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: 28
12
<< 25  26  27    29  30  31 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 4 2008 @ 10:35 AM
link   
reply to post by TheAvenger
 


Support your candidate, though admittedly, you have changed. I will support the other side, so we cancel each other's votes anyway. The real truth is, no one is running for President this cycle. There is no good choice, only the lesser of evils.


Actually, I see a deeper philosophical argument in the last sentence. I see it as related to America’s ethnic diversity. On many of the major issues, border security, undocumented workers, heath care, deficit budgets, and the war on terror too, which I hate. We are so accustomed to hearing one voice on the left and one voice on the right - so-called "balanced" news - that we forget there are usually many opinions on any important issue. What we get is sanitized news, or structured news. But it is not really balanced if "balance" means EVEN. Or fair.

Perhaps the reason we do not have a “candidate” that meets our personal expectations or preferences is because the TWO party system forces us to make those adjustments, accommodations and compromises, within the individual party BEFORE we go to the polls for an UP or DOWN vote.

We have the contrary examples of Italy before us, where there are many parties each espousing a “party” line, but none of them ever seem to get 51% of the vote. They are therefore constantly shifting alliances to form a government which is not that all stable. Like it or not, our government runs in FOUR year cycles - if not in TWO year cycles as I have complained about.

We adopted a two party system in 1789. With rare variance from that way of governing. 1856-1860 the Republicans. 1912 the Progressives. 1948 the States Rights Party. Dixie-crats. 1992, Ross Perot’s unnamed party. Other than those examples I cannot think of an election where a third party played such a significant role. Our differences are worked out at the party level, not at the governing level.

[edit on 4/4/2008 by donwhite]




posted on Apr, 4 2008 @ 01:39 PM
link   
I think Avenger has the right idea. We need more people involved in the talking, and the voting. Compromise doesn't happen by itself. Some times, half a loaf is better than none.



posted on Apr, 4 2008 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Justin Oldham
A lot of people want her to drop out of the race. Seems to me that a lot of peole are expecting her to somehow steal the Presidency. A lot can happen with the Dems go to their convention. Deals are always possible, and every super delegates wants soemthing.


Justin my good man! Thank you! And yes I will be sure to keep up to date here. As it is, I get most my news from this site and other sources.
But I will be sure to be watching this one.
They want her out? Hmmm thats a strange move by those in high places.
Is this but a ruse? Or have they picked up that prehaps people are not as sleepy as they once thought?
What kind of deal are we talking about here?
And what is something that Super delegates wants most?

[edit on 4-4-2008 by zysin5]



posted on Apr, 4 2008 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by zysin5
 


I get most my news from this site and other sources. But I will be sure to be watching this one. They want her out? Hmmm that’s a strange move by those in high places. Is this but a ruse? Or have they picked up that perhaps people are not as sleepy as they once thought? What kind of deal are we talking about here? And what is something that Super delegates wants most?


Jimmy Carter is a S/D. I’d guess he wants either some help with the Habitat for Humanity or on his next peace undertaking somewhere on the planet. Bill Clinton is also a S/D. He may want some money for his humanitarian foundation. Al Gore, a S/D, may want to STOP the drilling in ANWR Alaska. The operative word there is -N- is for “NATIONAL” meaning you and me own it as much as ExxonMobil. Or Senator Stevens.

Other delegates may want an old road made into a 4 lane. Who knows. A new gym for the local high school. 100 computer stations for the new school. That is the JOY of being President. You have a $3 T. pie to split every year.



posted on Apr, 4 2008 @ 06:21 PM
link   
IMO a candidates advisor's and there beliefs hold a better gauge to what direction a candidate will take if they are elected. In terms of the people behind Obama check out this thread

Obama talks the talk but the way he walks the walk may be completely differnt . Of course this applies to all candidates .



posted on Apr, 5 2008 @ 04:03 PM
link   
I have been informed that I posted the wrong link in the above post,
So here is the correct one .

Cheers xpert11,



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 04:30 AM
link   
I note with some interest that Barack Obama is starting to lose some of his campaign momentum. It's possible that his rookie mistkaes are catching up to him.



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 05:15 AM
link   
I cant find the original article but Obama was quoted on CNN as saying that he wasn't campaigning as hard as before because there wasn't another primary for about a month. It makes sense that Obama would take his foot off the gas for awhile. Obama and Clinton in a long distance race they will both choose when they will want to expend the most energy. This really comes into play after the last primary's and before the convention.



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 11:59 AM
link   
reply to post by xpert11
 


It makes sense that Obama would take his foot off the gas for awhile. Obama and Clinton in a long distance race they will both choose when they will want to expend the most energy.


Has anyone noticed the NEW genre of SOFT touch ads the BIG Energy companies are blitzing the airware with, propagandizing us as in Josef Goebbels? TexacoChevron asks the rhetorical question: “Can you imagine an energy company caring about the environment?” My answer is a resounding NO!

ExxonMobil
- which has not yet paid the 1989 $6 b. judgment for its snafu at Prince William Sound - has a similar series of TRITE for the gullible public to swallow!

ConocoPhillips
likewise is now touting itself as a Ralph Nader Jr. BPAmerica is also hoodwinking the viewing public.

Hey, those ads are directed towards our 6 to 10 year olds! They - the BIG BOYS - think LONG term! We ordinary jerks just think SHORT term. How to eat tomorrow, or pay the next mortgage payment. And Jeez! Their ads are TAX DEDUCTIBLE. We get to pay for our own ROPE! Sweet Jesus, come quick! While there is anything remaining for you to resurrect.

Oh yes, Mr X11, the candidates must pace themselves.

I’ll betcha there are 100s of REFORMS in the DNC (and RNC) before the next presidential campaign! FPP may replace PR on the Dems side, X11. Or at least bonus delegates added for getting a 51% majority anywhere. And both Conventions in 2012 will be in April. I suggest April 1. Then a Federal law ought to BAN all advertising on the subject after the conventions until Labor Day.

Good God A’mithgy! Can you imagine the 10s of MILLIONS that would cost FOX and CNN (now Fox Jr) and MSNBC in advertising revenues? Not to meniton putting Wolf Blitzer out of work! I don't know the guys on FOX as it is OFF my remote. I can happily say I NEVER watch FOX or Rupert Murdoch. The only Aussie I HATE. Him of the $6 m. bribe of Newt Gingrich.

[edit on 4/6/2008 by donwhite]



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 03:41 AM
link   
I note with some interest that the MSM has apparently picked up a new interest in the Clinton campaign. they are now almost universally expressing the view that she's got a real chance to win. Most are talking up the potential for an Obama defeat, asking whether or not the black community will stand for it. Are we seeing the results of some real shift, or has some back room deal already been done?



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 04:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Justin Oldham
I note with some interest that the MSM has apparently picked up a new interest in the Clinton campaign. they are now almost universally expressing the view that she's got a real chance to win.


Other then the fact it is a slow news period the notion that Clinton is still with in a shot is very creditable due to the strange way the dems have set up there race.


Are we seeing the results of some real shift,


No real shift the earth isnt moving under either candidates feet . Normal service is continuing in a quiet period.



or has some back room deal already been done?


Other then the usual wheeling and dealing Hillary , Bill and Obama would be doing I don't any new deal has been made . Things seem to have moved far beyond that point.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 03:06 PM
link   
How likely is it that we are seeing "buyer's remose" when it comes to Obama? If Senator Clinton's poll numbers continue to climb, AND she wins Pennsyvvania...can she actually make a real come back?



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 09:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Justin Oldham
Are we seeing the results of some real shift, or has some back room deal already been done?


Interesting point you bring up there. Back room deals, with shady guys smoking in a dark corner, armed to the teeth.
While their mob boss makes a deal with some SD. Its going on somewhere in the world. These bad guys, and all their drug running, and CIA deals with herion are the ones running part of the show.
They sertinly only want to see someone who is going to keep up the work of the Bush empire.
What do you think the chances of Dick getting to be VP agin?
I happen to belive the Bush empire will not end with the end of his term.
I think the drugs, the killing, and the lies will keep on building up.
No matter who wins this.. I think those back room deals have alot to do with herion, CIA, and the military.
Who is going to have the best game face to fool the masses? A black man, or a woman?
They want the person who will best say one thing, and put up a good front.
The person who was the least sloppy of the bunch are going to get in.
Right now, I think they are shifting threw the piles of doo doo, to see who is the least dirty of the few.
When clearly they are all dirty dogs, and have no honor..
Its a sad story.. But like with real life.. The good guys dont always win.
Because as I learned from Justin, its when the good guys dont do anything that the bad guys win.
And they seem to win all the time.. Since the Regan years, is the point that I can put my finger on.. Err wait, Nixon.. right?


[edit on 7-4-2008 by zysin5]



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 09:18 PM
link   
Well if you're voting Democrat or Republican then it doesn't matter. They are one in the same to me and are just puppets in a bigger conspiracy. America to me is no longer free and has been enslaved for a while now. America has been wussified and satified with American Idol and their pitiful tax paying jobs that just get them by while making others rich beyond comparison. Vote all you want folks but for me, it doesn't matter. The president has already been chosen.

Makes me wonder
If nobody voted at all in America then what would happen?



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 09:30 PM
link   
I don't see any reason for buyers remorse at this stage . To few people seem to care that there are in the very least double standards at play. If McCain had attended a church where white values had been preached there would be riots on the streets . If Hillary continues to have a lead in the polls up until the convention a case could be made that public support is behind her . This would put pressure on the Superdelegates to go with her .

However Obama and his team have shown enough political smarts to indicate that they can come out on top when it matters the most.



posted on Apr, 8 2008 @ 12:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Solarskye
Makes me wonder
If nobody voted at all in America then what would happen?


Yikes! Don't scare me like that. It's bad enough that we face a Depression. Nobody voting? Ow. Now, I'm gonna have nightmares.



posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 08:27 PM
link   
Today, President Bush sealed his party's fate. By announcing that troop withdrawls from Iraq would STOP in July, he's given the Democrats another shipment of ammo to use against John McCain. Itw as commendable that he reduced future combat tours in Iraq to just 12 months, but ouch. Ouch, man. Bush43 HAS to be the Democrat's best chance for winning the White House in '08.



posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 10:55 PM
link   
Military the correct decision has been made . Once Rumsfeld was gone the Bush admin was actually prepared to listen to military advice and it has paid off. A shortage of man power is now the biggest problem facing the US military . Politically the issue of troop numbers in Iraq is a lose - lose situation for Bush and co. Not continuing the withdrawals will cop flax as would the deteriorating security situation if the withdrawals took place.



posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 01:27 PM
link   
It's being suggested that President bush is intentionaly handing off the Iraq war to the U.S. leader. As you may recall, Bush41 allowed the Somalia problem to stay onthe back burner until he left office, handing it off to Bill Clinton. Is this a viable political tactic, or, is it a case of the son following the father's example?



posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 05:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Justin Oldham
 


It's being suggested that President Bush is intentionally handing off the Iraq war to the [NEXT[ U.S. leader. Is this a viable political tactic, or, is it a case of the son following the father's example?


It’s all about legacy. His L E G A C Y. Not the 4,030 KIA so far. (At this rate Bush43 will see 4,445 KIA by January 20). I’m sure as I can be that Bush43 imagined himself knocking off Iraq and catching Saddam in a few weeks; at the outside in a few months. Surrounded by YES men and WOMAN, VP Cheney, hawk of hawks, Herr Rumsfled who fights a war with what he has and not what he wishes he had, and NSA Condo Rice who brings the coffee when she’s not being briefed by VP Cheney or Scooter Liddy on NSA issues.

Then he would go into the history books as FINISHING what his father had left UNDONE in 1991. When contrasted with the USS Cole and Mogadishu he would look like the WISE and RESOLVED leader of the FREE World. The cowboy from Texas who not only draws quick but shoots straight!

INSTEAD Iraq has turned into a RE-RUN of the “Gang That Couldn’t Shoot Straight!” Funny unless you are doing the dying!

[edit on 4/11/2008 by donwhite]



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 25  26  27    29  30  31 >>

log in

join