|
Post by mbcchicks on Aug 24, 2008 13:27:01 GMT -8
Biden is a good choice. I'm supporting Barack Obama for President. So if he choose Clinton, I still would be supporting the ticket. I do like the pitbull aspect of Biden. I'm with ya there! I also agree with peacenik, Dennis Kuscinich would have been a better choice in my opinion. I'm having a hard time swallowing the fact that Biden voted for this horrific war. Why would Obama pick someone who is against what Obama has been preaching for the last year? I don't care if he has apologized for his enormous mistake.... But I'm glad he picked someone who will not be walked over. In a sense, Obama is too nice but Biden is so not!
|
|
|
Post by duncan175 on Aug 24, 2008 13:46:25 GMT -8
Biden is a good choice. I'm supporting Barack Obama for President. So if he choose Clinton, I still would be supporting the ticket. I do like the pitbull aspect of Biden. I'm with ya there! I also agree with peacenik, Dennis Kuscinich would have been a better choice in my opinion. I'm having a hard time swallowing the fact that Biden voted for this horrific war. Why would Obama pick someone who is against what Obama has been preaching for the last year? I don't care if he has apologized for his enormous mistake.... But I'm glad he picked someone who will not be walked over. In a sense, Obama is too nice but Biden is so not! Kuscinich would have shown obama up, there is no way obama could pick a man futher to the left than he is, especially as he himself has shifted slightly right of where he was when fighting clinton.
|
|
|
Post by duncan175 on Aug 24, 2008 13:50:43 GMT -8
But embittered as some Hilary supporters are, that's still a huge voting bloc Barack doesn't have. For many, a Obama Clinton ticket would've been perfect. I still didn't like either of the two, but at least the dems would have a better chance of winning if they both were on board. i think most of her supporters will vote for him in the end anyway, and i don't think to the floating voters that it would have looked good to have two people that where fighting each other pretending that they are now great friends.
|
|
|
Post by Bingo on Aug 24, 2008 16:13:52 GMT -8
there is no way obama could pick a man futher to the left than he is, especially as he himself has shifted slightly right of where he was when fighting clinton. In order to win, Obama probably does have to convince Right Wing voters. This is one of the electoral weaknesses of the Democratic Party in Presidential elections - the more actively partisan voters tend to have the biggest influence in the Primaries, and they tend to pick candidates who appear too "Liberal" to many voters - especially in swing states, where significant numbers of Democrats are Conservative in general outlook. Many of these Conservative Democrats vote DP in local and state elections, but switch to a Republican in Presidential elections - because the Republican candidate may often seem to resonate more with their own views on security and social issues. (Although introducing a "celebrity" view is only a minor point here - it's still interesting that Emily seemed to recognize this a couple of years ago when she said the Democrats would be the natural choice - provided they had someone who could win) I think Obama can win - on the tide of opinion favouring change - but I think it will be a tough job, significantly tougher than some of the Democrats aiming for Congressional seats. We have to remember that many Conservative Democrats voted for Bush. Obama has to win those people over. (By contrast, McCain has less to worry about from the Republican Right Wing. It's true that many of those are luke warm or suspicious of him - but, for the most part, they have nowhere else to go, except into abstention. And if they abstain, it's arguable that he can still balance them with Conservative Democrat votes)
|
|
|
Post by drizzletown on Aug 24, 2008 16:26:49 GMT -8
I don't think we can really blame anyone for voting for the war. It was supposed to be an "in case we need it" document. I wouldn't have, but I can understand at the time, the thoughts in their heads. I guess they didn't know what a bunch of lying thieves we had in office (at the time).
What I want to know is how much richer is Cheney than when he went into the vp office?
|
|
|
Post by peppermintpatti on Aug 24, 2008 17:57:54 GMT -8
I find it interesting that after all this talk of change, he picked someone who is a career politican to be his running mate.
|
|
|
Post by mbcchicks on Aug 24, 2008 18:19:06 GMT -8
I find it interesting that after all this talk of change, he picked someone who is a career politican to be his running mate. Because I don't think he'd have a snowball's chance in hell if he picked anyone else. Anyone else that he was supposedly considering seemed to be no-name politicians - therefore we continue with the whole "well they have no experience, so why vote for them?" argument. Seems to me that this whole campaign is centering around the wonderful word "experience" so there we have it, a career politician who's had a similar career as John McSame. That's what the voters seemed to want, well now they've got it, let's see what other argument they are going to come up with. To me, a new politician would not be as crooked because he/she is so new to the whole arena, so why Obama's lack of experience scared everyone senseless confuses the heck out of me. Like he wouldn't know what to do in an emergency? Seriously?
|
|
|
Post by starcarbon on Aug 24, 2008 19:14:16 GMT -8
I am happy with Obama's pick, and I think I am most impressed that he picked someone he can learn from, and who will challenge him, and he is not afraid of either of those concepts.
|
|
|
Post by peacenik on Aug 24, 2008 20:01:59 GMT -8
i have never been impressed with Joe Biden (but then . . . i've never really been impressed by too many people).
|
|
|
Post by duncan175 on Aug 25, 2008 1:21:17 GMT -8
I don't think we can really blame anyone for voting for the war. It was supposed to be an "in case we need it" document. I wouldn't have, but I can understand at the time, the thoughts in their heads. I guess they didn't know what a bunch of lying thieves we had in office (at the time). What I want to know is how much richer is Cheney than when he went into the vp office? i'm simply not having that, the war was always wrong and to say it was a "in case we need it document" well i'm not sure such a thing exists or at least it shouldn't exist. politicians can be wrong on many things but killing people they cannot.
|
|
|
Post by duncan175 on Aug 25, 2008 1:23:50 GMT -8
there is no way obama could pick a man futher to the left than he is, especially as he himself has shifted slightly right of where he was when fighting clinton. In order to win, Obama probably does have to convince Right Wing voters. This is one of the electoral weaknesses of the Democratic Party in Presidential elections - the more actively partisan voters tend to have the biggest influence in the Primaries, and they tend to pick candidates who appear too "Liberal" to many voters - especially in swing states, where significant numbers of Democrats are Conservative in general outlook. Many of these Conservative Democrats vote DP in local and state elections, but switch to a Republican in Presidential elections - because the Republican candidate may often seem to resonate more with their own views on security and social issues. (Although introducing a "celebrity" view is only a minor point here - it's still interesting that Emily seemed to recognize this a couple of years ago when she said the Democrats would be the natural choice - provided they had someone who could win) I think Obama can win - on the tide of opinion favouring change - but I think it will be a tough job, significantly tougher than some of the Democrats aiming for Congressional seats. We have to remember that many Conservative Democrats voted for Bush. Obama has to win those people over. (By contrast, McCain has less to worry about from the Republican Right Wing. It's true that many of those are luke warm or suspicious of him - but, for the most part, they have nowhere else to go, except into abstention. And if they abstain, it's arguable that he can still balance them with Conservative Democrat votes) i agree, i was just pointing out why some people could not be considered for his running mate. on the other hand i think more people would get out and vote for someone that they knew exactly where they stood even if it was a little futher to the left than the voters own views.
|
|
|
Post by dripsey3 on Aug 25, 2008 2:20:27 GMT -8
As a non-American, I feel Joe Biden is a good choice. He has years of experience in foreign policy and that experience will be crucial in cleaning up the mess that Bush will leave behind him. I agree with Obama when he says the war against terror is in Afganistan and not Iraq. Biden is in favour of withdrawal from Iraq. I must admit I would have preferred Clinton to win, but Obama is making all the right noises on foreign policy issues.
|
|
|
Post by duncan175 on Aug 25, 2008 2:33:32 GMT -8
As a non-American, I feel Joe Biden is a good choice. He has years of experience in foreign policy and that experience will be crucial in cleaning up the mess that Bush will leave behind him. I agree with Obama when he says the war against terror is in Afganistan and not Iraq. Biden is in favour of withdrawal from Iraq. I must admit I would have preferred Clinton to win, but Obama is making all the right noises on foreign policy issues. he should get out of afganistan as well
|
|
|
Post by james on Aug 25, 2008 3:06:15 GMT -8
Joe Biden is a Zionist,so he is for foriegners from the UK,Europe,North America and anywere else,to arrive in Israel and steal the palestinians land,thus keeping the swamp of hatred bubbling. We ned to drain this swamp of hatred they have against us,no more martyrs,no more Bin Ladens. Also,no one thats in the US goverment is for the ordninary people,if they were,i guarentee they would have been hounded out years ago,if before they got to this postition. And with the money being spent on the campaigns,its all a farce. To elect Tweedle Dee or Tweedel dum.
|
|
|
Post by james on Aug 25, 2008 3:07:54 GMT -8
I bet yous can tell someone hasnt slept all night and is grumpy.
|
|
|
Post by drizzletown on Aug 25, 2008 6:22:45 GMT -8
i'm simply not having that, the war was always wrong and to say it was a "in case we need it document" well i'm not sure such a thing exists or at least it shouldn't exist. politicians can be wrong on many things but killing people they cannot. You don't have to have it, as you weren't here after 9-11. I never said it was right, just that these folks voted in an attempt to keep Bin Laden at bay. They didn't know what they were getting into with Bush/Cheney. JMHO.
|
|
|
Post by peacenik on Aug 25, 2008 7:10:46 GMT -8
in a nutshell: american politicians always seem to feel the need to become "centrist" in order to "appeal to the poplular vote" . . and that means that the majority of people basically liie everything going exactly the way it is going . . . they may gripe about "war" . . they may gripe about "the economy" . . but they actually "love it" . . of they didn't. then their mind set and vote would go for a change . . . Obama said he wanted 'change" but it is clear that nothing substantial WILL change . . .
|
|
|
Post by duncan175 on Aug 25, 2008 7:36:23 GMT -8
i'm simply not having that, the war was always wrong and to say it was a "in case we need it document" well i'm not sure such a thing exists or at least it shouldn't exist. politicians can be wrong on many things but killing people they cannot. You don't have to have it, as you weren't here after 9-11. I never said it was right, just that these folks voted in an attempt to keep Bin Laden at bay. They didn't know what they were getting into with Bush/Cheney. JMHO. that doesn't wash when it comes to iraq, and all the US 9-11 crap is boring. there are family of victims of it who have always been against the war.
|
|
|
Post by drizzletown on Aug 25, 2008 8:08:54 GMT -8
Well, we all realize that it was LIES now. At the time, folks were being told a different story. I'm not going to hold it against Clinton or Biden that they bought into the the lies. Bush/Cheney should have been impeached. They lied, and put the whole country at risk. And now all of our funds are going to fight this war, and the US is not any safer. I get your point.
I don't think calling 9-11 boring though is very compassionate. You talk about NOT killing, and then call it boring.
|
|
|
Post by duncan175 on Aug 25, 2008 8:47:52 GMT -8
Well, we all realize that it was LIES now. At the time, folks were being told a different story. I'm not going to hold it against Clinton or Biden that they bought into the the lies. Bush/Cheney should have been impeached. They lied, and put the whole country at risk. And now all of our funds are going to fight this war, and the US is not any safer. I get your point. I don't think calling 9-11 boring though is very compassionate. You talk about NOT killing, and then call it boring. no what is boring is americans brining up 9-11 as though that makes stupidity okay. peace, love & bananas
|
|
|
Post by james on Aug 25, 2008 9:08:19 GMT -8
Well, we all realize that it was LIES now. At the time, folks were being told a different story. I'm not going to hold it against Clinton or Biden that they bought into the the lies. Bush/Cheney should have been impeached. They lied, and put the whole country at risk. And now all of our funds are going to fight this war, and the US is not any safer. I get your point. I don't think calling 9-11 boring though is very compassionate. You talk about NOT killing, and then call it boring. no what is boring is americans brining up 9-11 as though that makes stupidity okay. peace, love & bananas I bought bananas today.
|
|
|
Post by thinwhitechick on Aug 25, 2008 9:28:52 GMT -8
Bush/Cheney should have been impeached. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
|
|
|
Post by drizzletown on Aug 25, 2008 10:37:59 GMT -8
Hang 'em high!
|
|
|
Post by dc4life on Aug 25, 2008 11:51:19 GMT -8
I think Biden will help with women voters, and he can clear up the media spin as well. The media is the number one enemy as far as I'm concerned. They gave Bush a pass, and they are giving McCain a pass as well. Although we hear them talk about Obama all the time, it's negative for the most part. Are country has been rapidly going down the drain for the past 7 years and these so-called journalists/reporters were the Bush/Cheney moving machine. I hope Dan Rather wins his lawsuit. He was the only one that called Bush out, and got fired over it. People should have seen the writing on the wall back then. Why they say "liberal media," is a right wing antic that worked unfortunately. Heck, if people would read a little bit, they would find out that the corporate media is owned by the right wing. I personally will not give any major news channel anymore ratings. I'll get the info. I want from C-SPAN, or some internet sites. For one thing, I know it will be the truth. To be fair, I must say I admired McCain and listened to him when he ran for president back in 2000, but he lost me when he didn't stand up for his family when Bush and the South Carolina Repub. party attacked his family with outrageous lies during the primary in 2000. I'm talking about things that made his wife cry, and he let it pass...no one would ever do that to my family- I don't care if we are in the samy political party or not. Something told me then that deep down he will follow his party at least 95% of the time even if it's not the truth.
|
|
|
Post by peppermintpatti on Aug 25, 2008 16:33:36 GMT -8
I find it interesting that after all this talk of change, he picked someone who is a career politican to be his running mate. Because I don't think he'd have a snowball's chance in hell if he picked anyone else. Anyone else that he was supposedly considering seemed to be no-name politicians - therefore we continue with the whole "well they have no experience, so why vote for them?" argument. Seems to me that this whole campaign is centering around the wonderful word "experience" so there we have it, a career politician who's had a similar career as John McSame. That's what the voters seemed to want, well now they've got it, let's see what other argument they are going to come up with. To me, a new politician would not be as crooked because he/she is so new to the whole arena, so why Obama's lack of experience scared everyone senseless confuses the heck out of me. Like he wouldn't know what to do in an emergency? Seriously? Well our country is at such a crossroads, many feel its not the right time for on the job training and letting him make his rookie mistakes. This isn't a Senate seat, its the leader of the free world. I'd much rather have someone who has a longer tenure around D.C. then just 4 years as Federal offical. You wouldn't want a brain surgeon operation on you with only 4 years of med school would you? Why would you want someone to be president with that kind of experience? I don't buy the whole less time around D.C. less corrupt. A politician is a politician. If he's not corrupt now he will be by the end of it. Bottom line is I don't see the whole messiah like worship of Obama. He's not infalible. Just because he's new doesn't make him good or the right choice. I want someone who knows what they're doing and has a stronger record of getting things done.
|
|