posted on July 13, 2007 01:52:43 PM new
Just heard a quick call-in poll on the Thom Hartman radio show...who ya gonna vote for if election was right now...
Callers voted No. 1 Edwards/Kucinich (tie) No.2 Obama No. 3. Clinton
I'm thinkin' it over...but it don't sound too bad...
posted on July 13, 2007 02:31:33 PM new
To sub-morons and mouth breathers.
As a rational person, you could not possibly believe in a national election Kucinich would even make the top 15. One more haircut and Edwards is probably through, Obama doesn''t have a chance and Clinton has so much baggage, she might get arrested before the election.
posted on July 13, 2007 02:33:28 PM new
But, the pitiful thing is, that's the only prospects they have. I wouldn't vote for any of them if I were a democrat.
posted on July 13, 2007 03:46:17 PM new
I never stated I believed any of them would/could/might/wouldn't win. I reported the results of a quick call-in poll as was clearly stated in the OP.
A rational person wouldn't base his choice on a haircut.
Now, as I have stated before, the neocons are quick to bash the Democratic candidates but I have yet to see them bragging up any Republican candidates.
posted on July 13, 2007 05:25:52 PM new
etexbill
posted on July 13, 2007 04:01:52 PM new
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"A rational person wouldn't base his choice on a haircut."
Really, when they cost $1,250. If he spends money like that personally, what would he do with the budget."""
Gee, I don't know....I don't see any connection....sure hope if he's elected he won't spend it like bushit is doing....
"Cost Of Edwards' Haircut Hits $1,250
Beverly Hills Hair Stylist Who Cuts Democratic Presidential Hopeful's Hair Tells All To Washington Post"
This is one of 843,000 items on google under "Edwards Haircuts", so somebody must be reading about them and basing their choices on them. """
Doesn't prove they're rational.
""desquirrel
posted on July 13, 2007 04:19:56 PM new
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I know this is soooo hard. The point was I would doubt the accuracy of the poll.""
Uh, they counted the phone calls...if the caller said Edwards, the counted that as one. If the caller said Obama they put a little mark after Obama. Then when they quit taking calls they counted them.....ooohhhh is that soooo hard....?
posted on July 13, 2007 06:16:21 PM new
Clinton, Edwards talk of limiting debates; exclude lower rivals...
Associated Press - July 13, 2007 2:23 AM ET
DETROIT (AP) - Democrats John Edwards and Hillary Rodham Clinton consider themselves among the top presidential candidates.
They were caught by Fox News microphones discussing their desire to limit future joint appearances to exclude some lower rivals after a forum in Detroit Thursday.
Edwards says, "We should try to have a more serious and a smaller group."
Clinton agrees, saying, "We've got to cut the number" and "they're not serious." She also says that she thought their campaigns had already tried to limit the debates and say, "We've gotta get back to it."
Others taking part in the forum sponsored by the NAACP were Senators Barack Obama, Chris Dodd and Joe Biden, Congressman Dennis Kucinich, New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson and former Alaska Senator Mike Gravel.
One Republican, Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo, also participated.
posted on July 13, 2007 06:18:24 PM new
Kucinich Lashes Out at Limiting Debates
Jul 13 03:35 PM US/Eastern
By BETH FOUHY
Associated Press Writer
NEW YORK (AP) - An angry Dennis Kucinich lashed out at John Edwards on Friday, saying his Democratic rival showed "a consistent lack of integrity" by suggesting fewer candidates should participate in presidential forums and then trying to explain his remark to reporters.
"This is a serious matter and I'm calling him on it," Kucinich, an Ohio congressman, said in a telephone interview Friday. "Whispering, trying to rig an election, then denying what's going on and making excuses. It all reflects a consistent lack of integrity."
Kucinich's comments came after Edwards and Hillary Rodham Clinton were overheard Thursday discussing the possibility of limiting the number of participants in future presidential forums.
In an exchange captured on camera and open microphone by broadcasters after an NAACP forum in Detroit, Edwards approached Clinton onstage and whispered in her ear.
"We should try to have a more serious and a smaller group," Edwards said, and Clinton agreed.
"Our guys should talk," Clinton said, complaining the format had "trivialized" the discussion.
Kucinich, who typically polls in the low single digits, clearly felt the slight was directed at him. All eight Democratic contenders took part in the program, including Barack Obama, Bill Richardson, Chris Dodd, Joe Biden, Mike Gravel and Kucinich.
Both Edwards and Clinton were asked about the exchange Friday, and offered different explanations.
In New Hampshire, Clinton seemed to lay responsibility on Edwards.
"I think he has some ideas about what he'd like to do," she said, adding she liked participating in the forums.
For his part, Edwards told reporters in Iowa that he wasn't in favor of barring anyone from future gatherings. Rather, he said he wanted to see them separated into two groups of four each, chosen randomly.
"The result would be that we would have a much more serious discussion and people would actually be able to see what the differences are between us," he said.
Kucinich called Edwards' explanation "disturbing" and said he planned to contact Edwards and Clinton immediately to demand an apology.
"I accept their offer to participate in a debate with just the two of them," Kucinich said. "John should be happy with this, since he wants a small group."
Kucinich's bitterness toward Edwards was somewhat ironic, given the boost he gave Edwards in Iowa when they were both running for president in 2004.
Kucinich, who is very popular with a small but ardent group of liberal activists, asked his Iowa supporters to back Edwards if they didn't meet voting thresholds in any of the state's precincts. That effort increased Edwards' final delegate count in the state, putting Edwards within striking distance of winning the caucuses that year.
___
Associated Press Writers Amy Lorentzen in Humboldt, Iowa, Holly Ramer in Manchester, N.H. and Nedra Pickler in Washington contributed to this report.
It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather we should thank God that such men lived.George S. Patton
posted on July 14, 2007 02:29:40 AM new
How funny. Some progressive liberal station WISHING the elections would be held today and that edwards/kucinich would EVER have a chance of winning......
then clinton and edwards on tape, again caught conniving to use their POWER to limit the speech of others - this time their competition.....
kucinich raving about it.....
what a party.....of jokers.
======================================
"This is a serious matter and I'm calling him on it," Kucinich, an Ohio congressman, said in a telephone interview Friday. "Whispering, trying to rig an election, then denying what's going on and making excuses. It all reflects a consistent lack of integrity."
It SURE does. But then when did that EVER matter to any liberal/dem?
[ edited by Linda_K on Jul 14, 2007 03:32 AM ]
posted on July 14, 2007 04:19:48 AM new
Now, as I have stated before, the neocons are quick to bash the Democratic candidates but I have yet to see them bragging up any Republican candidates.
Hey, how 'bout that old John McCain...how's his campaign coming along ???
posted on July 14, 2007 04:54:31 AM new
linduh , you scream like a stuck pig when anyone speaks for you but I see you have no problem speaking for others once more proving your double standards.
""posted on July 14, 2007 04:27:43 AM new
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't like what you're hearing so now want to change the topic/title of YOUR thread to make it about McCain?
So typical of you when the thread doesn't go as you hoped it would. LOL LOL
And your clue phone is ringing off the hook.....Kucinich IS NOT a neo-con.""""
What I was "hearing" was exactly what I expected to hear from the neocons...same old, same old broken record. And never one good word about any of their candidates
How would you know how I "hoped" the thread would go...answer, you couldn't possibly. I posted something I heard on the radio today. Just because you're so obsessed with me you couldn't refrain from posting in here doesn't change anything about MY post.
"clue phone ringing off the hook" ????
You 've been hanging around that playground again at recess again haven't you, linduh....those restraining orders never did work very well.....
Now, as I have stated before, the neocons are quick to bash the Democratic candidates but I have yet to see them bragging up any Republican candidates.
posted on July 14, 2007 05:13:48 AM new
LOL....well it's kucinich who's screaming bloody murder now. And he's certainly NOT a neo-con .
Just trying to ignore what he's saying publically it appears. LOL LOL LOL
I'm sure we'll soon be hearing from all those other 'neo-cons' who are also running for the dem. nomination soon too.....on this underhanded garbage edwards and clinton THOUGHT they might get away with.
Also looks like the edwards/kucinich ticket won't be in their future. Call in to your progressive radio station.....things have changed already. LOL LOL
posted on July 16, 2007 06:21:32 PM new
Linda_K
posted on July 16, 2007 02:02:27 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No worry, Stonecold. sybil rambles each day 24/7....never stopping.
I take NOTHING she ever says to heart....how can anyone...she's for amusement purposes only. """
Translated from linduhspeak to the truth:
linduh, "She made a fool of me again and the old tired excuse of being stalked has backfired because I keep responding to her posts so now I'll babble inanities and hope nobody notices. ""
posted on July 16, 2007 06:29:20 PM new
Sure, Dennis is out there. Too far out there for me these days and I don't plan on voting for him even though he is a friend of mine. However, he does stand by what he says, he doesn't back peddle, he's passionate about helping the little guy and at least he's honest even when he knows his opinions are not always popular. Which candidate on either side can say that?
The candidates on the Republican side are not any better. In fact, it's getting so they all suck. There. I've had my hissy fit for the night. LOL!
posted on October 28, 2008 07:30:23 PM new
Just taking a stroll down memory lane and found this thread. Roadsmith was about the first to get Obama on her radar, I believe. Profe was also an early admirer. The great pundit Squirrel said "he doesn't have a chance".
Are YOU a Bunghole?