Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frets
I think you took what I was saying wrong, I realize that there are an insanely large amount of people of every color capable of the office. I meant that Obama is the first person (of any color, including white) to get what seems like the majority of America to look past the color of skin. I feel like he almost has this attitude like, "Yeah, i'm black, what does that have to do with this.....". His speech in Philly really changed my....a lot.
I can't believe how long it took Hillary to concede...or should I say "decide" to concede, she still hasn't yet. She's like a child that won't go to bed. Lights out Hillary!
I'm behind Obama 100%. He's not perfect. He's a politician and thus will say whatever people want to hear. The whole "change you can believe in" mantra is a total joke... BUT he's a fresh face and that's what we need right now.
Not someone like McCain, who while different than Bush in many ways, will invariably end up becoming like him, using the same old tired talking points about Iraq in the months ahead in order to satisfy his republican base.
Obama will have to walk on eggshells though...one tiny slipup can derail his campaign, and he really needs to straighten out some of the stuff he's said re: sitting down with people like Ahmadinejad - that is just flat out stupid and shows a total lack of experience in foreign policy, it's just not done, whether you are a republican or democrat. He'll need to spin himself out of that one somehow because it will be a major issue during the debates.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Visionray
At first, I was very afraid about Obama and foreign policy, but the more I thought about it, the more I thought maybe he is exactly what we need. Maybe his inexperience will lead to a BETTER way of doing things. I think it is ultimately going to be optimism vs. experience.
Optimism wins.
All Obama has to do is stick with the facts.
It will be a landslide for Democrats in the House and the Senate. Even the RNC has stated this publicly.
However one thing that was noted on "Coundown" by Keith Olbermann
JFK was very hip and very charismatic. He barely beat Nixon.
Back in 2000 when mccain was an independent I was going to vote for him. But someone took him aside and told him to stfu for years and he'd be pres. Now I don't know who he is.
Obama would have plenty of advisers and always have his options clearly laid out. He's been a pretty good decision maker so far so I'm thinking he's got a pretty good chance.
I was surprised too. I thought someone would start one any second so I didn't bother.Quote:
Originally Posted by gerbick
I have had a similar experience, although I wouldn't have voted for him in '00. McCain was like Powell for me, one of the few well-known Repubs who wasn't off-his-rocker insane; would have much perferred him over Bush. But he has indeed whored his 'maveric' soul out for this nomination, and as much as you'll hear from him in the coming months that he's an 'agent of change' it's a bit hard to swallow when his voting record in 2008 is 100% in line with Bush's policies.Quote:
Originally Posted by jAQUAN
From Americans that I have seen represented by the media in Britain, the majority have said that it doesn't matter who wins this, the next president will be McCain.
However, hat hasn't stopped the British media completely blanket covering the elections. For something that means so little to the average British person, they have overblown it out of proportion. Many newspapers had double page spreads on the topic for many months now and devoting tiny amounts to British politics. Our recent problems, such as tax bands and slipping house prices, have been pushed to the back and only brought forward now they are a problem - rather than a warning.
There was one stage, I think it was a month ago, where the BBC (British version) had more coverage of the election than CNN or the NYT.
On March 5th British MPs where voting whether or not to have a referendum on joining the EU treaty. This has serious consequences in Britain. But it was pushed back and hidden away on page 9 of the Guardian, and not even in the headlines of the BBC. The headlines were about Clinton winning Ohio.
I seriously do not get why - nor do I truly care - why UK and Germany, among other European countries cover our politics in such a horrible misinformed manner. It's like watching a children's show... as an adult. It's mildly amusing... somewhere in the deeper, more child-like recessions of your brain. Apply some adult logic and it hits you as just a bad attempt to make something that's not pertinent to you... somehow pertinent.
I've been there, and by the time I read what was typed, it was misconstrued in a manner to make it even objectively pertinent to (what I considered) an audience that honestly didn't care unless it was assassination or would affect their livelihoods... and with the British Pound Sterling going from (typically for years) a 1.4:1 to now a previously unseen 2.1:1 (or so) exchange rate, there's nothing we can do to regain that .6 exchange difference overnight... so why even cover it?
The coverage is usually missing a lot of pieces in its presentation anyway despite multiple past (and forthcoming) that the media in those markets are "fair and unbiased"... it's just an oddity that isn't reciprocated in the same percentages in regards to the overseas politicians; guaranteed.
Anyway... as it stands, McCain will end up winning simply because of states like West Virginia and that mindset - anglo-saxon first/last name, "experience", and the whole "stay the course" mentality because... well, as it was so simply stated to me last night, "Bush might not be an eloquent speaker, but he said what he'd do... and he did it. Disagree or agree, a man that says exactly what they're going to do and then does it comes off as trustworthy "enough" to continue to follow..." and despite having to dislike things that our foreign policy has done that I'd consider foolish, nor having a true liking for our present president... at a lower level I can see how that would stick in the mind of people that's heard one thing, dealt with the other...
"Read my lips..." (paraphrase) - George H. Bush
Yeah... that also stuck in people's heads too.
It will be interesting to be over in London for the elections.
I have to agree with you on the media asheep.
Now that the dust has settled a bit the news is remembering that there are crisis situations all over the world.
Bite your tongue.Quote:
Originally Posted by gerbick
I'm a little surprised this is the way this thread was started too.
I came on here expecting to see a "Finally!" or an "Obama FTW!" title. :yarr:
Guess as one of his supporters and a volunteer, I dropped the ball...
I'll just have to blame it on being home sick with the flu all week now.
Anyway, I forced myself to stay up with the wife in bed to watch his nomination speech.
I already felt like I was a part of historymaking, and finally knew what it must have been like for previous generations to watch the last truly inspirational leaders like MLK or the Kennedys, but then I looked over at my wife.
Here was a rightwing, evangelical, who voted for Bush even in spite of his first disasterous term..., and she was crying.
Man, that melted my heart right there.
"Hope" really is the best word to describe his campaign, because if he can touch her like that then maybe there's still hope for the rest of the Bushies too. ;)
Not sure why you think it was so quiet, Gerbs.
It seems like everywhere I turned last night the lead story was Obama with interviews of young black Americans, clips of MLK and RFK, and (until Hillary's campaign suspension was leaked) politicians and pundits discussing VP choices and Hillary's "demands".
I was a little relieved when the leak came, but I'll be really relieved if he picks someone else and she doesn't go all Joe Lieberman/Benedict Arnold/scorched earth on the party.
We'll just have to wait and see...
As for experience, he's got more than enough experience and accomplishments under his belt, and the whole "lack of experience" is just an empty talking point that gets repeated in the hopes that people will believe it without checking his record.
He's got foreign relations experience, he's traveled and met with leaders in the middle east, he's a member of the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee, a member of the Environment and Public Works Committee which deals with our national infrastructure, and a member of the Veterans’ Affairs Committee trying to get better treatment for our soldiers who make it back home.
He's got a great record in bipartisanship and working across the aisle with the Republicans to get important legislation passed in areas like loose nukes, ethics and lobbyist reform, and government accountability and transparency, including bills that bear his and fellow Republicans' name like the Coburn-Obama, and Lugar-Obama bills, and he cosponsored immigration legislation with McCain that allowed undocumented workers who have been here over 5 years to stay and apply for citizenship only if they pay all back taxes, learn English, and have no criminal record.
This time we might actually get a president that knows how to be a "Uniter" instead of a "Divider" because as much as it pains me to say it, his record in the Senate shows he voted with Bush and the Republicans 40-50% of the time.
Now despite that one forgivable "weakness" ;) he's shown good judgement and been on the correct side of most of the issues that are import to the majority of Americans such as the Iraq war, minimum wage, children's healthcare, veteran's care, affordable education, alternative energy, climate change, tax cuts for the lower and middle class, America's infrastructure, job creation, the economy, and restoring foreign diplomacy and respect in the world for America again.
OK, I'll get off my soapbox now, and just say pish-tosh to the naysayers and pessimists... and Gerbs,... go bite your tongue again for good measure :crazy: because our future depends on you being wrong. :D
I'm gonna go lay back down now, all this typing wore me out.
I disagree Gerbs
Unless We have a serious voter fraud going on and the Supreme Court decides the election Obama will be the next president of the United States.
As for McCain there are way to many holes in that one.
Claims to support the troops.
Infact slowed down the g-i bill and then didn't vote for it.
Claims that he would have told Bush to Go to New Orleans
Instead was too busy partying with Bush on his birthday.
Claims to be concerned with the ecology.
Believes that free market princilples are the only way to reduce global warming.
Claims he is a foe of lobbyists but even with the recent purging of staff he still has more lobbyists more current and former lobbyist fundraising bundlers than any other candidate ever.
Flipflopped on immigration.
Votes against MLK holiday not once but twice then tries to play makeup 20+ years later.
Whatever happens, this is one of the few times in recent memory where I have been proud of Americans.
i hope obama leaves mcain barrack and blue on his way to becoming the best president ever. Johnny boy should give up now, im sure the republicans are saying sweep the leg by playing the race card, but obama is about to crane kick his ass with his awesomeness.
Yes, i havnt got a god damned clue how politics work, but i want obama, im ready for change.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gerbick
I don't understand where you are coming from seeing that I can read about Obama winning all over Google News, Digg even the WSJ is reporting about it and more then a few Blogs, not to mention all over the radio and people talking about it on the street, ie I'm in New York City and heard a number of people talking about it.
Personally I don't see McCain winning it, most Republicans (myself included) don't really care for the man and I don't see a lot of people getting off their @zz to vote for him come Election Day.
But to be honest, coming to Flashkit.com I did expect multiple threads on the whole thing.
^ We did. The issue is so good that we covered all the scenarios already. Half the reason I didn't start one was for fear of getting 'old'ed.
I just overheard McCain say, "It always darkest just before its completely black." Wtf does that mean!?
Imho, I'd prefer a true conservative constitutionalist elected. I'm a little concerned about where Obama would get the money to enact all his plans or if some of the people it would help even deserve it. Bottom line he couldn't do any worse in that area and he's perfect for the #1 issue. Global perspective.
America is the best place on earth, but we should realize it's lonely at the top.
Is America really the best place on earth though? Maybe parts of it but I could see wanting to live in other countries compared to some states here.
I'm still in the Southeast US. Trust me... the news here barely covered it. And the social response has been rather quiet.
Don't know about that one - talking with foreign leaders polls fairly well, so it isn't an unpopular position regardless of its wisdom. And at this point, a moderation in our approach to dealing with guys like him might be more benficial than our current cold-sholder.Quote:
Originally Posted by Visionray
One other point about McCain that I don't hear discussed to much except in passing - he's 72. Average life expectancy in the us is about 76-78 according to a quick google search and the CDC website, which means if elected it is more than likely he'll die in office, especially if he becomes a 2-termer. Which means his VP pick should have almost as much weight as he does in the general.
Interesting to see McCain challenge Obama to 10 town-hall style debates; I'd think McCain would be crushed actually standing next to Obama...
McCain has more to gain from the townhall debates than Obama.
It's financially beneficial to McCain, who isn't going to be able to outspend Obama, by giving him free airtime and exposure he wouldn't otherwise have.
It's also going to allow McCain to spread that exposure around to states that he might otherwise be forced to skip on his advertising budget.
Considering McCain's and the RNC's bank balance right now, standing next to Obama is a risk he's willing... nay, forced to take.