posted on January 28, 2008 07:16:22 AM
Yikes! Looks like Hill's sun may be setting! Ted Kennedy announced he will be endorsing Obama for party presidential nomination.
Still can't figure why Clinton let Bill do the campaigning for her in South Carolina - what better thing did she have to do??? Just when we could take some pride in having a woman candidate for the top office, she lets her "better half" (!!!!) take on the hard jobs for her??? WTF!!
-------------------------------------
"Still can't figure why Clinton let Bill do the campaigning for her in South Carolina - what better thing did she have to do??? Just when we could take some pride in having a woman candidate for the top office, she lets her "better half" (!!!!) take on the hard jobs for her??? WTF!!"
And then there are some who attribute Gore's loss of the election to his effort to distance himself from Clinton.
posted on January 28, 2008 08:33:24 AM
I don't think distancing herself from WJC is necessary or recommended (or even possible), but it looked like he was stealing ALL of her thunder. She has to present herself as a viable candidate in her own right and she didn't do in SC and one has to wonder WHY NOT?
-------------------------------------
posted on January 28, 2008 09:44:06 AM
I think it became obvious early that Hillary didn't stand a chance in SC - so she spent her time in states where she still has a chance to win. JMO.
posted on January 28, 2008 11:28:54 AM
Kennedy gave a great endorsement speech for Obama at American University today. He praised Obama's positions with an implicit but unstated comparison to those taken by Hillary.
posted on January 28, 2008 12:50:24 PM
Obama is an empty suit that appeals to the same crowd who ooed and ahhed over Edwards' haircuts. It's hilarious to see Leno ask people on the street who people like in the race. Then you can hear all about how handsome Obama is, great choice in ties, etc. Now if he only had SOME kind of experience, like maybe part-time manager of a gas station.
After Kucinich pulled out, he's my number one choice for the Dem nod.
I have to agree with desquirrel about Obama. An empty suit. It just proves how irresponsible some of the voters in this country are. Imagine, choosing to vote for someone based solely on their looks, how they dress, their race or their sex. You may as well hold a pageant much like Miss America to choose the next president. Why bother going through the normal voting process at all?
Still, it should be one of the most interesting races we've had. My brother intends to vote for Romney. If Romney does not get the nomination, he'll vote for Obama (he hates McCain). If Obama doesn't get the nomination, he's not voting at all (he won't vote for a woman). It's comical.
posted on January 30, 2008 10:02:02 AM
I kind of like Romney. Being elected a Rep gov of a Blue state has to mean something. But you really can't vote for a cult member. In terms of beliefs, Mormons make Scientologists or People's Temple members look like Episcopalians. Too wacky for words, even though part of those beliefs include strong civic pride and sense of community.
So McCain looks like the best choice to me by far. The only question is, is it best to run against someone who will be voted for solely because she's a woman or someone who will be voted for solely for being black.
posted on January 30, 2008 11:12:55 AMSo McCain looks like the best choice to me by far.
McCain is to old for me. Could he even survive four years in office?
Imagine, choosing to vote for someone based solely on their looks, how they dress, their race or their sex.
Is Romney any different in this regard. Isn't he the Edwards of the Republican Party?
The only question is, is it best to run against someone who will be voted for solely because she's a woman or someone who will be voted for solely for being black.
Is that how you see the choice between Clinton and Obama? Nice to see that it boils down to sex and race for you.
Personally I think Clinton has to much baggage to bring to the table. Besides I am so sick of the White House being filled with Bush and Clinton. It is time for someone new.
Granted Obama does not have the experience, but I see it as an opportunity to bring some change to the country and some fresh ideas.
There is one guy in charge of running this country in name only, but whoever the President it, that person will have a CABINET which will advise the President so that is one reason why I do not feel a person does not need to have "the experience" everyone seems to think the President has. What kind of military experience did Bush have? Practically none - so this makes him qualified to be Commander in Chief? Does he make all the decisions about Iraq? Yes in name only. It is all those generals that develop the ideas and present them to Bush who makes a decision.
What experience did Bush have with running a business? Years, but all those business failed. That didnt stop Bush from becoming President and running the finances of this country.
Take a look at this article on past presidents who have had less experience than Obama.
posted on January 30, 2008 11:36:29 AM
"Is that how you see the choice between Clinton and Obama? Nice to see that it boils down to sex and race for you."
Has nothing to do with ME. If you see any interview with "the moron on the street", these are the reasons for earning the person's vote.
Personally these 2 are the best possible opponents for the Republicans to run against. All of the Clinton scandals shoved under the rug will be broadcast in living color. The "signed where they told me to sign" nonsense is great ammo. The quality of Obama's suits is going to get boring real fast and it is doubtful the dems can bus enough people to the polls to make up the difference.
posted on January 30, 2008 11:55:57 AM
As long as democrats keep the focus on the war, either candidate could win against a republican. Last CNN poll:
"When it comes to dealing with Iraq, which party do you think would do a better job: the Democratic Party, the Republican Party, or both about the same? If you think that neither would do a good job, please just say so." Half sample, MoE ± 4.4 (Form A)
Democratic Party 34%
Republican Party 28%
About the same 20%
Neither 10%
Unsure 8%
[ edited by pixiamom on Jan 30, 2008 11:58 AM ]
posted on January 30, 2008 12:16:31 PM
"But you really can't vote for a cult member. In terms of beliefs, Mormons make Scientologists or People's Temple members look like Episcopalians. Too wacky for words, even though part of those beliefs include strong civic pride and sense of community."
desquirrel, please enlighten all of us with the source of your information. This non-Mormon who married a wonderful Mormon woman and her five children, desperately needs to know, so he can save himself, from their control.
posted on January 30, 2008 12:20:12 PM
Most people are worried about the economy.
Every time Iran rattles a saber and investors "lose confidence" and the market tanks, even the lowest dolt figures out the Middle East is the most important part of the planet.
posted on January 30, 2008 12:44:03 PM
Joseph Smith "invented" Mormonism the same way L Ron Hubbard "invented" scientology. The Book of Mormon is nothing but plagiarized hokey copied from bits and pieces of the Bible, etc. And unlike the Bible, absolutely nothing has any other verification. Smith and later leaders call themselves "prophets" yet the Bible says if a prophet's prophesies do not come true he is not a true prophet and should be put to death. You wouldn't want to read a list of Smith and the gang's prophesies. In any case, telling a Mormon he's wacky is like telling a Scientologist he's wacky, except at least you don't have to worry about finding a rattlesnake in your mailbox with a Mormon.
posted on January 30, 2008 12:46:03 PM
Bill - My brother is Mormon. IMHO, he's voting for Romney just because he is Mormon. To me, that's just plain wrong!
If I were a Republican, and I am NOT, I'd never vote for McCain. Listen to him. He's a Bush clone right down to his tone of voice. It sends shudders up my spine.
As a democrat, I haven't totally decided yet. I'm leaning toward Clinton. There are some very sad facts we have to face in this country and that's the fact that racism is alive and thriving. It's not so much the Klan or the Skin Heads I worry about, it's those hiding behind the bushes. If you look throughout history, what has happened to those who have been supportive of civil rights? Martin Luther King? Kennedy? Lincoln? I fear Obama may have some things to deal with that would take his attention away from White House duties. Obama really is an intelligent, well spoken man and I think he'd do well. Sadly, I just don't think it's his time yet. There are still too many in this country that won't look past his race. If Edwards would have stayed in it, I think I may have voted for him.
Cheryl
[ edited by CBlev65252 on Jan 30, 2008 12:46 PM ]
posted on January 30, 2008 12:57:03 PM"Is that how you see the choice between Clinton and Obama? Nice to see that it boils down to sex and race for you."
Has nothing to do with ME. If you see any interview with "the moron on the street", these are the reasons for earning the person's vote.
Sorry, but how the heck I am supposed to know that was just a general statement when you were making a statement about McCain being the best choice to you in one sentence and then made another statement that was supposed to be from "some moron on the street".
"In my experience, those who do not like you fall into two categories: the stupid, and the envious. - John Wilmot, the Second Earl of Rochester
posted on January 30, 2008 01:02:07 PMIf I were a Republican, and I am NOT, I'd never vote for McCain. Listen to him. He's a Bush clone right down to his tone of voice. It sends shudders up my spine.
If this was another time in history where the country was not so divided about every major issue I might have voted for Rudy. However I want to get the Republicans out of the White House and try to get some things accomplished in the country.
There are some very sad facts we have to face in this country and that's the fact that racism is alive and thriving.
I totally agree. Not only is racism still alive, I think there is still a good portion of people in this country who do not feel a women can/should lead this country.
"In my experience, those who do not like you fall into two categories: the stupid, and the envious. - John Wilmot, the Second Earl of Rochester
posted on January 30, 2008 01:53:47 PM
"There are some very sad facts we have to face in this country and that's the fact that racism is alive and thriving."
Let's not forget religious intolerance.
desquirrel's statements are indicitive of the beliefs which Romney must run against.
It's really unfortunate that in the 21st century there is still a significant number of people who will base their vote for a presidential candidate on race, gender or religion.
But I believe that most Americans will base their vote on a candidate's position on issues. Romney, who is a conservative Republican is not acceptable to me because I don't agree with his party platform or his position on issues.
I am not influeced one way or the other by his gender, the color of his skin or the God that he worships.
posted on January 30, 2008 05:25:45 PM
It is a Beauty contest.
In the beginning,it is like a GONG SHOW but slowly it morphs into a beauty contest.
A Midwestern look is better than a distinct NEW YORK city look,did you notice they all have pretty white teeth?
*
Lets all stop whining !
posted on January 30, 2008 06:18:38 PM
Yup. And it doesn't matter how much Helen wrings her hands and chants "say it isn't so", it won't change.
The Democrats insists on shooting themselves in the foot every chance they get and as time goes on, this election gets further and further away from them. One BBC commentator said that in virtually any other country on the planet, the idea of Clinton or Obama running for the head office would be laughed at.
posted on January 31, 2008 05:29:53 AM
They've started running Obama ads here - oh my gosh! What an orator! All politics aside, he does sound like Kennedy...or Hitler (not comparing him to Hitler except in his ability to stir up folks through his speeches ). He has that "sumpin-sumpin". It's not JUST that he's handsome - he's got IT. I don't see how he can be stopped.
-------------------------------------
I agree about Obama and his oration. When he's giving a speech he's inspiring. I don't think he does as well in debates. He's still well spoken, but he has let Clinton rattle him.
I hope he does better in tonight's debate.
Desquirrel - did the BBC commentator say what he had against Clinton and Obama?
posted on January 31, 2008 06:03:58 AM
No one here thinks that Kennedy's endorsement of him may hurt him? As much of a dem as I am, I don't like a lot of what Kennedy does or says. Let's not forget that the man got away with murder. That's one fact I can't get out of my head. I have a feeling that I'm going to be on the fence between Obama and Clinton right up to the March primaries. They both bicker at one another like two school children. IMHO, having all this start too early is really too much!
posted on January 31, 2008 07:06:10 AM
Cherishedclutter, I strongly suspect that the BBC commentator's "statement" is a figment of a squirrels overactive imagination.
"They've started running Obama ads here - oh my gosh! What an orator! All politics aside, he does sound like Kennedy...or Hitler (not comparing him to Hitler except in his ability to stir up folks through his speeches ). He has that "sumpin-sumpin". It's not JUST that he's handsome - he's got IT. I don't see how he can be stopped."
OVER the years, I’ve been deeply moved by the people who’ve told me they wished they could feel inspired and hopeful about America the way people did when my father was president. This sense is even more profound today. That is why I am supporting a presidential candidate in the Democratic primaries, Barack Obama.
My reasons are patriotic, political and personal, and the three are intertwined. All my life, people have told me that my father changed their lives, that they got involved in public service or politics because he asked them to. And the generation he inspired has passed that spirit on to its children. I meet young people who were born long after John F. Kennedy was president, yet who ask me how to live out his ideals.
Sometimes it takes a while to recognize that someone has a special ability to get us to believe in ourselves, to tie that belief to our highest ideals and imagine that together we can do great things. In those rare moments, when such a person comes along, we need to put aside our plans and reach for what we know is possible.
We have that kind of opportunity with Senator Obama. It isn’t that the other candidates are not experienced or knowledgeable. But this year, that may not be enough. We need a change in the leadership of this country — just as we did in 1960.
Most of us would prefer to base our voting decision on policy differences. However, the candidates’ goals are similar. They have all laid out detailed plans on everything from strengthening our middle class to investing in early childhood education. So qualities of leadership, character and judgment play a larger role than usual.
Senator Obama has demonstrated these qualities throughout his more than two decades of public service, not just in the United States Senate but in Illinois, where he helped turn around struggling communities, taught constitutional law and was an elected state official for eight years. And Senator Obama is showing the same qualities today. He has built a movement that is changing the face of politics in this country, and he has demonstrated a special gift for inspiring young people — known for a willingness to volunteer, but an aversion to politics — to become engaged in the political process.
I have spent the past five years working in the New York City public schools and have three teenage children of my own. There is a generation coming of age that is hopeful, hard-working, innovative and imaginative. But too many of them are also hopeless, defeated and disengaged. As parents, we have a responsibility to help our children to believe in themselves and in their power to shape their future. Senator Obama is inspiring my children, my parents’ grandchildren, with that sense of possibility.
Senator Obama is running a dignified and honest campaign. He has spoken eloquently about the role of faith in his life, and opened a window into his character in two compelling books. And when it comes to judgment, Barack Obama made the right call on the most important issue of our time by opposing the war in Iraq from the beginning.
I want a president who understands that his responsibility is to articulate a vision and encourage others to achieve it; who holds himself, and those around him, to the highest ethical standards; who appeals to the hopes of those who still believe in the American Dream, and those around the world who still believe in the American ideal; and who can lift our spirits, and make us believe again that our country needs every one of us to get involved.
I have never had a president who inspired me the way people tell me that my father inspired them. But for the first time, I believe I have found the man who could be that president — not just for me, but for a new generation of Americans.
I don't think Ted Kennedy's endorsement will hurt Obama. The man has been in the senate since 1962. Regardless of any issues some people have with him that says a lot for his popularity and power.
I think it has the potential to really help him. The pundits say that Kennedy has a huge well organized fund raising machine and is very popular with Latinos (a group that Obama has been weak with.) Of course, that's no guarantee that he can convince them to vote for Obama - but it is possible that he will sway some voters.
