Obama '08?

FreeDuck wrote:

Miller wrote:
How long before we find out Obama has a SouthSide cutie ( in hiding), not his wife?

Who needs to find one out when you can just spread rumor and innuendo and get the same effect?

Say what

0 Replies

Miller

I believe that your contributions here really deserve a more thorough study. I shall immediately set to this task...

http://images.salon.com/mwt/feature/2008/03/12/poo/cover.jpg

0 Replies

Blatham
HA! Blatham, that was a gooder.

BBB Laughing

0 Replies

Miller wrote:

How long before we find out Obama has a SouthSide cutie ( in hiding), not his wife?

When yours, show up! Cool

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

maporsche wrote:
convince those pledged delegates to switch sides

You want delegates who were allocated on the basis of the popular vote to switch sides now?

Hillary does. And because I think she is the best candidate for president, I suppose I do as well.

Of course that is a possibility with the insane rules that the DNC has enacted. If they didn't want that to be possible either, they would have written the rules differently.

0 Replies

Last I read you were voting for Nader then McCain or anyone but a Democrat.

What'd McCain do to cause you to change your mind again?

0 Replies

Butrflynet wrote:

Last I read you were voting for Nader then McCain or anyone but a Democrat.

What'd McCain do to cause you to change your mind again?

Nader or McCain over Obama has always been my position.

In order, Clinton, Nader, McCain, Obama.

I have only changed my mind about Obama, Clinton has always remained at the top, and I added Nader when he announced.

I've also said that all of this is flexible because VP nominations haven't been decided yet. If Clinton is the VP for Obama for example, I will vote for Obama in the general.

0 Replies

This is probably old news, but it's worth repeating.

Clinton supporter defends Obama race remarks
By Donna Smith
Wed Mar 12, 10:26 AM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The only woman ever to be on a major party's U.S. presidential ticket on Wednesday stood by her comment that Sen. Barack Obama is ahead in the Democratic race for the White House because he is black.

Geraldine Ferraro, a Democrat who ran for vice president in 1984, said his campaign's reaction had backfired and divided the party. Ferraro is supporting Obama's Democratic rival, U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton, for the November election.

"My comments have been taken so out of context and have been spun by the Obama campaign as racist that it's doing precisely what they don't want done -- it's going to the Democratic Party and dividing us even more," Ferraro told ABC's "Good Morning America" in an interview.

She ignited a flap by telling a California newspaper that "if Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position."

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The only woman ever to be on a major party's U.S. presidential ticket on Wednesday stood by her comment that Sen. Barack Obama is ahead in the Democratic race for the White House because he is black.

And she's absolutely right!
Very Happy

0 Replies

Then why wasn't Jesse Jackson ahead in the race when he ran? Answer; because Obama has a lot to offer to people of all races; creeds and gender which is why a lot of white people are voting for him too when they didn't vote for Jesse Jackson.

The kind of campaign Hillary is running has been shameful and disappointing; that we are even speaking in this vein in the democratic race among fellow democrats is just a let down and it is Hillary and her compaign's fault.

0 Replies

revel wrote:

Then why wasn't Jesse Jackson ahead in the race when he ran? Answer; because Obama has a lot to offer to people of all races; creeds and gender which is why a lot of white people are voting for him too when they didn't vote for Jesse Jackson.

The kind of campaign Hillary is running has been shameful and disappointing; that we are even speaking in this vein in the democratic race among fellow democrats is just a let down and it is Hillary and her compaign's fault.

amen to that! Hillary's method of campaigning has revealed her true colors; she only wants the power. Her so-called "experience" has no meaning if she can't articulate how her "experience" can transfer to the commander in chief. She still hasn't answered the phone.

0 Replies

One has "people" to do things like that c.i.

0 Replies

Quote:

How long before we find out Obama has a SouthSide cutie ( in hiding), not his wife?

He couldn't possibly risk that. Talk about a hostage to fortune. No chance.

Any half way grown up Pharoe or Ceasar is another matter.

We are Christians aren't we Bernie?

0 Replies

In a report I saw by Chris Harris Miss. has 33 delegates allocated by proportion. Penn has 158.

And yet the Sunday Times has Miss. with 40 delegates and Penn with 188.

Mr Harris gives the latest position after Miss. I presume, as 1610 to BO and 1481 to the beautiful and fragrant heroine. Which means the allocation from Miss. was 40 and were divided 29 to 21 because before Miss the position was 1581 to 1460 in favour of BO.

If the Lady wins Penn and gets all the delgates the figures will read, if we assume the ST is correct, 1648 to 1581 in favour of the gutsy broad and the heat's turned up.

To come after that are Guam, Ind. NCal. WVirgin. Ken. Ore. Puerto Rico. Mon. S Dak and then the BIG ONE Aug 25-28 in Denver.

The superdelegates have it. Back to the smoke-filled rooms but without the smoke so they won't be thinking straight.

Latest UK Betting-

Quote:

Barack Obama 6/5
John Mc Cain 6/4
Hillary Clinton 3/1
Al Gore 50/1
Wayne Root 100/1
Ralph Nader 500/1

So Mr Gore must still be in with a squeak.

0 Replies

Ferraro leaves Clinton campaign post

About time

0 Replies

Roxxxanne wrote:

If Hillary were to continue the tenor of the last debate, the Dems would have a definite advantage in staying in the limelight. Of course, Hillary pulled out the kitchen sink and this has hurt both candidates. So it's not the fact that Dems are playing out the process it is how the game is played.

Mississippi just closed, advantage Obama but too close to call.

And if Obama had wings...

0 Replies

Obama doesn't have wings, but Hillary just added about ten pounds of weight on her own campaign. She isn't sunk yet, but she's doing everything to make sure she does drown.

0 Replies

maporsche wrote:

Roxxxanne wrote:
So it's not the fact that Dems are playing out the process it is how the game is played.

SHUT UP!....you've been clammoring on and on and on and on and on and on about how Clinton needs to drop out of the race...how it's over and you don't understand why she's staying.....now your saying that it's OK that she stays, but only if she's nice.

Give me a break, you're giving all left leaning people on this board a bad name.

Too late.

0 Replies

maporsche wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
Clinton has to win 64% in every remaining state to catch Obama.

OR....convince those pledged delegates to switch sides......OR.....convince those super delegates to switch sides........OR......stay in and see if Obama screws something up somehow.......OR.......run as a 3rd party........OR...any myrad of other possiblities.

Of course you're right, so do yourself a favor and stop reacting to the "Huntley/Brinkley" updates of Cyclo and Roxy.

Every time Obama wins a primary they are going to trumpet the result, as if it is material (of course if he wins PA, that will be material).

This race is not going to be decided, at least, until the FL and MI delegates are resolved (Remember our bet Cyclo), and probably not until the convention.

The Audacity of Hope!

It's for you Clinton supporters too.

0 Replies

maporsche wrote:

nimh wrote:
maporsche wrote:
convince those pledged delegates to switch sides

You want delegates who were allocated on the basis of the popular vote to switch sides now?

Hillary does. And because I think she is the best candidate for president, I suppose I do as well.

Why? Why not have an opinion of your own about it?

maporsche wrote:

Of course that is a possibility with the insane rules that the DNC has enacted. If they didn't want that to be possible either, they would have written the rules differently.

So everything that's legal, is good? As long as it's legal, there's nothing to worry about or disagree with?

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know