It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Clinton? Obama? or Edwards? Who Will It Be?

page: 11
12
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 11:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Justin Oldham
 


I'm actually 24 pounds lighter in my new picture. I hope to lose 30 pounds in 2008.


You can do it J/O! Anyone who can write 500+ pages of great fiction “Fisk” can lose pounds for sure. I lost 105 lbs in 20 months under Weight Watchers to become a lifetime member. I have regained 27 lbs since late ‘06 and now I have to pay to attend the meetings. Motivation is the key. Any diet plan will work if you’re properly motivated. If I knew how to that - motivate - I’d start my own diet plan.

Well, it’s Jan 1 and not 48 hours before the showdown beings in Iowa! I watched Michele Obama yesterday on CSpan and Bill Clinton this AM also on CSpan. My unregulated but legal monopoly cable company knocked CSpan 2 and CSpan 3 off my low cost options, so I’m unable to view all the campaigning going on. Thank you Time-Warner. I really do hate you. Q. Why can’t we choose the channels we want at a decent price? God Bless America! Land of the Free and Home of the Brave.

A Happy New Year to all who view this today!


The pollsters - also I saw the Des Moines Times Register pollster on CSpan this AM - either give Obama the edge or say it is a dead-heat between the top three candidates. I claim no prescience in titling my thread, but I’ve been around so long I’ve seen Joe Biden and Chris Dodd too many times. Both are good men and senators for America. But they cannot resonate with the national voters.

I put Edwards last in my title because he is too far left for the majority of Americans. He is for social justice, not an vibrant issue for most of us. Most Americans don’t give a darn about social justice, as we also have the same peculiar view of war. Wining war, good, losing war, bad.

I put Barrack second because he is handsome, articulate, has a pretty and smart wife and advocates “change” whatever in the heck that is. I am sorry to feel impelled to say this but America is not ready to vore for a black man for president. How can you - you is plural - ignore the ‘06 Ford v. Corker race in Tennessee? Except for a few black sycophants every black person in American knows the GOP is NOT their friend. I call’em cannibals. Because they “eat” their own kind to get ahead. JC Watts, Alan Keyes, Clarence Thomas. And etc.

Nixon used race-baiting in his 1968 race when he said he opposed “bussing” to achieve racial integration of the public schools. Regretfully, I must report integration has mostly failed. Our schools are now pretty much segregated inside, if not outside. Busing has been abandoned for the most part.

Reagan won the California gubernatorial election with his ‘Welfare Cadillac’ slander on blacks. He then devastated the UC System - free colleges education - and thanks to the Ayatollah Khomeini he became president in 1980, again using the 'Welfare Cadillac' racial slur to his cheering GOP audiences.

Finally, Bush41 had no hesitancy to run out the Willie Horton racist tv ads that was icing on his already winning cake-walk against Dukakis. IF Obama was to be the Dems nominee, the GOP race baiters would eat him alive! And Red Staters would eat it up! Shucks, even evangelist Huckabee might win?

I have put my wagon behind Hillary. Yes, she is a lightning rod, so we are reminded every day by the GOP. One pollster asked why she was such a divisive personality and according to him, very few if any respondents could offer a reason. I’m pretty sure it was a character assassination contrived by the pharmaceuticals and insurance companies in the 1993 debacle over health care. Those guys have long memories.

Aside: Isn’t it remarkable that Bill Clinton gets a rousing welcome in Iowa, where people proudly stand in recognition of his accomplishments and he is at the same time the only living ex-president who has been impeached? A badge of HONOR that the GOP so feared and hated him they would conjure an impeachment. Well, past is past but he is a valuable asset in Hillary’s corner.

I predict Iowans will vote for 1. Hillary, 2. Obama and 3. Edwards. All by the thinnest of margins.




posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 12:28 PM
link   
My sense of the situation in Iowa is the people there are tired of being over analyzed. I'm not sure that the race is as tight as the MSM likes to say. Even so, we will know in 48 hours.



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 10:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Justin Oldham
My sense of the situation in Iowa is the people there are tired of being over analyzed. I'm not sure that the race is as tight as the MSM likes to say. Even so, we will know in 48 hours.


And...here we are. The race was not as tight as they said. Obama's showing has eletrified millions. Huckabee's showing has stunned many GOP analysts.

It's important to understand that Iowa does not a President make. It's the first of many contests. Remember that February 5th is a big day, with more than twenty primaries held on just one day.

Hillary's third place showing needs to be taken with a grain of salt. Iowa is a very conservative State, and she went in to it knowing that she wasn't much liked. She may not do much better in New Hampshire.

I have to admit that I'd like to see her defeated, only because I want to be wrong about a lot of things. Even so, I still don't foresee a Republican winning the White House.

Hillary and Obama have been sparring politely, with gloves on. Huckabee and Romney have been taking more earnest jabs at each other. Things will certainly heat up now. Hillary's machine is likely to overtake Obama on key issues. His best defense might be a few more stump speeches from Oprah.

Change is a powerful motivator. It's what many of us on ATS ask for almost every day. Obama's idealism will be seriously tested once he assumes high office. As President or Vice President, he's going to see that the world looks a lot different. Many of the options he thought he had, will not exhist. Hillary already knows this. Expect her to exploit his idealism.



posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 05:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Justin Oldham
 


Hillary and Obama have been sparring politely, with gloves on. Huckabee and Romney have been taking more earnest jabs at each other. Things will certainly heat up now. Hillary's machine is likely to overtake Obama on key issues. His best defense might be a few more stump speeches from Oprah.


Yes on Oprah. I haven’t seen anyone appraise the value she was to his sort of moribund campaign. She seemed to spark him as much as she did the audience which must surely be made up of a lot of young-ish women.

I’m sorry to say it again, but despite his premier showing in Iowa, I cannot see the US as even close to being ready to elect a black president. And I dread another religious president. There is nothing worse than a zealot in high office. I give you Bush43 as my proof.

John Edwards - my choice if Hillary was not running - if far too left to ever win in very conservative America. Even though most people will agree with the issues Edwards campions, one at a time, the slur of “socialist” or “liberal” has been so successfully linked to “tax and spend” that once hurled, it will stick to him.


Change is a powerful motivator. It's what many of us on ATS ask for almost every day. Obama's idealism will be seriously tested once he assumes high office. As President or Vice President, he's going to see that the world looks a lot different. Many of the options he thought he had, will not exist. Hillary already knows this. Expect her to exploit his idealism.


History tells us that there was great hope of change when the 19th Amendment in 1920, that at last, women voting would bring civility and change to politics. I was alive and well when the 26th Amendment was offered in March of 1971 and approved by July, 1971, to be the fastest ever ratified. This gave the right to vote to 18 year olds. I had voted NO to a prior state amendment offered in KY, but it passed over my objection. Again, we looked forward to the idealism this would bring, but alas, it did not. It has been politics as usual or worse. Demographers say that few persons between 18 and 21 actually vote. Perhaps Obama can change that?

Obama would be as ill prepared for the presidency as Bush43 was. Whether he would surround himself with a broader range of views than Bush43 opted for is the only source of hope that the US will not run further downhill under an “amateur” like Obama.

Obama promised Iowans that if elected, he would promote an effort to remove the US from “foreign energy dependence” which is to say to Iowans, “I’m for ADM and corn and soy subsidies for more and more ethanol.”

You know I HATE ethanol because it takes more BTUs to make it than it contains. That if ethanol was unsubsidized it would not exist as a fuel additive. Say think you, Senator Dole.

And one more even more consequential reason I HATE ethanol. Fossil aquifers include the Ogallala under the U.S. Great Plains. In a fossil, or non-replenishable aquifer, depletion means the end of pumping. We are pumping Ogallala water to make ethanol! CRAZY! Over pumping of the vast Ogallala or High Plains aquifer - essentially a fossil aquifer that extends from southern South Dakota through Nebraska, Kansas, eastern Colorado, Oklahoma, and Texas - is a matter of national concern. In the Southern Great Plains, irrigated area has shrunk by 24 percent since 1980 as wells have gone dry.

In a rational world, falling water tables would trigger alarm, setting in motion a series of government actions to reduce demand and reestablish a stable balance with the sustainable supply. Unfortunately, not a single government appears to have done this. Official responses to falling water tables have been consistently belated and grossly inadequate. In the United States, water tables are falling under the Great Plains and throughout the southwest. www.earth-policy.org...



posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 01:09 PM
link   
I like a good dose of idealism as much as the next guy, but I do understand that its not enough to make a President. His showing tells me that there is a mood of dissatisfaction in the country. Don and I have both mentioned in the past that people vote their hearts in a primary. They tend to vote with their brains in general elections.

My opinion about the Republican candidates remains unchanged. None of them have the support they would need to actually defeat a Democrat (any Democrat) in the general election. Their base is too fragmented.

Today's GOP candidates were once moderates who are now forced to war the camouflage of ultra-conservatives, and its just not going to wash with the voters who are faced with Dems who are still what they've always been. "Genuine" counts in American politics, even when you don't like the other guy's platform.

The backlash against the Iraq war and Bush43 are also factors that no Republican candidate can overcome. McCain has come back humbled and contrite, but even that abasement won't be enough to put him in the White House.

Obama's showing in Iowa was a historic thing. No two ways about that. He's got the money, but he lack the grass-roots organization to beat Hilary. We should expect him to begin recruiting for boots on the ground in every State, but his nation-wide network won't be able to expand fast enough to meet his needs. It's a matter of political logistics that he can't overcome in the long run.

Bear in mind that we still haven't seen the worst of the back-biting and political smears. We don't yet know how many of these candidates will hold up under the sprint from now until February 5th. the Iowa loss isn't going to mean what you might think for Hillary. If anything it will serve to galvanize her campaign.

One last point. There's still a lot of donor money waiting to find a home. Clinton and Giuliani BOTH are pre-positioned to make the back room deals to get that money, leaving their competitors in the lurch. Air time and print space will do nothing but get more expensive as time goes by. All candidates will burn their cash much faster than they expect. If Obama's fund-rasing machine breaks down at any point on the way, he will be in trouble.



posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 01:48 PM
link   
Hillary and Obama look like two tired robots. I was considering myself as leaning towards Democrats, but I can't bring myself to vote for any of these individuals.

I'll vote Huckabee. I don't give a damn whether he's religious or not. He seems to be more sincere than Obama and Hillary combined.



posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 03:10 PM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


He seems to be more sincere than Obama and Hillary combined.


Content Removed by Author









[edit on 1/4/2008 by donwhite]



posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 03:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by donwhite
No one was ever MORE sincere than Adolph Hitler.



Please read this, you may find it useful:
en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by donwhite
No one was ever MORE sincere than Adolph Hitler.


Actually, I do not approve of referring to Hitler in general discourse. Whatever else it is, it is distracting. OTOH, I regard offering "sincerity" as a valid reason to vote for someone who has intentionally, and repeatedly attacked another candidate's religion as obfuscation at best and disingenuous at worst. For sure no one has to explain his or her own preferences. I guess what this all ads up to is 1) yes, I was wrong, and 2) no, I'm not sorry.


The fallacious nature of reductio ad Hitlerum is, however, most easily illustrated by identifying X as something that Adolf Hitler or his supporters did promote but which is not considered unethical, such as watercolor painting, owning dogs, or vegetarianism. It may be refuted through counterexamples using figures with reputations generally opposite that of Hitler:
At least the concept behind reductio ad Hitlerum sometimes makes appearances in the mass media. For example, in a Dilbert cartoon (published October 28, 2006), the character Ratbert says that he is winning all his debates on the Internet by asking, "How would you like it if Hitler killed you?" from Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 03:35 PM
link   
IMO Iowa is/was like the opening ceremony at the Olympic Games the anticipation has been building for a while but impressing the crowd opening ceremony wont win you any medals . Most of the events and medals will be decided on Super Tuesday. Who ever finishes top of the medal table will likely be the overall winner.

For those who haven't seen it there is a thread devoted to the 2008 Republican candidates .



posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by xpert11
 

IMO Iowa is/was like the opening ceremony at the Olympic Games the anticipation has been building for a while but impressing the crowd opening ceremony wont win you any medals . Most of the events and medals will be decided on Super Tuesday. Who ever finishes top of the medal table will likely be the overall winner. For those who haven't seen it there is a thread devoted to the 2008 Republican candidates.

Well, since my candidate lost to a person who IMO cannot possibly win the November 4 election, and who finished behind another candidate who could not possibly win in conservative America, I’m disappointed. Now some of the pundits - apologists? - are saying she KNEW from the get-go she could not carry Iowa which is a strong Republican state and she is indeed the lightning rod for any who don’t like her or Democrats in general.

Yes, I agree she is really “stalling” for the February 5 Grand Event. After NH comes SC and FL. Based on DNC rules, the Dem candidates have agreed NOT to campaign here - FL was mucked up by Jeb Bush as his parting gesture and confirmed by the Republican legislature - so it is definitely in flux here. But not in SC where Oprah has greatly strengthened Obama’s draw to the large number of blacks registered as Dems. Well, all blacks there are registered a s Dems.

Earlier polls - January ‘07 - showed Hillary way ahead of Obama among black voters in SC but now she is either even or trailing. The same pundits say Hillary is not popular in NH despite being a close neighbor. I don’t know why that would be unless they - the NH types - are not all that happy over the Clinton legacy. Or disagree with her vote to go to war and her ambivalence about getting the US out of Iraq. And maybe her NY drivers license faux pas.

I’m back to my earlier statement that NO candidate can tell the truth and run a winning election campaign in America. And you call that democracy? I call it a plan for the 18th century that is not working in the 21st century. We need a THIRD constitutional convention in Philadelphia. Pronto!

[edit on 1/4/2008 by donwhite]



posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 05:36 PM
link   
Well the media will probably get carried away with the Iowa result as per usual with such of things. Conservatives would hate anyone with the Clinton surname assuming Hillary does get the go ahead this is something that could prevent the landslide that should take place.

My guess is that Hillary and her team focus if not strategy was or is on the states involved in Super Tuesday . No doubt Hillary advisor's would have taken notes and filed them for the not to distance future reference. Don I could just see you at think tank that is devoted to pondering ways to re jig the US political system.



posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 07:05 PM
link   
I'll stand on what I said earlier. It's a long race and all we've seen so far is the opening move.



posted on Jan, 5 2008 @ 04:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
I'll vote Huckabee. I don't give a damn whether he's religious or not. He seems to be more sincere than Obama and Hillary combined.


I like Huckabee too. When I'm really, really, really drunk. But then again I overanalyze things. Insincerity is honesty to me. And the guy I really want to go fishing with is the biggest liar of them all. Seriously, there's not a Democrat on the planet that wouldn't want to rent a cabin with Gdub, Dickie and Huckster, then dig up Ronnie and play a little Weekend at Bernies.

But let's be honest. We want to be lied to. Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush... Jebus. Just please God no more honest, good human beings like Carter. Anything but that.

America can't handle John Edwards, truth teller. We're tired of triangulation Billary. And the fact Barack is an inexperienced, manufactured phoney negotiator that lives to please is the entirity of his "agent of change" curb appeal. Hell, he already is President on 24 and in AllState commercials. Why not? Yes, we are reduced to that. Quit playing smart.

Huck in 08! I won't hate his guts and be sick of the sight of him until 2011. Just like a real friend.



posted on Jan, 5 2008 @ 06:22 PM
link   
I think the anti-Bush mood that permeates the country has actually translated in to an anti-establishment backlash. These angry people don't want another Clinton, and they don't want more Republican failure. The question is, will they be enough of a force at the polls to elect a populist?

[edit on 5-1-2008 by Justin Oldham]



posted on Jan, 5 2008 @ 06:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Justin Oldham
I think the anti-Bush mood that permeates the country has actually translated in to an anti-establishment backlash.


You cant to far that would also help to explain Ron Paul. Those who are anti establishment see Ron has being outside of the establishment. I can certainly understand the sentiment and feel it to agree and I'm not an American.


The question is, will they be enough of a force at the polls to elect a populist?


Nope Ron has no chance and Obama doesn't seem to have convinced the people in question that he can really offer change for the better. The problem is that once a so called populist is elected they will become a part of the establishment .

Rather then anti establishment feeling change has to be measured decision making for the better. Before change can take place the means or foundations that it is build on has to be in place.

Even thou I was around in the 60s from what I know of the era I don't think we are seeing such a turbulent era because while there is an unpopular war there is nothing like the Civil Rights movement in the US.



[edit on 5-1-2008 by xpert11]



posted on Jan, 5 2008 @ 07:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by RANT


I like Huckabee too. When I'm really, really, really drunk.


I crack me up.



posted on Jan, 5 2008 @ 09:20 PM
link   
I don't know that Huckabee or Obama would be considered true populists. Obama's message of ardent change harkens back to the 60's, but he lacks a lot of specifics. I expect Hillary to hammer him with specifics, challenging him to be more precise.



posted on Jan, 5 2008 @ 10:01 PM
link   



America can't handle John Edwards, truth teller.


How sad is it that Americans don't want to face the truth? John Edwards seems to me like the only candidate that can be trusted to do the "right" thing for the majority of the country.

America needs to become its own country for the first time in its history. We need a new independence day. Edwards can deliver the goods I believe.

Edit: Why is this in italics?

[edit on 5-1-2008 by disgustedbyhumanity]



posted on Jan, 5 2008 @ 10:26 PM
link   
Well I have to agree with Justin Obama is yet to explain how he would bring about the change he speaks. When it counts the most Hillary will take the gloves off and pull some real punches.

How will Obama deal with such attacks ?
In order to maintain his selling point he cant get to involved in a slug feast with Hillary . Even if he was elected I don't see how Obama could implement his vision. He would still have to deal with the same partisan hacks in Congress and lobbyists . If he isnt road kill having lost to Hillary Capital would spilt and chew out Obama and any populist that got that far.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join