood wrote:
Green Witch wrote:
(I had a feeling I was going to hit a hot button)

Snood - I think it's obvious that our society is more accepting of light skin. I'm not saying it's right, it just is. Look at Hollywood, the black actresses all tend to be mocha. There isn't a bigot in American that would turn down a date with Halle Berry or Jessica Alba. Even in black society I've noticed there is this idea that lighter skin is more attractive. My very dark Nigerian girlfriend in college would point out light skinned black women and admire their skin color. She would tell me I was crazy to get a tan in the summer, not for health reasons but "because you will ruin your light complexion". I've seen studies that show the darker the skin the more likely you will be convicted of a crime - even if the jury is mostly black. Beauty is cultural, western culture likes things on the pale side.

Yep - pity, isn't it?


Yes, it's a pity we judge people by how they look, but the whole world does it.

By saying we are over the color thing, I meant that 20 years ago there was no way in hell that a black man would be seriously considered as a presidential candidate. A black candidate would be ignored as a novelty. Today I think the prospect is very real and the idea is taken seriously by the majority of Americans.


I agree the majority of Americans would say they take it seriously.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Mar, 2006 01:20 pm
Absolutely. She's gorgeous, though GW.

But, domineering. She embarrasses him in interviews that I've seen. He handles it very gracefully, but it's distracting to me.

Have you ever noticed that?

She's NO TERESA KERRY, though!!! LOL!!! Yikes!!
0 Replies
 
Green Witch
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Mar, 2006 01:22 pm
Lash wrote:
Absolutely. She's gorgeous, though GW.

But, domineering. She embarrasses him in interviews that I've seen. He handles it very gracefully, but it's distracting to me.

Have you ever noticed that?

She's NO TERESA KERRY, though!!! LOL!!! Yikes!!


That means will soon be getting Mrs. Obama cookie recipes forced upon us. Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Mar, 2006 01:22 pm
Here's a rundown of where he stands on various issues (as of 2004, anyway...)

http://www.issues2000.org/Senate/Barack_Obama.htm

-sigh- Good stuff -sigh-
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Mar, 2006 01:23 pm
Lash wrote:
Absolutely. She's gorgeous, though GW.

But, domineering. She embarrasses him in interviews that I've seen. He handles it very gracefully, but it's distracting to me.

Have you ever noticed that?

She's NO TERESA KERRY, though!!! LOL!!! Yikes!!


Care to share something she said that was embarrassing? I've not cought those interviews.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Mar, 2006 01:24 pm
I agree about excitement, cyphercat. One thing I typed in my previous post and deleted was that I think people WANT to be idealistic, and would enjoy having the opportunity. This would say so many good things about America if he were elected!

But I knew nimh would jump on me for being overoptimistic and it wasn't really defensible. ;-) Blame the sunny springy weather, it makes me more hopeful than usual...
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Mar, 2006 01:26 pm
Well, if I'd had some effin' sunny springy weather here already i'd be idealistic too! Dammit..
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Mar, 2006 01:29 pm
snood wrote:
Lash wrote:
Absolutely. She's gorgeous, though GW.

But, domineering. She embarrasses him in interviews that I've seen. He handles it very gracefully, but it's distracting to me.

Have you ever noticed that?

She's NO TERESA KERRY, though!!! LOL!!! Yikes!!


Care to share something she said that was embarrassing? I've not cought those interviews.

It's not what she says so much, it's how superior she acts toward him. She's condescending and belittling toward him. It's not overt, but it is there.

I would like to give you something more concrete. As soon as I see it again, or remember a specific example, I'll bring it here.

GW---Obama cookies...brilliant!! Laughing
0 Replies
 
Anon-Voter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Mar, 2006 01:29 pm
Maybe the best thing about Obama is lack of track record. It gives the GOP less to tear apart. I don't think they can't make the drug thing stick ... after all ... they worship a drunk cokehead.

Anon
0 Replies
 
Green Witch
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Mar, 2006 01:30 pm
A Gore & Obama team would be fine with me. I recently heard a speech by Gore on NPR and apparently his balls have grown back - it was a great speech.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Mar, 2006 01:30 pm
sozobe wrote:
I agree about excitement, cyphercat. One thing I typed in my previous post and deleted was that I think people WANT to be idealistic, and would enjoy having the opportunity. This would say so many good things about America if he were elected!

But I knew nimh would jump on me for being overoptimistic and it wasn't really defensible. ;-) Blame the sunny springy weather, it makes me more hopeful than usual...


Where are you, Sozobe (part of country, that is)? I ask because maybe the perception about what is, and is not possible in American politics is different in different regions.
0 Replies
 
Anon-Voter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Mar, 2006 01:31 pm
Green Witch wrote:
A Gore & Obama team would be fine with me. I recently heard a speech by Gore on NPR and apparently his balls have grown back - it was a great speech.


Gore would have a tough time getting my vote again.

Anon
0 Replies
 
Dartagnan
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Mar, 2006 01:31 pm
OK, I'll bite:

What is Obama's drug history? (I apologize if this is cited above.)

I'm guessing it's toking while in college or some such. If so, it won't be a BFD...
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Mar, 2006 01:32 pm
What do you mean by "stick"?

He's admitted it, in his book, which could go either way.
0 Replies
 
Anon-Voter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Mar, 2006 01:34 pm
sozobe wrote:
What do you mean by "stick"?

He's admitted it, in his book, which could go either way.


Wrong word ... make it a real issue. I don't think they can make that big of a deal out of it.

Anon
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Mar, 2006 01:34 pm
He's admitted to pot and coke. I think with coke it was that he tried it and didn't like it. He's said about all of it that it was over by the time he was 20.

I'll see what I can find.

Snood, I'm in Columbus, Ohio. Recently moved from Chicago, so was there when Obama was campaigning.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Mar, 2006 01:35 pm
Al Gore?! I should friggin' hope not.

Plus, he's polling negatives that outshadow Kerry's and make Hillary look like everyone's favourite granma.

On that count, one of the problems with Kerry IMO was that, well, basically people thought he was unsympathetic from the start -- and the Democrats, or those that supported Kerry anyway (not that I'm specifically talking about you, Sozobe Twisted Evil ), made the mistake of thinking, well, but he isnt really that bad, so its just a question of getting the true picture out, and once the efffort is made of showing who he really is, people will come around!

Problem with that is that, in a high-tension, high-pressure competitive race, you simply cant afford to first have to spend precious energy on getting people to the point where they're willing to come to first base like that, to where they'll actually be prepared to listen to what the man is saying in the first place. Thats much of my problem with Hillary too.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Mar, 2006 01:36 pm
D'artagnan wrote:
I don't think the GOP is anti-poor, but I do think the party is selling poor people a bill of goods. As in, "These policies (e.g. tax cuts that benefit the well off) will help you when you have more money."

The American Dream is to have more. I think people buy into a fantasy rather than a realistic approach to a better life...


I think this is well-stated, however, i also think that with notable exceptions such as Theodore Roosevelt, Jr., Republicans became, shortly after the civil war, the party of capitalists. In Lincoln's first term, they were the radicals, the wild-eyed ravers who frightened everyone politically. Lincoln took most of his first term to get them under control, and success by Democrats in the mid-terms sobered Republican party leaders. Lincoln had to work very hard to get re-elected, and the Republicans had a long way to go to begin to appear to be a mainstream party.

But the Grant administration, and the economic boom of the post-war period, when immigrants flooded into the country gave the Republicans the opportunity to set themselves up locally with monied men. This was the era of the great political machines, and the Democratic Party was successfully appealing to immigrants and the disaffected whites of the South, while the Black Republicans of the South were being run out of office, and the South was being lost to Republicans. It was pretty natural for Republicans to become more and more conservative, and to appeal more and more to capitalists, while the Democratic Party went down the long, twisting and bizarre road of attempting (and surprisingly succeeding at) appealing to conservative Southern white racists and rural and urban white radicals in farming and trades unions.

The phenomenon of the "Reagan Democrats," when the Republicans made their first inroads in the South in the history of the party was the signal for Republicans to develop a propaganda of being a party of broad-based appeal. I frankly don't believe that the power brokers in the Republican Party ever gave a rat's ass about the working class, but i do think they finally wised up and saw that they needed to and could appeal to "the little guy."

I heartily agree that they are selling the middle and the working classes a bill of goods.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

So....Will Biden Be VP? - Question by blueveinedthrobber
My view on Obama - Discussion by McGentrix
Obama/ Love Him or Hate Him, We've Got Him - Discussion by Phoenix32890
Obama fumbles at Faith Forum - Discussion by slkshock7
Expert: Obama is not the antichrist - Discussion by joefromchicago
Obama's State of the Union - Discussion by maxdancona
Demand a plan - Discussion by H2O MAN
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Obama '08?
  3. » Page 3
Copyright © 2018 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.12 seconds on 09/20/2018 at 02:54:03