Buzzflash
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mixx it!
RedditThis column has been pondering and predicting an Obama-Biden ticket for some time now. That's still the best bet, and now that the announcement is finally imminent, everyone is talking about it.
So, what the heck, let's run the Hillary Clinton scenario one more time:
Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton like one another. Obama had Clinton's cell number on speed dial, and vice versa. They maintained stable, even good, personal relations during the primary campaign. When things got ugly, Obama stepped up several times to defend Clinton, and the senator from New York got what might have been the loudest and most sincere round of the campaign when she seemed to suggest at the close of a contentious primary-season debate that she would be willing to join an Obama-led "dream ticket."
But we always knew that the "what to do with Bill Clinton" challenge would steer Obama away from an easy or casual selection of Hillary Clinton as his vice presidential running mate. Again and again through the primary season, it was Bill who said things that seemed to inflame the competition and move both camps to their respective corners. And, of course, there is the fundamental question of where to put an ex-president in an administration that supposed to be all about change.
So the line became: Obama would only pick Clinton if he comes to the conclusion that he needs her badly enough to accept not only his former rival but the complexities that her husband brings to the equation and, of course, their considerable baggage.
Well, the latest polls seem to suggest that Obama finds himself in a circumstance that lends itself to the Clinton consideration.
Despite the fact that the miserable state of the U.S. economy shaped by eight years of oilman budgeting should be handing the election to Obama, he's either tied or behind in a number of key state and national surveys. The new Reuters/Zogby poll has Republican John McCain leading Obama 46-41. Gallup and LA Times surveys have it much closer, with Obama slightly up. But these are not encouraging number for the Democrats.
Russian tanks in Georgia, regime change in Pakistan and the general uncertainty about whether to worry more about a new Cold War or the mismanagement of the old war on terror seems to have caused a good many Americans to edge toward McCain. That may not be reasonable, or smart or fair. But, to employ the phrase of the season, "It is what it is."
Barack Obama might just need Hillary Clinton.
Clinton, whether appropriately or not, seen by a great many Americans as someone who knows her way around the international stage. In fact, members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee who are not fans of Clinton have told me that she has far better international connections than McCain or Obama.
She also has some pretty good connections in the swing states of Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania.
Then there is the whole "dream ticket" thing.
If Obama takes the stage in front of the Old State Capital in Springfield, Illinois, Saturday with Evan Bayh at his side, it will be news -- but not very exciting news. If he does so with Joe Biden, it will be bigger new -- but it's not like Biden brings the "wow" factor.
If Obama takes the stage with Clinton at his side, it will be the dominant news story of the weekend, the convention and perhaps of the fall campaign.
Indeed, it could create that wave of excitement that Obama needs to have not just a triumphal convention but a triumphal campaign.
So that's the Hillary Clinton scenario, with all of its challenges, complexities and unpleasantnesses.
One does not have to like Clinton, or even believe that Clinton will ultimately join a "dream ticket," to suspect that as the Obama camp reviews the latest polls, they might be spinning the scenario one last time.
Obama and his aides may reject the option -- because of Bill, because the former First Lady does not say "change," or because of concerns that a ticket made up of an African-American man and a woman might be too much change for the electorate.
But let's presume, out of respect for the savvy of the Obama team, that they are considering it.
Clinton carries so much baggage with the general public, it's a wash if Obama picks her. Half the country can't stand her and will not vote for her, so she's a wash. Obama sure needs a life preserver, but she's more like a cinder block.
Posted by pontificus at 08/20/2008 @ 12:12pm
A NEW INSTA-POLL: What is Obama least anxious to talk about? - His relationship with Bill Ayers - His position on abortion - His childhood in Indonesia - His relationship with Jeremiah Wright - Progress in Iraq - All of the Above
Posted by pontificus at 08/20/2008 @ 12:25pm
Posted by 2HAPPY at 08/20/2008 @ 12:14pm
I still feel perfectly fine Happ actually. I have said through the whole election that the polls are worthless. So I'm still not in the least worried.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/20/2008 @ 12:31pm
McCain needs to cool down a bit and drop back in the polls.......---Posted by 2HAPPY at 08/20/2008 @ 12:14pm
Oh, so now that McCain is up...that's a good thing.
and when McCain drops in the polls...that'll be a good thing too, huh, HAPP?
Pretty much you got every number on the table covered with a bet, don't ya?
LOL
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/20/2008 @ 12:31pm
What does a national poll have to do with a POTUS election?
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/20/2008 @ 12:34pm
McCain supporters don't seem to exist.
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/20/2008 @ 12:35pm
On Hillary as Veep, it would raise some FUN prospects-
1. (Of course) Would be FRANKGRITS. SIMULTANEOUSLY supporting Veep nominee Hillary attacking McCain....AND defending McCain from attacks by Hillary (all in an effort to free up 2012 for her and then tell us "Oh, and not only was she a First Lady AND Senator, she was a brilliand Vice-Presidential nominee last time!")
So that'd be funnier than hell.
2. Would be the Repubs/cons who put all their anti-Hillary stuff in the Recycle Bin on Desktop after June 6th, trying to pull it from the archives.
How soon after Obama picked her, would PONTI post a "You know not ALL the answers for the Vince Foster shooting add up" post?....Weeks?....heheh
3. Would be McCain SCRAMBLING to pick Palin or Susan Collins or SOMEBODY of the female persuasion. The man is such a "leader" after all....heheh
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/20/2008 @ 12:37pm
The lefties need another Slick Willie, and what they came up with was a black George McGovern. What they fail to realize is, the country ain't buying what the left is selling, and what it takes to win the Demoratic Party nomination is NOT what it takes to win the Presidency. Lying about Obama's past and having the MSM cover for you only works so long as people aren't paying attention, and as we get closer to the election, people start to read the facts, even if the MSM, ala Edwards, refuses to report them. No wonder the lefties are so hot for 'fairness'!
And they think they're going to remedy the situation by nominating Hillary, who has all the ethics of Bill Clinton but none of the charm? Sheesh.
Posted by pontificus at 08/20/2008 @ 12:37pm
McCain supporters don't seem to exist.----Posted by i'm nobody at 08/20/2008 @ 12:35pm
Not really. The Hard Right don't trust him ("agents of intolerance", McCain-Feingold, McCain-KENNEDY!!!!) and probably rightfully so on some issues.
Even HAPP's mentor Limbaugh said a McCain nomination would "destroy the Republican Party".
They just oppose Obama.
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/20/2008 @ 12:39pm
ponti-If the country wasn't buying what the left was selling then Bush would be popular,as would the war,and Obama would be polling at about 10%.
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/20/2008 @ 12:39pm
Mask-It is odd that they picked the one that few support and the one that would be a first term lame duck.
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/20/2008 @ 12:41pm
Posted by pontificus at 08/20/2008 @ 12:37pm
Clinton?...McGovern?
Hmmm...let's see. McGovern was a combat pilot who won numerous medals and Clinton cheated on his wife.
Who does that sound like? Obama or McCain???
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/20/2008 @ 12:41pm
Posted by 2HAPPY at 08/20/2008 @ 12:32pm
Methinks the shredders and incinerators at the Univ of Chicago have been operating on the late shift lately.
Posted by pontificus at 08/20/2008 @ 12:41pm
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/20/2008 @ 12:39pm
"They just oppose Obama."
More generally, we oppose stupidity.
Posted by pontificus at 08/20/2008 @ 12:43pm
Posted by pontificus at 08/20/2008 @ 12:25pm
Hmm I wonder about McCain and his wife? Or how about McCain's waning "maverickness"? Or him being blamed for the fires on the USS Forestall and the deaths of American soldiers by the veterans who served on that ship? Oh or how about doing propaganda ads for the enemy? Or how about how he insulted Pat Robertson, Bill O'Reilly and Falwell and is not all chummy with them?
http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnmccain.com/index.htm
And this guy hates the Communists and illegal immigrants as much as you do.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/20/2008 @ 12:43pm
ponti-I haven't seen any evidence that you oppose stupidity.
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/20/2008 @ 12:43pm
More generally, we oppose stupidity. Posted by pontificus at 08/20/2008 @ 12:43pm
Weird considering they keep folks like you around.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/20/2008 @ 12:44pm
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/20/2008 @ 12:39pm
"ponti-If the country wasn't buying what the left was selling then Bush would be popular,as would the war,and Obama would be polling at about 10%."
So now, Obama is not in the tank BECAUSE he's a leftist? Funny, and here I thought he was modifying his positions (and starting to lose support from the moonbat wing) because he needed to go to the center. At least, Nichols thinks so.
Posted by pontificus at 08/20/2008 @ 12:46pm
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/20/2008 @ 12:43pm
Beat me to it. I love these people who think they are more intelligent because they are Republican. Group of morons of you ask me.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/20/2008 @ 12:46pm
Ponti-Obama isn't in the tank.You made that up.
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/20/2008 @ 12:47pm
Ccc-I do know some intelligent republicans.They oppose Bush and aren't into McCain,either.
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/20/2008 @ 12:48pm
More generally, we oppose stupidity.---- Posted by pontificus at 08/20/2008 @ 12:43pm
You voted for Bush twice, didn't you?
heheh (Atleast I learned my lesson after the FIRST time and I started thinking more "strategerily" about what was going to "put food on my family")
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/20/2008 @ 12:57pm
Hillary endorsed McCain so she would be a bad choice for Obama.
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/20/2008 @ 12:57pm
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/20/2008 @ 12:57pm
Hey MASK, I heard your Mayor of NYC Bloomberg is now proposing to produce electricity by putting windmills on buildings and bridges. Do you think we could convince you Dems to wear 'personal windmills' on top of your heads? Just a thought!
Posted by pontificus at 08/20/2008 @ 1:04pm
It's Kathleen!
Stay tuned...
Posted by Metteyya at 08/20/2008 @ 1:06pm
Kathleen Kennedy?
Posted by pontificus at 08/20/2008 @ 1:08pm
"Bloomberg Offers Windmill Power Plan
By MICHAEL BARBARO Published: August 19, 2008
In a plan that would drastically remake New York City's skyline and shores, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg is seeking to put wind turbines on the city's bridges and skyscrapers and in its waters as part of a wide-ranging push to develop renewable energy. "
Who says you Dems don't have an energy plan? Bwaahahahahahahaha
Posted by pontificus at 08/20/2008 @ 1:10pm
Ponti-Bloomberg is an independent and not a democrat.What were you saying about opposing stupidity?
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/20/2008 @ 1:14pm
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/20/2008 @ 12:48pm
I know many an intelligent Republican, ponti doesn't fall into that category. He falls into the typical anti-liberal foaming at the mouth idiot type. He's the type who listens to Ann Coulter and thinks shes a genius.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/20/2008 @ 1:14pm
Posted by pontificus at 08/20/2008 @ 1:08pm
No... Kathleen - the one who is going to get moderate Republican women to vote for Barack - Sebelius!
You are going to be drowning in news about her in the next week!
Posted by Metteyya at 08/20/2008 @ 1:16pm
Posted by pontificus at 08/20/2008 @ 1:10pm
Uhh. Last I checked Bloomberg was and independent who was not long ago a Republican. He has never been a Democrat.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/20/2008 @ 1:17pm
Ccc-We don't get the better republicans on here.As you said,it's just the anti liberal types.
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/20/2008 @ 1:18pm
Posted by pontificus at 08/20/2008 @ 1:04pm
And that relates to your objection to stupidity and voting for Bush twice...how?
BTW, speaking of "not that intelligent"....let's go back to this theory of yours that the pro-lifers will graciously concede to McCain picking a pro-choicer as Veep with nary a peep of discontent.
or....your attacks on Clinton and Edwards for adultery...and ..."absent-mindedness"?...
over how John and Cindy McCain "met"???
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/20/2008 @ 1:18pm
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/20/2008 @ 1:17pm
Scratch that. He was a Democrat BEFORE he ran for mayor. Then he ran twice as a Republican Mayor of New York. Then he became Independent. Jesus you couldn't bother to wikipedia your comment before you before you presented us with the beautiful irony.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/20/2008 @ 1:19pm
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/20/2008 @ 1:17pm
You imagine if Bloomberg was a far-right winger and proposed "drilling in Central Park"....PONTI would LOVE him!
LOL
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/20/2008 @ 1:20pm
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/20/2008 @ 1:18pm
First off, Bush has done a good, if not great job as President. Like Truman, his perception by the public is colored by the extreme hatred of his enemies.
Also, McCain is not going to nominate a 'pro-choicer'. He'll nominate someone like Bush or Cheney, who are personally opposed to abortion but resigned to the fact that no consensus exists to outlaw it. Just as Lincoln's anti-slavery personal views were reconciled with the recognition that public policy could not be feasibly implemented in accordance with it (absent a war).
Second, Clinton's adultery was never the issue - it was his perjury. Similarly, with Edwards, again, it's not the adultery that matters, it's the lies and coverup used to conceal it that tell the tale (e.g., Nixon and Watergate). Again, your erroneous take on my views results from taking your own straw men as fact.
Posted by pontificus at 08/20/2008 @ 1:27pm
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/20/2008 @ 1:18pm
I like Jom in the general sense. Sometimes he gets outta hand with his whole liberal hatred thing but he is a good guy and smart.
I like Darin before he got all upity. He seems to be in a bad mood as of late.
Happy I like sometimes. It depends on Happy's mood. Sometimes he is a joy to talk to sometimes he is ponti-like.
LVL I'm hot and cold with.
ACook was nice to talk to.
Thrawn is intelligent too.
We don't have a bad class of them here we just have the more stalwart ones. Then there's people like Ponti and Rio Bravo who just make my head hurt.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/20/2008 @ 1:29pm
Second, Clinton's adultery was never the issue - it was his perjury. Similarly, with Edwards, again, it's not the adultery that matters, it's the lies and coverup used to conceal it that tell the tale (e.g., Nixon and Watergate). Again, your erroneous take on my views results from taking your own straw men as fact. Posted by pontificus at 08/20/2008 @ 1:27pm
Isn't it Edward's buisness whether he wants to tell the public about an affair? I'm sure the day McCain had sex with his current wife behind his former wife's back he went out to the press and screamed I'm cheating on my wife!
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/20/2008 @ 1:32pm
Sebelius!
I'm all for her. Good clean American.
Clinton is the spawn of corruption...
It's time to set our priorities straight.
Posted by ttr at 08/20/2008 @ 1:38pm
Ponti-Bush,Hoover and Carter are some of the worst presidents this country has ever had and no amount of spin will change that fact.
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/20/2008 @ 1:43pm
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/20/2008 @ 1:43pm
He's not spinning. He actually has managed to make himself believe that.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/20/2008 @ 1:44pm
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/20/2008 @ 1:32pm
Well, I think it's the public's business if Edwards has been making such a big point out of telling everyone what a wonderful marriage he has, and how supportive he has been of his wife. Also, if Clinton's adultery was no big deal, why didn't he just admit it, rather than perjuring himself, and lying to the country on national tv? Similarly, it's unlike that Nixon ever would have been impeached if he had not tried to cover up the Watergate break in. These are all issues where the lies and methods used to cover up a small incident became important public issues.
Posted by pontificus at 08/20/2008 @ 1:45pm
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/20/2008 @ 1:43pm
By what objective measure has Bush done a bad job? Carter and Hoover have lots of bad stats. Bush? none at all. Your unreasoning hatred does not make him a bad President, sorry.
Posted by pontificus at 08/20/2008 @ 1:47pm
Ccc-First ponti says that he opposes stupidity and then he follows that up by claiming that Bloomberg is a democrat and Bush is a great president..Nothing like immediately contradicting yourself.
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/20/2008 @ 1:47pm
Posted by pontificus at 08/20/2008 @ 1:27pm
1. Give me an approximate time-frame for the "public redemption" of George W. Bush, PONTI? I'd say, Truman was quite popular again by the end of Ike's term, surely by his death in the mid-60s. So....what are we looking at for when "People finally realize how great a President, Dubya was"?...10-20-25-50 years? Ball-park it for me. I can wait to repost your answer in the future...heheh
2. Of COURSE, McCain isn't going to pick a pro-choicer. It'd be political suicide and THAT was my point. He has to "pay off" his LVLIB base by nominating a "Brownback" or a safer "Bobby Jindal" who thinks "life begins when you have sex" and "we should mandate the Lord's Prayer at all school lunches!"
He can't "go maverick" or the Hard Right will stay home on November 4th and say "Let the Commie Muslim black guy win...we'll get a REAL conservative in 2012 and wipe those Dems out!" and Obama will win.
3. No....the jokes and snide remarks you make are NOT about "perjury" or "lies and cover-ups". That's a lie and you know it. It's about the SEX, specifically SEX with another woman not Clinton or Edwards' wife.
But when it comes to McCain, it's "no big deal"..."30 years ago"..."they moved on, why can't we?"
Reason?....because he has an (R) behind his name on the Chyron on the TV. That's why.
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/20/2008 @ 1:50pm
Ponti-I don't have any unreasoned hatred.In fact,I don't hate Bush.I have factual reasons like the economy,inability to win an easy to win war in Iraq,Bush's weak response to 9/11,etc.The list is quite long.History will judge him to be one of the worst and history will be correct.
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/20/2008 @ 1:51pm
Carter and Hoover have lots of bad stats. Bush? none at all.----Posted by pontificus at 08/20/2008 @ 1:47pm
So I guess the 70% of Americans who don't like the job he's done are missing all the "good stats", huh?
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/20/2008 @ 1:53pm
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/20/2008 @ 1:29pm
"Then there's people like Ponti and Rio Bravo who just make my head hurt."
Now I know I'm doing my job here, thanks.
Posted by pontificus at 08/20/2008 @ 1:56pm
http://tinyurl.com/5ymeb7
Why does McCain hate US troops?
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/20/2008 @ 1:56pm
I'm not going to get into Bush's record with Ponti since all he'ss do is dismiss every point as "left-wing propaganda". Never argue with an idiot and all...
But to get back on-topic, the fact no one is considering (and Randi Rhoads has mentioned several times) is that there is a roll call for the nomination of President AND one for VP. Clinton could put her name into nomination no matter who Obama chose, use the Clinton weight to get herself nominated, and there is zip anyone could do about it. And since a poll of the delegates suggests that 26% want her as VP, this could end up being the most likely scenario. The real question is does she want second chair or does she pull a coup?
Posted by yutsano at 08/20/2008 @ 1:57pm
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/20/2008 @ 1:53pm
"So I guess the 70% of Americans who don't like the job he's done are missing all the "good stats", huh?"
70 percent of the American people think 'Freedom of Choice' is in the Bill of Rights, MASK. Similarly, the drumbeat of massive anti-Bush propaganda in the overwhelmingly Pro-Democratic MSM bombard the public with anti-Bush, pro-Obama bullshit every day. By all objective measures, the economy is doing fine right now, the country is safe, and the war in Iraq is won. Anyone who's paying attention, has experienced the constant anti-Reagan bias in the press, and the systematic bias of the last 35 years knows full well that the American people are simply reflecting in the polls what they are being told to believe every day by the MSM. And you people believe your won propaganda to the point that your perceptsion become your reality.
That's fine, but the Republicans will win again this fall, leaving you folks scratching your asses and wondering what the hell happened.
Posted by pontificus at 08/20/2008 @ 2:01pm
Ponti-the economy is not doing well,obviously, and we are at war which means that we are not safe,and it's customary to wait for a war to end before declaring victory something you might want to consider.Of course,your statement that the war in Iraq is won shows amazing ignorance since the war still rages on and your claim that Bush's lack of popularity is because of an MSM plot is a bit paranoid.
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/20/2008 @ 2:08pm
That's fine, but the Republicans will win again this fall, leaving you folks scratching your asses and wondering what the hell happened.----Posted by pontificus at 08/20/2008 @ 2:01pm
Okay, let's take them in reverse order.
First....you're predicting "Republicans will win again this fall". Are you talking about JUST McCain or are you going waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay out on a limb and actually predicting the Repubs will take back either the House or Senate or both?
Second, so 70% of America are stupid robots to Dem propaganda NOW...but when they re-elected Bush just 4 years ago by 3 million votes and he was at 55% approval still....they weren't? THAT your theory? (And amazingly that Dem propaganda will fade this fall (see above #1)?)
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/20/2008 @ 2:11pm
Anyone who's paying attention, has experienced the constant anti-Reagan bias in the press, and the systematic bias of the last 35 years knows full well that the American people are simply reflecting in the polls what they are being told to believe every day by the MSM.----Posted by pontificus at 08/20/2008 @ 2:01pm
BTW, on this? If true....why is Reagan one of the most popular ex-Presidents in those polls?!?!??!!? (or did you forget THAT part?)
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/20/2008 @ 2:13pm
Posted by pontificus at 08/20/2008 @ 2:01pm
The name betrays everything about him.
pontificate verb |pänˈtifiˌkāt| 2 express one's opinions in a way considered annoyingly pompous and dogmatic
Don't bother with him. He is a brainwashed mouth piece who doesn't have a view that is their own. He is just repeating the talking points he hears everyday from right leaning pundits. He wouldn't know what objective fact was if it slapped him across the face. He views everything through the guise of what is good for the Right. If it were up to him there would only be one view in this country.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/20/2008 @ 2:16pm
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/20/2008 @ 2:16pm
Well, and he's just not very bright. He doesn't ever seem to have thought much on his Limbaugh talking points.
Attack Clinton and Edwards for being sleazy adulterers...but forget how the McCains "got together".
or think that HIS friends on the Right would let McCain get away with picking a pro-choicer (which he NEVER would...it'd be suicidal).
or (if he is saying what he's saying) that somehow "the Media pushed down Bush's poll numbers and that's why the public doesn't like him anymore, just like the Media did with Reagan!!!!"...
yet he again "forgets?" that Reagan is still among the most popular ex-Presidents....which he'd gladly TOUT on another thread...but it hurts his "propaganda effects polls" argument here.
Or how about the time he posted something showing how "Reagan DID oppose use of chemical warfare in the Iran/Iraq war"....but that condemnation referred to SADDAM HUSSEIN as the "legitimate government of Iraq".....LOL
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/20/2008 @ 2:24pm
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/20/2008 @ 2:13pm
Don't worry. Ponti doesn't give a damn about facts. Hell he believes Bloomberg is a Democrat. He doesn't care about facts he just cares about spewing his obviously wrong and baseless dogmatic BS.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/20/2008 @ 2:27pm
Should I bother to mention that Reagan was ALSO an adulterer? Or is that picking on the Republican's sacred cow too much?
Posted by yutsano at 08/20/2008 @ 2:28pm
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/20/2008 @ 2:13pm
My point, MASK, is that most people don't pay much attention to politics. Their default views tend to gravitate towards whatever they are hearing in the news. Just as Obama's ratings go up when there's lots of coverage of him, and goes down when there's not.
But historically, polls always start to drift towards the Republicans as election day gets nearer. This is because people pay more attention to issues and draw more of their own conclusions when the time gets closer to vote. And yes, with McCain ALREADY ahead, it certainly looks like he's going to win, usually the Democratic Presidential nominee is VERY far ahead at this stage of the election cycle. And considering how unqualified and inexperience Obama is, how bad his past is, and what a bad candidate he is in general, I think it's highly unlikely even the MSM can get him elected. And he'll join McGovern, Mondale, Gore, Dukakis, and Kerry in well-earned obscurity.
Finally, people like Reagan in spite of the media, not because of it. And people know that the MSM is lying to them, that's why polls hold journalists in lower regard than Congress, and the MSM is fading away. It's also why liberals are so hot to control the internet and radio through government intervention.
Posted by pontificus at 08/20/2008 @ 2:29pm
You realize that national polls are so much bullshit and what really matters is state-to-state polls, which shows Obama comfortably ahead? Popular vote is bupkess, it's Electoral College, which is why I pretty much ignore the polls until around my birthday. Which happens to be a week before the election. Which is a political eternity. And I'm hoping the media starts getting off their asses and showing the gaffe-a-day campaign that is Grandpa McCain. But since you don't have an independent thought in your head Ponti, I have no idea why I'm bothering.
Posted by yutsano at 08/20/2008 @ 2:37pm
The presidency? It's going to be McCain in a landslide.
Pretty boy, Obama's, an empty suit. He's gutless. He's a condescending windbag. He has no foeign policy experience. He's not served in the armed forces. His primary accomplishments have been 1) self-promotion, 2)arousing the twenty-somethings, who think it'd be cool to have a Colored guy as president, & 3) he's put "I did not have sex with that woman" Willie put out to pasture.
An additional millstone hanging on his neck is the developing new "National Enquirer" story about John Edwards, his mistress & their love child.
On the other hand, my opinion of Edwards has soared upwards since I read he "begged" Hunter not to abort their baby. But then, I'm Catholic & pro-Life & not a typical "The Nation" baby killing Left/radical.
Posted by Banshee5 at 08/20/2008 @ 3:09pm
Posted by pontificus at 08/20/2008 @ 2:29pm
Okay, so
1. You've now backed down from your stance that "Dem propaganda is the reason Bush's poll numbers are so low...just like they attacked Reagan"...because you had to admit that Reagan is popular, which negates your earlier theory.
So...I guess we give it a mere 5-7 years and Dubya should be as popular as Reagan, no??? Or would you like to alter your theory even further?
2. Just to be clear, you're predicting a McCain victory....NOT that Republicans will win back control of Congress, right? You still have some grip on reality?
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/20/2008 @ 3:13pm
Pontificus is right about Bush. History will forgive him for his domestic failures such as his retreat on Social Security reform and will instead, 50 years from now, hail what was the ultimate shift in US strategy that started the down fall of Islamic terrorism.
Functioning Democracies in Iraq and Afganistan along with the wealth they will begin to create through free enterprise is going to start to crumble the basic building block of terrorist networks. That building block is poverty, despair, and the ability to channel that frustration into hatred of the west. They have been told that they are poor because of the wicked infidels and that the only option avaiable to them was to hit back in the name of Allah.
The fact is that a lot of Arab countries have already figured out that capitalism and peace are not at all at odds with being a good muslim and makes for a much more comfortable life.
Now you have muslims that have existed under tyranny for centuries beginning to figure it out with the help of the American armed forces.
This has been a fundemantal change in how we have delt with terrorism over the last half century. We are changing the game and not letting despots, and fanatical clerics determine the rules anymore.
This was a bold move and it's what Bush will be remembered for. Economic cycles come and go. With veru few exceptions nobody remembers or cares how a past president handled an economy. What historians ultimately write about is his impact on the world stage. George W Bush's impact will have been enormous. Enormously positive.
Posted by IUT at 08/20/2008 @ 3:16pm
Pontificus is right about Bush. History will forgive him for his domestic failures such as his retreat on Social Security reform and will instead, 50 years from now, hail what was the ultimate shift in US strategy that started the down fall of Islamic terrorism.
Functioning Democracies in Iraq and Afganistan along with the wealth they will begin to create through free enterprise is going to start to crumble the basic building block of terrorist networks. That building block is poverty, despair, and the ability to channel that frustration into hatred of the west. They have been told that they are poor because of the wicked infidels and that the only option avaiable to them was to hit back in the name of Allah.
The fact is that a lot of Arab countries have already figured out that capitalism and peace are not at all at odds with being a good muslim and makes for a much more comfortable life.
Now you have muslims that have existed under tyranny for centuries beginning to figure it out with the help of the American armed forces.
This has been a fundemantal change in how we have delt with terrorism over the last half century. We are changing the game and not letting despots, and fanatical clerics determine the rules anymore.
This was a bold move and it's what Bush will be remembered for. Economic cycles come and go. With veru few exceptions nobody remembers or cares how a past president handled an economy. What historians ultimately write about is his impact on the world stage. George W Bush's impact will have been enormous. Enormously positive.
Posted by IUT at 08/20/2008 @ 3:16pm
I have never seen such amusing fodder as the analysis of who Obama is going to pick.
Yesterday's short list had Biden, Bayh and Kaine on it and I would have made that the order of finish. I cannot imagine Obama being so crass as to hold out an icon's name like Biden's only to reject him. Curiously, Biden seemed to take himself out of the running yesterday only to backtrack a bit.
Mrs. Obama is said to be opposed to him and as the new Marie Antoinette of Democrat politics, I think she gets what she wants.
One would think with all of Obama's present polling trouble, Obama would make the smart calculation and turn to Mrs. Clinton. This is what I said late yesterday.
I think the call was made and she also demurred. Not interested, thank you very much Barack! Why? I think Mrs. Clinton, like Biden, suspects this may be a losing effort and even if the ticket wins, why spend four to eight years in exile as VEEP to a Prez who does not like you very much.
The Clintons are nothing if not clever. Bill and Hill have no doubt offered their sage counsel to Obama. He needs to do shore up base support among her disaffected voters.
Only a woman at number two can assuage the ill-feelings of the sulking Hillary supporters. Pick Sibelius, they urge and you will have chosen someone you like, we like and our 18 million voters like.
This is of course tailor made to create dissension in the party. Many of HRC's most ardent supporters will not get what Obama has done in passing over their gal.
Hillary will be gracious, but a touch wounded in the aftermath, slipping Obama the shiv and making sure he goes down to a bitter defeat.
Posted by pete kent at 08/20/2008 @ 3:31pm
We are changing the game and not letting despots, and fanatical clerics determine the rules anymore.----Posted by IUT at 08/20/2008 @ 3:16pm
We are? The Saudis and Musharref were "democrats" (small d)?
BTW, I wonder if you ever debate any fellow right-wingers on THIS point of yours?
"That building block is poverty, despair, and the ability to channel that frustration into hatred of the west. They have been told that they are poor because of the wicked infidels and that the only option avaiable to them was to hit back in the name of Allah."
So the cause of terrorism is NOT that Islam is an "inherently violent religion" or that they "hate us because of our freedoms"...but due to "poverty and despair"?!?!?
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/20/2008 @ 3:35pm
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/20/2008 @ 3:13pm
"2. Just to be clear, you're predicting a McCain victory....NOT that Republicans will win back control of Congress, right? You still have some grip on reality?"
That's right. The Republicans will not win back Congress, but WILL win the Presidency. That's my prediction. You will recall, I have a pretty track record with predictions. I predicted that impeachment would go nowhere, Plame would go nowhere, the Iraq war would be a non-issue by election time...all things the things that you, Nichols, CRABBIE, and the rest of the moonbats have been wasting time here all year and last year haven't worked out to amount to more than a hill of beans; all have, I believe, worked out about like I expected. Go ahead, run one of those nifty little searches you like to do.
Posted by pontificus at 08/20/2008 @ 3:44pm
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/20/2008 @ 3:13pm
"1. You've now backed down from your stance that "Dem propaganda is the reason Bush's poll numbers are so low...just like they attacked Reagan"...because you had to admit that Reagan is popular, which negates your earlier theory."
Reagan was popular for the same reason that Slick Willy was popular. Charisma. Frustrated the hell out of the press, they used to call him the 'teflon President'. But boy did the left hate him. More than Bush, in some ways. Oh, and they also used to like to call him stupid. Bush has the disadvantage of not having Reagan's charisma. But he, just like Reagan, has the issues on his side.
"So...I guess we give it a mere 5-7 years and Dubya should be as popular as Reagan, no??? Or would you like to alter your theory even further?"
How did you come up with 5-7 years? Who knows how long it will take?
Posted by pontificus at 08/20/2008 @ 4:03pm
First; Hillary is not Bill. She did not cheat
Second; a surgeon in his first surgery has a better chance of success if an experienced surgeon is in with him. Bill will add some expertise despirately needed in our troubling time. Since when is experience a bad thing?
Third; They can play good cop bad cop. Obama can kindly set an agenda, Hillary can push it through.
Forth; Hillary is an intelligent mother. She gets the whole picture and how that picture affects future generations.
fifth; Hillary was able to be a senator while her husband did his own thing. Bill is working on a world mission. He can move forward. Hillary can work without her husband looking on, yet Bill can be there for that extra anaysis when needed.
Posted by dwwolf at 08/20/2008 @ 4:14pm
Posted by pontificus at 08/20/2008 @ 3:44pm
No need, PONTI. I'll accept this and already locked it away for November 5th.
BTW, I'll be happy to post it if you're right too!
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/20/2008 @ 4:36pm
Reagan was popular for the same reason that Slick Willy was popular. Charisma.......... But he, just like Reagan, has the issues on his side.----- Posted by pontificus at 08/20/2008 @ 4:03pm
Wait a minute, PONTI...which was it?
Was Reagan popular due to "the issues" or "charisma"?
And I assume this is at the least an admission that Bush has little charisma?
BTW, the 5-7 year frame was the polling that showed Reagan very popular in the early 90s.
Again, HOW LONG will it take to "redeem Dubya in the eyes of the American people"? Love to save THAT prediction too....even if it takes until 2050 or longer.
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/20/2008 @ 4:40pm
dwwolf at 08/20/2008 @ 4:14pm
H.C.S.O.T.D.
1.) Bill's 'cheating' may be the reason he had to 'get' her into office...
2.) Not when the 'experienced' surgeon was part of the 'old school' thinking that lead to the ilness in the first place...
3.) The 'good cop-bad cop scenario' may work great on hardened criminals... but we are in a position where it is necessary to reestablish democratic principles across the board.
4.) OK... fine
5.) Dream on... Bill wants a 'second chance'... and that's how Hillary has gotten this far.
Posted by ttr at 08/20/2008 @ 4:42pm
I'm curious about two of these points-
1. "Third; They can play good cop bad cop. Obama can kindly set an agenda, Hillary can push it through."
What agenda did Hillary ever get pushed through? Anything significant?
and 2. "Forth; Hillary is an intelligent mother. She gets the whole picture and how that picture affects future generations."----Posted by dwwolf at 08/20/2008 @ 4:14pm
"An intelligent mother"?!?!?? Is that like "You know, they say that Hillary is a bad mother__...hush your mouth...Hey, I'm only talkin' 'bout Hillary!"
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/20/2008 @ 4:52pm
After doing some soul searching I have come to the conclusion that Barack Obama should seriously consider Hillary for his VP pick. Barack needs someone who is a fighter and smart. Hillary fills that need. If however Barack picks Joe Biden that would also be a plus. The McCain/Bush smear machine is in full gear again with nothing to offer but fear and lies as their tools to win. In conclusion the Democrats need a strong team to prevent four more years of misery.
Posted by LPSPGN at 08/20/2008 @ 4:58pm
Why is it taking so long?
I guess it is just that hard to find a candidate who is less experience as to not make you look inexperienced by comparison.
Maybe he should pick David Cook from 'American Idol'.
This will no doubt be like one huge firework that launched into the sky but never goes off.
No matter who the nominee is, it will be a disappointment.
Posted by Zamfeer at 08/20/2008 @ 5:02pm
Virtually anyone he picks will be more qualified and more experienced than he is.
Repackaged campaign slogans and nice suits won't win in November. The voters will start to wonder about the judgement of the Democratic party as to why they woul dpick such a lightweight who has to go out and pick an experienced Washington insider to overcome his glaring deficiencies after all the 'hope and change' talk.
He should pick Hillary and Bill. If the country is going to go down in flames, at least make it amusing in the process.
I don't think he wants Hillary becuase he probably does not want Bill alone with his wife Michelle while he is in some other country pretending to be a statesman.
Posted by Zamfeer at 08/20/2008 @ 5:08pm
Repubs want Hillary or a Washington insider as Obama's VP pick so they can undermine his "change we can believe in" message.
It ain't gonna happen!
Posted by Metteyya at 08/20/2008 @ 5:18pm
At an RCP average of Obama up by less than 2% does not bode well, even with the presumed "bounce" he will get from the convention.
The DNC brought this on themselves as they have so many times in the past.
More than anything though, Saddleback showed us for the first time who the candidates are and what they stand for. The national media did not do it, like YouTube, it took someone outside the loop, to do the work for Newsweek, Time, NYT, and MSNBC, to name a few.
This is a most interesting time!
Posted by sailcovershot at 08/20/2008 @ 7:02pm
Posted by pete kent at 08/20/2008 @ 3:31pm
Hillary Clinton will support Obama and so will her we. We were wounded and angry because she was the stronger candidate, but that does not translate into McCain votes. She may have been the best candidate, but Obama is the better candidate still in the race.
Even those of us who once admired McCain have found his recent pandering pathetic. There is also the foggy, lost quality in his speeches that make me(and a lot of other women who care for aging parents) wonder just how healthy he is. Bush makes me cringe because a man who attended private schools right through college should be able to speak his native tongue, but McCain used to be very sharp and now seems tired and confused.
Posted by Pogge at 08/20/2008 @ 7:31pm
Posted by frankgrits at 08/20/2008 @ 7:35pm
I am speaking for women of a certain age here Frank. I haven't talked to any of them who are seriously considering McCain. Obama is a young whippersnapper and all, and it's a crappy time in history to have such a steep learning curve, but he is an able learner. John MCCain is turning into the poster boy for old dogs who can't learn new tricks.
I am also waiting for it to dawn on someone in the press that if McCain wins the woman who will be giving the White House Christmas tour committed adultery too. Cindy McCain had sex with a man knowing he had a family. That is not going to fly with married women of any age, except maybe the Evangelicals who seem to have an enormous tolerance for adultery as long as it is GOPPERS doing the whoring.
Posted by Pogge at 08/20/2008 @ 8:09pm
Posted by Zamfeer at 08/20/2008 @ 5:08pm
Michelle Obama could kick Bill Clinton's ass and Barack Obama is a statesman whether you like it or not.
Posted by Pogge at 08/20/2008 @ 8:13pm
I'll probably be laughed at for saying this...but I think Clinton is Obama's only chance. Biden is bland. I don't know much about the others. And if McCain wins I'd rather live on another planet. But what do I know..i'm only a naive 32 year-old (so my parents say).
Posted by jenjenjen at 08/20/2008 @ 8:19pm
Posted by Pogge at 08/20/2008 @ 8:09pm
Correcting my post "some loopy" Evangelicals. I have Evangelical friends who would be mighty offended to be lumped in with the pro-adultery contingent.
Posted by Pogge at 08/20/2008 @ 8:19pm
If he were to name any other woman besides Hillary, he'd have a war on his hands in his own party. If he picks Biden, the repubs roll out all of his former quotes and make a fool out of him and a mess of the ticket. Then you'll see McCain go up by double digits.-----Posted by frankgrits at 08/20/2008 @ 7:19pm
And remember, you can always trust a FRANKGRITS' prediction...
to be wrong.
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/20/2008 @ 8:34pm
Posted by Pogge at 08/20/2008 @ 8:09pm
Amazingly, same Repubs who went after Clinton for adultery...and joke about it to today (over 10 years later)...
have no problem with how John and Cindy "got together"!
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/20/2008 @ 8:36pm
Don't you people realize that the only SURE WAY for Obama to win this election is by taking Hillary as his running mate. I honestly don't understand the stupidity in this country. Yes, Bill Clinton made remarks and yes, he was a bit problematic, but is it really worth risking the election and having to deal with another Republican in the White for at least four more years, just to prove the point that Bill was a problem? Hillary Clinton is brilliant and effective and knows the ropes and has the respect and support of 18 million voters. There is no other candidate out there that can deliver a win for Obama the way an OBAMA/CLINTON ticket can. Biden's ok, all of the others are ok, Clinton is stupendous! Honestly, I wish she would grab for the nomination, because she is the best candidate out of any of them and it's a shame that the media put Obama on this false pedestal and just tore this woman to shreds, because she should be taking that Oath in January of 09. If Obama is truly a smart guy, and I think he is, but unfortunately he is listening to alot of idiots out there, and that includes the Kennedy's like Caroline and Uncle Ted, who pushed Hillary Clinton off the map. Well, guess what guys, if he doesn't choose Hillary, he isn't going to be living at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue anytime soon. You can bet on that!
Posted by LoisZimmerman at 08/20/2008 @ 8:36pm
Posted by LoisZimmerman at 08/20/2008 @ 8:36pm
Actually, Lois, you and FRANKGRITS need to get together. I think HE's a bigger fan of Hillary than you...
and he said EVEN IF Obama picks Hillary as Veep, he's STILL voting for McCain to give her a shot at 2012 instead.
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/20/2008 @ 8:41pm
have no problem with how John and Cindy "got together"!
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/20/2008 @ 8:36pm
ooh,
elitists in hawaii!
Posted by frosty zoom at 08/20/2008 @ 9:12pm
Posted by frosty zoom at 08/20/2008 @ 9:12pm
I have a problem not so much with how John and Cindy "got together", though it ain't a pretty picture, but with the pass Cindy gets while Michelle Obama gets hammered.
This is a woman who didn't have enough moral fiber to tell a married man she was unwilling to commit adultery and Michelle, an intelligent, tough, savvy, faithful woman is taking heat?
Women should be horrified.
Posted by Pogge at 08/20/2008 @ 9:28pm
Ergo, McCain should win.
Posted by JOMAMMA at 08/20/2008 @ 9:31pm
Uh, MAASCH, didn't you also predict "Hillary should win"?
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/20/2008 @ 9:32pm
Posted by JOMAMMA at 08/20/2008 @ 9:31pm
Hillary likes Obama. You can see it in their body language. It's Bill who has the problem. Contrary to the talking head who shall remain nameless Hillary Clinton didn't ride Bill's coattails to the Senate. She nearly sacrificed her political career for his and as it was her ambitions were on hold for decades and he knows it. She won in spite of him, not because of him.
Bill Clinton contributed to Hillary's problems in the primary and now he's feeling guilty. That explains his lack of enthusiasm for Obama, but after what the GOPPERS have done to him I can't believe he'll be so petulant as to not come around.
Posted by Pogge at 08/20/2008 @ 9:41pm
Wow, here comes Biden, another talking head and plagiarist; just as if one barak Obama's not enough.
----------
Biden is Democratic favorite for Obama's No. 2 By NEDRA PICKLER, Associated Press Writer
CHICAGO - Sen. Joe Biden has emerged as the clear favorite among Democrats to be Barack Obama's running mate for his understanding of foreign policy in grave global times and his fighting spirit against the rival Republican ticket.
Posted by HelenDAO at 08/20/2008 @ 10:03pm
Nothing surprising in McCain's lead. It should be that way. The people are practical. Who needs Obama - Biden?
-------------
McCain takes lead over Obama: poll Wed Aug 20, 2008 4:19pm EDT
By John Whitesides, Political Correspondent
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - In a sharp turnaround, Republican John McCain has opened a 5-point lead on Democrat Barack Obama in the U.S. presidential race and is seen as a stronger manager of the economy, according to a Reuters/Zogby poll released on Wednesday.
Posted by HelenDAO at 08/20/2008 @ 10:16pm
mccain is seen as a stronger manager of the economy, according to a Reuters/Zogby poll released on Wednesday.
Posted by HelenDAO at 08/20/2008 @ 10:16pm
wow,
the man admits he knows nothing and people still............
Posted by frosty zoom at 08/20/2008 @ 10:25pm
While he's making millions $ thanks to his race, his brother scraps by 1 dollar per month.
----------
Barack Obama's 'lost' brother found in Kenya
By Nick Pisa in Rome Last Updated: 9:01PM BST 20 Aug 2008
George Hussein Onyango Obama, Senator Barack Obama's long lost brother was tracked down living in a hut on the outskirts of Nairobi Photo: Guy Calaf, Vanity Fair, Italy The Italian edition of Vanity Fair said that it had found George Hussein Onyango Obama living in a hut in a ramshackle town of Huruma on the outskirts of Nairobi.
Mr Obama, 26, the youngest of the presidential candidate's half-brothers, spoke for the first time about his life, which could not be more different than that of the Democratic contender.
"No-one knows who I am," he told the magazine, before claiming: "I live here on less than a dollar a month."
Posted by HelenDAO at 08/20/2008 @ 10:31pm
Posted by JOMAMMA at 08/20/2008 @ 10:44pm
So you're kinda batting .000 on your predictions, huh?
BTW, McCain can surely win. Obama can blow it, despite his advantages. But one thing to remember-
After St. Paul, Maverick is stuck with his public financing of 84 million...
while Obama will have 100s of millions. Money he can dump into "solid Red States" and force McCain to defend (where he shouldn't have to).
Right-wing getting a LITTLE premature in their "Obama is sunk now" prognostications I think.
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/20/2008 @ 10:48pm
the US is experiencing growth...
Posted by JOMAMMA at 08/20/2008 @ 10:53pm
thanks to a stupidly low fed rate.
it'll go up in december.
$10 trillion, jm, $10 trillion.....
Posted by frosty zoom at 08/20/2008 @ 11:13pm
the "dot.corn" bubble!
lol.
Posted by frosty zoom at 08/20/2008 @ 11:19pm
ooh, goody! more oil:
SHAWN MCCARTHY
Globe and Mail Update
August 20, 2008 at 2:15 PM EDT
Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Danny Williams proclaimed a new era of partnership in the often-fractious relationship between his government and the oil industry Wednesday as he inked a deal to proceed with the $7-billion Hebron offshore project.
The often-combative premier said the megaproject will generate some $28-billion for provincial coffers at current oil prices, and company guarantees of local contracting will lure back Newfoundlanders who have left the province to find work.
But he said the oil companies - led by operator Chevron Corp. and Exxon Mobil Corp. - can expect generous profits even if oil prices fall back from current levels.
"This is really a win-win," Mr. Williams told a news conference in St. John's.
Posted by frosty zoom at 08/20/2008 @ 11:21pm
half and half?!?
happy, your "fingers" are a superfund site.
Posted by frosty zoom at 08/21/2008 @ 12:10am
Sorry...Obama's lead has dwindled state by state also. One popular website has McCain winning by 4 and another has Obama winnning by a couple electoral votes. The media could only prop him for so long. His inexperience and far left views are what's killing his poll numbers. Conservatives aren't thrilled with McCain but, he is the lesser evil.
Posted by JustTheTruth08 at 08/21/2008 @ 12:19am
growth:
After the binge, the purge
For the past five years, the U.S. restaurant industry has been on an expansion tear. Now, high fuel prices, a shaky economy and rising food inflation are keeping customers at home, sending four major chains running for bankruptcy protection so far this year
Posted by frosty zoom at 08/21/2008 @ 12:28am
The shaky economy, the credit crunch, plus soaring food and fuel prices have combined to create the worst conditions for restaurateurs since 1991.
Posted by frosty zoom at 08/21/2008 @ 12:35am
There is still hope that the Democratic party will nominate Hillary at the Convention. All these problems with Obama as the potential, or presumptive, nominee only highlight what a mistake it was to bury Hillary's candidacy.
If the DNC is incapable of making a decision that will win the Democrats the Presidency, i.e., allowing the nomination of Hillary to go through, then their only other hope, is to have her as the VP.
Millions of Hillary supporters have stood by her all this time, withholding their support for Obama. If she were on the ticket 75% of those Hillary supporters would throw their significant weight, power, energy and dollars behind Obama/Clinton.
At first some of their supporters would balk, but both candidates should be able to reasonably convince their supporters of the sound logic of this choice.
An added benefit, even more important that politics (No!), the country needs a healing and those two joining forces would take us in the right direction for that healing, as nothing else right now can. So even if Hillary is on top, I firmly believe that a combined ticket is required to bring peace between these two groups and unity back to the Democratic Party.
This making peace between the two groups has the potential for more power than either candidate possesses. A candidates power always lies in reaching the hearts of the people. Most Democrats have been deeply troubled over the schism within the party. A union, reunion, of the Party would bring forth from most supporters that rapt commitment both candidates are capable of channeling. The naysayers would not be able to resist the pull of the tide.
Posted by Rockrooky at 08/21/2008 @ 12:55am
And it's the return of the H.T.O.T.D.'s!!!
Posted by yutsano at 08/21/2008 @ 02:00am
Well, my guess is, if Hillary's the nominee, then Obama would be on the ticket, but not the other way around. That's, if Obama's the nominee Hillary might not be the running mate. She should not even accept the offer. What's that sh-t, VP.
Posted by HelenDAO at 08/21/2008 @ 02:29am
The United States needs HRC...Bill should be relegated to AR to turn that state around. HRC has the ability to use precise language. Biden has a habit of screwing up. Don't forget his past plagarism of speeches. Bring HRC out in Springfield Saturday ...Let's march together and defeat the GOP. Let's ask how many planes McCain crashed...Let's discuss his character or lack thereof... Clinton
The Bush now has us in a near war situation with Russia..That should be an issue..
D McCage
Posted by bushout at 08/21/2008 @ 04:10am
Posted by frosty zoom at 08/20/2008 @ 10:25pm
"mccain is seen as a stronger manager of the economy, according to a Reuters/Zogby poll released on Wednesday.
Posted by HelenDAO at 08/20/2008 @ 10:16pm
wow,
the man admits he knows nothing and people still............"
If McCain admits he 'knows nothing', then Obama doesn't even know enough to KNOW he knows nothing. It's been a long time since we've had a candidate with as thin a resume as Obama's. Two years in the Senate? Give me a break!
Posted by pontificus at 08/21/2008 @ 07:58am
McCa has been sooo out of touch on sooo many levels that his competitiveness only proves that what's worse is how clearly out of touch and morally bankrupt the new con repub GOP is now-- all their candidate has to do is turn into a maniac shouting "KILL KILL KILL KILL, my freinds"... and they all come out.
All Obamre has to do is play McCa contradictory statements on a loop, split screen, mirror image of McCa saying completely opposing statements, with flashes of others telling him corrections--- over and over and over...
Yes it's 3rd grade level stuff, but apparently it seems to work for those in a mass media fog.
Posted by hsuBfools at 08/21/2008 @ 08:19am
Posted by JOMAMMA at 08/21/2008 @ 08:48am
yuts is right, MAASCH. "Rockrooky" is merely the Hillary Troll Of The Day returned. Soon they shall pass again, this time into oblivion.
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/21/2008 @ 09:02am
BTW, I notice from the "blurb" to this thread that John Nichols is saying "it'll probably be Biden"...
ergo, given Mr Nichols track record...
it probably WON'T!
heheh
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/21/2008 @ 09:03am
Mask,
Who do you suppose will be the picks of both candidates?
Posted by JOMAMMA at 08/21/2008 @ 09:11am |
From the movie National Treasure, very fitting for my predictions of VP picks, consistent with all the speculation.
Abigail Chase: What do you see? Ben Gates: [holding a water bottle up to a 100 dollar bill and peering into it] 2:22 Abigail Chase: What time is it now? Clothing Store Clerk: Almost 3 Abigail Chase: [sighs, defeated] We missed it. Riley Poole: No, we didn't. We didn't miss it because... [looks up and Ben and Abigail, to Ben] Riley Poole: You don't know this? I know something about history that you don't know. Ben Gates: I'd be very excited to learn about it, Riley. Riley Poole: Hold on one second, let me just take in this moment. This is cool. Is this how you feel all the time? W-well, except now. Abigail Chase: Riley! Riley Poole: All right! What I know is that daylight savings wasn't established until World War I. If it's 3 p.m. now that means that in 1776 it would be 2 p.m. Ben Gates: Riley, you're a genius. Riley Poole: [Abigail and Ben start heading out. Riley follows.] Do you actually know who the first person to come up with the idea of Daylight Savings Time was? Abigail Chase, Ben Gates: Benjamin Franklin [Riley stamps his foot in defeat.]
Sooooo,
What I predict is that Obama will pick Al Franken and McCain will pick Dennis Miller.
Posted by Benchrest at 08/21/2008 @ 10:35am
I have been of both extremes of the reaction for a Obama-Hillary ticket. Yesterday I abhored the idea, in fact I sometimes think she is partly to blame for Obama's recent slip in the polls. But I can also see that it would ONLY be with her announcement that the convention would be awesome and the Party would come united. In addition, McCame seems to want a pro-choice vp. If he gets it, he will erode deeper into the Democrat constituency that is still loyal to her. It's time to come together and WIN the elections. Let's spoil the party for the Republican's.
Posted by carlosbas at 08/21/2008 @ 10:43am
The Clintons believe that they have 2012 sewn up and will do what they can to get Obama to lose and it will be interesting,if Obama loses,to see how many ignorant democrats allow the Clintons to get away with it and go for the Clintons in 2012.
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/21/2008 @ 11:07am
Posted by JOMAMMA at 08/21/2008 @ 09:11am
Obama doesn't "go safe", i.e. Biden. He doesn't pander to women, i.e. Sebelius.
I think he takes a page from Clinton when he picked Gore, instead of an "older, Establishment Democrat" and finds somebody who keeps up the change paradigm (since it's a winner for him).
No ideas who that might be.
As far as McCain goes? Despite his "leadership", he'll FOLLOW Obama's lead and pick HIS Veep based on Obama's Veep. He's pandered about everything else, why not this? Obama doesn't pick a woman...McCain might pick Palin in a BLATENT attempt to woo Hillary voters, but he might be smart enough to know it would back-fire.
My hope? He picks Romney and LVLIB goes nutsy over a "Temple Mormon a heartbeat away from the Presidency!!!"....LOL
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/21/2008 @ 12:23pm
I like how everyone is making their predictions and everyone here has bee repeatedly proven wrong in this election. How many people on here, including Happy, during the primaries said Obama wouldn't win, that Hillary was going to steal it? Now look at where we are. As much of a political guru as you are Happy and as much as you say you are looking through crystal balls you got that one way off base. This election is a funny thing. Predictions are worth about as much as the gum on the bottom of your shoe.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/21/2008 @ 12:24pm
Al Gore.
Posted by hsuBfools at 08/21/2008 @ 12:33pm
McCain rolling on...states are turning from deep, cyanotic lip blue to a kind of pale blue...others turning from baby blue to pink...time to panic, lefties! Nominate Hillary!
http://www.electionprojection.com/president08.shtml
Posted by pontificus at 08/21/2008 @ 1:24pm
ponti-Why is it time for the lefties to panic and nominate Hillary?
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/21/2008 @ 1:41pm
"half and half"
Posted by 2HAPPY at 08/20/2008 @ 11:55pm
So what are you happy? A freakin' clone?
I'm a smattering of German, English, Irish and Norwegian but when I lived in Germany (and dressed from the German clothing stores) my blonde hair and blues eyes allowed me to "pass" as German. Not a big deal in 1986, but with a Jewish great-great grandmother it would have been important in 1939.
There is a difference between "bi-racial" and "half and half" that has nothing to do with being PC and you are bright enough to know it. The language of bigotry is intended to demean, diminish and degrade. It's disgusting.
Posted by Pogge at 08/21/2008 @ 1:43pm
Al Gore.
Posted by hsuBfools at 08/21/2008 @ 12:33pm
What about him, HSUB?
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/21/2008 @ 1:43pm
Posted by Pogge at 08/21/2008 @ 1:43pm
Pogge, "Half & Half" is Limbaugh code for a word that he (and ditto-heads like HAPPY) would LIKE to call Obama.
The original one was "Magic"...aka "Magic Negro" (from the mocking editorial by David Ehrenstein in the LA Times).
By way of excusing their use of "Negro", they claim "Hey! The mainstream media started calling him that, not us!!!!" (A lie of course since Ehrenstein was being sarcastic).
Probably got too much heat for that, now they're onto "Half & Half" (code for "mulatto")
Ultimately, we know...and THEY know...the word they REALLY want to use for Obama...."Negro" was close...just need to slurrrrrr it a bit more.
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/21/2008 @ 1:46pm
I'm still trying to figure out how people regard McCain as being experienced in economics. He admitted to the entire nation that he knows NOTHING about the economy. Like I've said before, if war was all the president had to deal with then I'd vote for McCain. Unfortunately for McCain, being president encompasses more than that. I also think the president should be able to relate to the majority of Americans(i.e. working class). McCain does not. I'm sure that offering your wife up for a topless beauty contest may impress some people but not me. My president atleast has to have some respect for his wife. Please, no Al Gore. I'm not going to give him another shot. He had his chance and he fucked it up. This time I'll stand in line for hours for someone else. Thanks but no thanks on Al Gore.
Also, I don't agree that Obama needs Hillary to win. She will be a hindrance if anythign at all. I'm sure she does have redeeming qualities. I just didn't see her exhibit those qualities after the Iowa primaries and please Bill just pissed everyone off. I've never seen the man's face and neck be more red than during the primaries. I thought he was going to explode. Also I don't trust her especially the way she conducted herself regarding the Michigan and Florida primaries. Both state parties knew the delegates were not gonna be counted if they held their primaries early but they did it anyway. People, don't say your vote doesn't count. It does count within the rules of the DNC. If your state party decides to break the rules, don't be mad at Obama. Be mad at your state party and their leaders. They're the ones who fucked ya'll over. Or be mad at the DNC for instituting those policies years ago. I'm sorry but it is what it is. Such is life.
Posted by k330k at 08/21/2008 @ 1:47pm
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/21/2008 @ 1:41pm
Because at some level the lefties must know that America is simply saying no, once again, to the far left candidate that the far left fringe that dominates the Democratic Party has put up. This much slippage, this early, even with the unprecedented in-the-tank-for-Obama MSM performance, has got to have alarm bells ringing all over kool-aid land. Lying about Obama's past has not worked, people are starting to figure out just how far left this guy is, and what an appallingly poor fit his beliefs are to that of most Americans. Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, this Chicago project that Howard Kurtz has been working - the bottom has just begun to fall out. Obama needs some kind of crediblity injection fast, and only Hillary can provide it.
Posted by pontificus at 08/21/2008 @ 1:48pm
ponti-There is nothing,including polls, that indicates that America is simply saying no to Obama nor is there any evidence that Obama is a far left candidate.Save your bs for Rush's site.Those people will believe anything.The bottom has not fallen out for Obama and the war in Iraq has not been won and will be a campaign issue despite your desire to have it otherwise.It will be a close election and you know that which is why your republican partisan self is pushing for Hillary.
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/21/2008 @ 1:54pm
Posted by k330k at 08/21/2008 @ 1:47pm
So, please give us a rundown on all of Obama's economic experience. Has he ever even held a paying job? Bwahahahahahahaha. Please insert your answer here -------->[] use more space if necessary.
Posted by pontificus at 08/21/2008 @ 1:55pm
ponti-Bush never earned anything in his life and got everything through family connections.
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/21/2008 @ 1:57pm
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/21/2008 @ 1:54pm
"nor is there any evidence that Obama is a far left candidate."
Really? 20 years of 'God Damn America' and 'the government invented AIDS and drugs to kill black people' doesn't provide a clue to you? Friendships with far left domestic terrorists like Bill Ayers?
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOkie dokie!
Posted by pontificus at 08/21/2008 @ 1:59pm
Ponti-I see that you were unable to back up your claim that he is far left.Of course,all one needs to do is look at his voting record to know that he isn't far left,but that takes effort.
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/21/2008 @ 2:04pm
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/21/2008 @ 1:57pm
"ponti-Bush never earned anything in his life and got everything through family connections."
Well, there's no question he earned several million dollars running businesses. Whether you approve of that is, of course, problematic for any leftist, because by their definition, pretty much all of capitalism is a criminal enterprise. What I mean is, Obama's experience with economics is so tenous, I can't even explain how he makes a living at all, outside of milking the public coffers. No wonder he thinks money grows on trees, or in the bank accounts of wealthy people, by some kind of evil, magical, mystical process.
Posted by pontificus at 08/21/2008 @ 2:04pm
So, please give us a rundown on all of Obama's economic experience. Has he ever even held a paying job? Bwahahahahahahaha. Please insert your answer here -------->[] use more space if necessary.
Posted by pontificus at 08/21/2008 @ 1:55pm
SENATOR OBAMA has a job, the same one McCain has-not that the old man has shown up much lately.
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/21/2008 @ 1:46pm |
I had bi-racial foster kids who called me mom. Up to that time I didn't really get just how insane racists are. I am a pacifist by nature, but took it out in the parking lot with one pasty wench. Someone intervened before it went beyond shouting, but I have never wanted to hurt someone so badly in my life. She said vile things to two sweet little kids who were nothing but sunshine and smiles till she started in. What in God's name is wrong with these people other than a total lack of conscience, empathy or a sense of fairness?
There is no excuse.
Posted by Pogge at 08/21/2008 @ 2:05pm
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/21/2008 @ 2:04pm
Obam's voting record is the most far left in Congress. 100 percent rating by the ADA, even Kennedy doesn't get that. Look it up if you have to, I'll wait here.
Posted by pontificus at 08/21/2008 @ 2:06pm
Ponti-I am a capitalist and have no problems with rich people who earned their money without hurting anyone and Bush did not earn millions on his own.He used family connections to avoid Nam and run businesses into the ground.On his own, we never would have heard of Bush.
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/21/2008 @ 2:09pm
Ponti-You mean the Obama who voted to fund the war and voted to give Bush power to attack Iran?Those are,certainly,very far left things to do.
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/21/2008 @ 2:10pm
ponti-You mean the Obama who voted in favor of the revised FISA bill?Very far left.
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/21/2008 @ 2:12pm
Posted by Pogge at 08/21/2008 @ 2:05pm
"SENATOR OBAMA has a job, the same one McCain has-not that the old man has shown up much lately."
When I say 'economic experience' or 'paying job', I don't mean working for the government as a politician. This has absolutely nothing at all to do with understanding how economics works, it's a world completely divorced from economic reality. Any business that managed their finances the way the government manages theirs would go out of business immediately. The fact is, Obama has not got the slightest experience in business, or pretty much anything else for that matter. This explains how his economic policies are so completely fucked up and bass-ackwords. I suspect most of the people who vote for him are similarly economically illiterate as well, or else they wouldn't be looking for more handouts from the govenrment.
Posted by pontificus at 08/21/2008 @ 2:13pm
Ponti-McCain has no experience in running an economy.In fact,he doesn't even run his own families economy.The wife's family does that for him.
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/21/2008 @ 2:15pm
Posted by pontificus at 08/21/2008 @ 2:06pm
We live near an Army base and were a military family ourselves. This is the first time I have ever heard the majority of the soldiers saying they will not vote for more war-in this case McCain. They may not like voting for a Liberal, but when the president of Iraq says, "Congratulations, you won, pack up and go home" and John McCain is still giving speeches where he is shouting he will never surrender....well? I know what the polls are saying and I'll be darned if I can explain it because we live in Right Wingville and most of the neighborhood is voting Obama or staying home.
Worth noting, it was a winger who pointed out to me that Cindy McCain was culpable when John McCain committed adultery-like I care being a godless Liberal and all-so apparently someone has actually read all the Ten Commandments, not just the ones that are convenient. It's a point that to e is as fine as frog's hair, but the winger seemed to take it very seriously.
Posted by Pogge at 08/21/2008 @ 2:20pm
Posted by pontificus at 08/21/2008 @ 2:13pm
Since I need to return to MY paying job I will respond later I guess :)
Posted by Pogge at 08/21/2008 @ 2:21pm
pogge-I'm an Army brat.
Posted by i'm nobody at 08/21/2008 @ 2:22pm
Posted by Pogge at 08/21/2008 @ 2:05pm
The Limbaugh guys aren't your old "Bull Connor" guys with firehoses and talk of "Nigras"....they aren't even the quasi-smoothness of a David Duke (though they're close).
They couch it in "gangsta/hip hop culture" talk (even when referring to somebody like Obama who is Harvard-educated). They bring up crime stats on crimes committed by Latinos s supposedly part of an "illegal immigration" debate.
And they use their little code-words....like "Half & Half" ....which of course brings up the question "Why does Obama being biracial MATTER to you?"...to which they say "What's wrong with that? It's not me, it's you libs who want to make him white and black for your own political purposes!"
Really? Then why aren't WE calling him "Half & Half" over and over, if that's "our agenda" and "there's nothing wrong with that"???
Then they'll say somehting like "Hey, some of my best friends are Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, or J.C. Watts!"....just like the old, equally subtle anti-Semites used to say about "all their Jewish friends"....as cover for the crap they're spewing.
BTW, anybody want to dispute Rush's racism...go here and read the first few quotes alone-
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Rush_Limbaugh
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/21/2008 @ 2:39pm
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/21/2008 @ 2:39pm
MASK, the fact that some Republicans are racists does not excuse or justify your embrace of politicians who practice and/or espouse poor economic policies. There are plenty of racists who vote Democratic as well. I don't oppose Obama because he's black or half-black, I oppose him for the same reasons I opposed Kerry, Gore, Clinton, Dukakis, Mondale, and Carter: bad policies.
Posted by pontificus at 08/21/2008 @ 2:49pm
Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 08/21/2008 @ 2:52pm
No problems.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/21/2008 @ 3:06pm
When did mulatto become offensive? Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 08/21/2008 @ 3:06pm
Always has been. Mulattos used to be hated in the black and white communities. It was a term that differentiated them as neither black or white. Belonging to no group. Grow up as someone who doesn't belong to either group and you start to understand. Mullato was used as a term of separation.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/21/2008 @ 3:08pm
"I don't oppose Obama because he's black or half-black, I oppose him"
Because you have bought into dogmatic and factually bad Republican policy. I have already disproven the myth of lowering taxes makes the economy better. Want to keep going?
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 08/21/2008 @ 3:15pm
Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 08/21/2008 @ 3:04pm
Won't be Jodi Rell....reason?
"On April 20, 2005, Rell signed into law a bill that made Connecticut the first state to adopt civil unions for same-sex couples without being directed to do so by a court."
Posted by Maskdelta at 08/21/2008 @ 3:21pm