1
   

Which Will Hurt Obama The Most

 
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Dec, 2006 07:56 pm
Bravo, nimh
0 Replies
 
LoneStarMadam
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Dec, 2006 07:56 pm
OCCOM BILL wrote:
Haven't you heard, Nimh? I'm a liberal too! Cool

Zippo wrote:
There is nothing wrong with criticizing people names/religions. Especially if they have a chance of becoming America's future president. LoneStarMadam is completely faultless. However, what i would really like to know is, why people don't do the same with Jewish names in powerful government positions ?

Double Standards ?
Dennis Miller commented that Joe Lieberman's campaign wasn't gaining much steam because people kept mispronouncing his name "Jew Jewberman". Why would you want to see more ridicule of Jewish names in powerful government postions anyway?

sozobe wrote:
Laughing

Gosh, this is shading into the surreal.

Your topic title is which one will hurt him MOST. Inherent in that -- they'll all hurt him, to varying degrees. Inherent in that -- as factors that will hurt him to varying degrees, they're all negative.
Gotta disagree with you there, Soz. Too many threads like this, and superficial crap like this in general may very well force me to throw my vote Obama's way... just out of a sense of fair play (Outside of Giuliani or McCain, at this juncture, he's probably going to get it anyway.).

I can only aspire not to vote the way you do, your sound judgement leaves some to be desired.
Now don't get all piqued, that was a pat on the back. I'm sure you remember that, right?
0 Replies
 
LoneStarMadam
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Dec, 2006 08:01 pm
nimh wrote:
LoneStarMadam wrote:
nimh I said at least some liberals, you decide which camp you're in, I just read & watch & decide who I think is holier than thou.

Oh, I'm more than a liberal - I'm a leftist.

But in those two posts, you sure seemed to automatically classify Phoenix as a liberal - which was rather silly, considering her political views and voting record.

The issue in the background here, of course, is that your definition of liberal appears to be, "anyone who criticizes me". O'Bill, Phoenix - all you need is a sign or two that someone doesnt go along with your talk radio-style political bashing games and - presto - they must be liberals.

Typical, really. If you're not with us, you're against us. If you dont support the Bush line on Iraq, you're supporting the terrorists. "Which camp are you in?", indeed - in your world, there's just "ours" and "theirs".

This mindset, of course, is exactly what had you guys lose the elections; it ended up the perfect way to repell independent voters who'd still gone Bush in 00 or 04 - like Phoenix and O'Bill, for example.

As a leftwinger I'd say, keep up the good work. Get your Brownback, Hunter, Rice or Romney nominated in '08, and end up a bitter minority.

You seemed, at least that's an improvement.
You'de be wrong in your summation of what I consider a liberal, I certainly don't judge them on what they agree with me on or not on, I sincerely hope they don't agree with anything popitically with me because I would change my stance in a tic toc. I deplore socialism, not socialists before anybody gets their panties in a wad, but socialism, it's just so anti democratic/capatalistic.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Dec, 2006 08:03 pm
Whoa... socialism ain't capitalism. Slow down, LSW, it's just too frikkin cerebral.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Dec, 2006 08:16 pm
LoneStarMadam wrote:
You seemed, at least that's an improvement.

An improvement on what? Yes, I've looked back to my original post. So, an improvement on what?

LoneStarMadam wrote:
I deplore socialism, [..] it's just so anti democratic/capatalistic.

Well, thats half right.
0 Replies
 
LoneStarMadam
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Dec, 2006 08:16 pm
snood wrote:
Whoa... socialism ain't capitalism. Slow down, LSW, it's just too frikkin cerebral.

Where'd you get your first clue that socialisn ain't capitalism?
I never said it was, i said socialism is so anti democracy/capatalic. The key word being anti, genius.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Dec, 2006 08:18 pm
book f*cking mark the above post

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Dec, 2006 08:18 pm
LoneStarMadam wrote:
OCCOM BILL wrote:
Too many threads like this, and superficial crap like this in general may very well force me to throw my vote Obama's way... just out of a sense of fair play (Outside of Giuliani or McCain, at this juncture, he's probably going to get it anyway.).

I can only aspire not to vote the way you do, your sound judgement leaves some to be desired.

Well, you did vote the same way as him, in the 2000 and 2004 presidentials. Does that come as a surprise?
0 Replies
 
LoneStarMadam
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Dec, 2006 08:20 pm
nimh wrote:
LoneStarMadam wrote:
OCCOM BILL wrote:
Too many threads like this, and superficial crap like this in general may very well force me to throw my vote Obama's way... just out of a sense of fair play (Outside of Giuliani or McCain, at this juncture, he's probably going to get it anyway.).

I can only aspire not to vote the way you do, your sound judgement leaves some to be desired.

Well, you did vote the same way as him, in the 2000 and 2004 presidentials. Does that come as a surprise?

So what? We all learn as we go along, or some of us do.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Dec, 2006 08:37 pm
He obviously did, yes.

But if you cant even win over the likes of him or Phoenix in the next elections, you can forget about winning.
0 Replies
 
LoneStarMadam
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Dec, 2006 09:00 pm
nimh wrote:
He obviously did, yes.

But if you cant even win over the likes of him or Phoenix in the next elections, you can forget about winning.

What are you talking about? i have yet to say who I'd vote for in the next election & nobody knows who will get the nominations yet.
A clue here for you, i would not want to vote for anybody that OCCOM would vote for, he hasn't shown very good judgement here. As for Phoenix, sometimes I agree with her/him, sometimes I don't. I don't always agree with people I love, I sure as hell won't always agree with somebody i don't know.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Dec, 2006 03:50 am
Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing
Catching up was definitely a 5-Laughing on a scale of 5. LSM: you really must find a way to define sarcasm and sattire. Laughing

Phoenix and I have definitely been leaning right lately, but if memory serves; I voted for Nader in 2000 because the party fools both struck me as idiots of the same cloth... I honestly couldn't tell the difference… and I think Phoenix actually voted for Gore. Shocked 2004, we were both reluctant Bush votes... but I suspect that's mostly because in the post 911 world neither of us could bring ourselves to vote for a weathervane. In an evil world; the evil you know is better than the evil you couldn't possibly know.

Word to the wise (Democrats): Hillary is the exact same candidacy as John Kerry, with more baggage, and she's even less likeable (Shocked, really). And don't forget the republican's couldn't find a bigger moron than Bush if they tried. Idea Hillary, Kerry, Edwards, etc.= no shot. Obama, the General and possibly Biden (though I seriously doubt Biden)= shot. This is assuming the GOP misses the writing on the wall and fails to nominate Giuliani or McCain. Either of them, in all likelihood, smoke any and all democratic comers (accept, maybe, Obama). Please don't back Hillary... because I don't want to vote for another Republican Hardliner... and you damn sure don't want her to lose to one. Choose Obama... and force the Republicans to at least nominate a moderate... or lose, eh?
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Dec, 2006 06:41 am
Quote:
Please don't back Hillary... because I don't want to vote for another Republican Hardliner... and you damn sure don't want her to lose to one. Choose Obama... and force the Republicans to at least nominate a moderate... or lose, eh?


"Traditional wisdom", we might call this. But it seems to me that the thinking here doesn't take into account what happened in the last election.

There has been a large and significant shift in the electorate away from the Republicans. More specifically, away from the extremism of the Bush administration and its allies. As nimh and others (and the polling referred to) suggest, this is no small thing that has happened within the political center.

Given that, I really think you guys ought to reconsider how Hillary might look in this new situation.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Dec, 2006 06:52 am
dagmaraka wrote:
what does his name have to do with anything? he is a christian (though i don't care what religion anyone is), born and raised in the u.s. of a. and anyone with 2 brain cells will not judge anyone else just by his name. he didn't choose it for himself. shrug, who really cares.

Two brain cells? What kind of hyper-elitist standard is this? You European intellectuals from Harvard are so predictable.
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Dec, 2006 07:10 am
Bill wrote:
Phoenix and I have definitely been leaning right lately, but if memory serves; I voted for Nader in 2000 because the party fools both struck me as idiots of the same cloth... I honestly couldn't tell the difference… and I think Phoenix actually voted for Gore. Shocked 2004, we were both reluctant Bush votes... but I suspect that's mostly because in the post 911 world neither of us could bring ourselves to vote for a weathervane. In an evil world; the evil you know is better than the evil you couldn't possibly know.


You have got that right Bill.................I voted for Gore in 2000, 'cause I thought that Bush was a schmuck. I voted for Bush in 2004 'cause I didn't know what the hell Kerry was.

Just for the record, so that no one gets too confused. I am extremely on the left socially, and extremely on the right economically. I believe in the smallest government possible, (with an eye to the practical and realistic), whose main job is defense, within and without.

I deeply resent paying my hard earned and saved money to fund some politico's pork barrel programs, no matter how well meaning. I have no problem paying for defense, so long as the government does not get into an ill conceived, unwinnable war, with no end in sight.

I believe that the government needs to stay out of our bedrooms, our laboratories, and our bodies. I believe in the right to bear arms, but think that there needs to be some kinds of checks in place so that firepower does not get into the hands of cuckoos and nutjobs.

I believe in strict separation of church and state. If a person wants to send their kids to a religious school, that is fine with me, but not on my ass.

I don't know why I went on this whole rap, but I simply wanted to set the record straight. As any person with an IQ over that of a fruit fly can discern, there will probably be no presidential candidate whom I would totally endorse, so my vote is up for grabs. It is all a matter of priorities as to whom I would consider, and my vote could go to someone from either party, or even an Independent, if a viable candidate came along.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Dec, 2006 08:02 am
vote early,
vote often,
vote Kucinich.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Dec, 2006 08:07 am
I still have never been told by anyone what, outside of personalities and the fact she voted for the Iraq war, is so wrong with Hillary.

All I ever get in return is personality stuff and how unlikable she is and how she's a liberal if you talk to repubs and a repub in disguise if you talk to democrats.

Meanwhile she's done a great job as a Senator by all accounts I've read and no one seems to be able to find anything negative to say about her of substance without dredging up old business from her past.

Show me why she's such a **** candidate please and show me something besides being married to Bill, or her appearance or demeanor.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Dec, 2006 08:23 am
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
I still have never been told by anyone what, outside of personalities and the fact she voted for the Iraq war, is so wrong with Hillary.

A miracle just occured. Bear and I totally agree. Now I believe in God again.
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Dec, 2006 08:24 am
Thomas wrote:
A miracle just occured. Bear and I totally agree. Now I believe in God again.



If it were me, I would not go THAT far! Laughing
0 Replies
 
LoneStarMadam
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Dec, 2006 08:28 am
Phoenix32890 wrote:
Bill wrote:
Phoenix and I have definitely been leaning right lately, but if memory serves; I voted for Nader in 2000 because the party fools both struck me as idiots of the same cloth... I honestly couldn't tell the difference… and I think Phoenix actually voted for Gore. Shocked 2004, we were both reluctant Bush votes... but I suspect that's mostly because in the post 911 world neither of us could bring ourselves to vote for a weathervane. In an evil world; the evil you know is better than the evil you couldn't possibly know.


You have got that right Bill.................I voted for Gore in 2000, 'cause I thought that Bush was a schmuck. I voted for Bush in 2004 'cause I didn't know what the hell Kerry was.

Just for the record, so that no one gets too confused. I am extremely on the left socially, and extremely on the right economically. I believe in the smallest government possible, (with an eye to the practical and realistic), whose main job is defense, within and without.

I deeply resent paying my hard earned and saved money to fund some politico's pork barrel programs, no matter how well meaning. I have no problem paying for defense, so long as the government does not get into an ill conceived, unwinnable war, with no end in sight.

I believe that the government needs to stay out of our bedrooms, our laboratories, and our bodies. I believe in the right to bear arms, but think that there needs to be some kinds of checks in place so that firepower does not get into the hands of cuckoos and nutjobs.

I believe in strict separation of church and state. If a person wants to send their kids to a religious school, that is fine with me, but not on my ass.

I don't know why I went on this whole rap, but I simply wanted to set the record straight. As any person with an IQ over that of a fruit fly can discern, there will probably be no presidential candidate whom I would totally endorse, so my vote is up for grabs. It is all a matter of priorities as to whom I would consider, and my vote could go to someone from either party, or even an Independent, if a viable candidate came along.

nmih said that you voted for Bush twice, hopefully she/he will read your post & quit telling tales on you.
Glad that you haven't endorsed anyone yet, cause so far, I can't see any president among the horde that's running.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/19/2024 at 01:50:21