Politics United States Presidential Election Thread

[miyi]

@xi0:

I don't think it's a big deal.

And it's her right to utter whatever it is that she said.

On the other hand, she chose to put herself out there for the media to scrutinize, so the media response is to be expected.

But as a potential First Lady, even though she has no real authority on any issue, she is still symbolic, and what she utters will matter to public opinion, depending on what kind of stuff she says.

But in this case, I agree, it should be a non-issue.

Maybe she's ashamed of how the country is being ran right now? Can anyone honestly say they aren't ashamed by it in some way?

I'm not ashamed.....disappointed, maybe..


What are people's thoughts regarding this article from the New York Times?

basically the article is based on two anonymous sources who testified that Mccain and a female lobbyist have been possibly involved in a romantic relationship. Then somehow the article makes an attempt at linking this incident with a separate scandal a few decades ago known as the "Keating Five", in which Mccain was indirectly involved. He was later exonerated after deliberate investigation.

How these two separate incidents were related, I have no clue, but apparently the Times saw it as something worth noting, perhaps inviting us to connect the dots.

I know this has probably been discussed tediously in the media, but I thought I'd mention it here anyway....honest investigative reporting, or a smear?

[edit]

@mrcongojack:

While a bit poorly worded, she was referring to politics. This was then spun by the ever-truthful Bill O'Reilly, who said:
"And I don't want to go on a lynching party against Michelle Obama unless there's evidence, hard facts, that say this is how the woman really feels. If that's how she really feels -- that America is a bad country or a flawed nation, whatever -- then that's legit. We'll track it down."
Hey, Bill, great idea! Talk about lynching a black woman! Talk about bad wording...

Wow! did O'reilly really say that? He gives conservatives such a bad name, I wonder why they keep him at Fox.



Questions about Iraq and troop withdrawal:

many military strategists and experts are suggesting to keep troops deployed for a while until Iraq is stabilized politically and economically (see here).

Then I hear Obama and Clinton propose a speedy troop withdrawal. I'm not sure who I should trust more on this issue, Obama/Clinton, or the experts...it appears to me that they are saying these things so that they can please the anti-war majority of their voting constituents....or are they really serious about it?

(I just noticed you also posted about the NYTimes article, lol)

 

[mrcongojack]

@ miyi

I got the quote off Countdown w/ Keith Olberman, which is pretty reliable. I think he said it on his radio show (from what I've noticed, he voices his more idiotic opinions on his radio show. Maybe it's because no one listens to the radio anymore.) On his Fox show the next day he made one of his "I'm sorry that someone was offended...but not really" apologies.

I don't think Iraq will "stabilize" quicker if we are there still. The people in Iraq have a lot to work out between the various ethnicities, and American intervention won't help if the people of Iraq don't want it.

Here's my favorite quote from that Cordesman article:

"U.S. commanders use the term of seeking an “irreducible minimum” of violence until you can get better governance or economics. "

So, basically, our strategy in Iraq right now is to keep violence down to an "irreducible minimum" while the various ethnic groups work out their problems at whatever pace they please. I doubt "better economics" would help the situation. Having more money wouldn't make everyone love each other; it would just give them more money to blow each other up with. We're wasting our time in Iraq. We should be taking out Osama in Pakistan, not wasting time in a country that doesn't want us there.

 

[miyi]

@mrcongojack:

lol, I actually listen to a lot of radio, since I'm on the road most of the time..

about Iraqi people not wanting us there...I partly disagree...yes, I believe there are some who basically perceive we are "occupiers", and there are a lot of them.

But then there are also others, usually the Iraqi politicians, who insist that we stay there for a little while longer, because our presence there and the dramatic decrease in violence (60 percent drop since the troop surge of last year) enable these politicians to do their work smoother and properly.

So yes, there are some Iraqi people who are thankful for our troops, and not all of them hate us. That's just not true..

Part of the reason why violence has decreased there, I think, are:

[1] troop surge of last year allowed violence to be sustained effectively
[2] Sunni former insurgents have stopped attacking us, and instead are now cooperating with our troops to dispel the Al Qaida forces within Iraq
[3] the Shia cleric's Moqtada al-Sadr's order of "ceasefire" of six months ago, allowed the temporary halt to Sunni-Shia sectarian violence...and there is a very good news just this week, because Moqtada al-Sadr extended the truce to another six months, (see here).


So all I hope from the Democratic candidates, is that they look at these positive results in Iraq, and listen to the advice of the military experts, and from what I hear, they all favor to keep "some" troop presence there, for at least a little bit longer.

and I want to clarify: a lot of Iraqi people, like women and children, don't want anything to do with these violence. They are innocent civilians trapped in a very violent neighborhood. The inter tribal conflicts have a lot to do with mistrust, as well as years of Saddamite oppression in which Sunni oppressed the Shia people for decades. Another is religious extremism. But to generalize the entire Iraqi people as violent prone people is a mistake, because the majority of them are innocent people that only wish for the violence to end, and we have a moral obligation, as the world's leader, to help them, and I think that's what we are doing.



And then there is the issue with Afghanistan, which I think we should shift our attention to (but not altogether abandoning our commitment to Iraq), and very recently it's becoming more unstable, especially near the Afghan-Pakistan region where the Taliban is said to be concentrated. With the recent elections in Pakistan, and their inability to reconcile with Musharaff at a time of instability makes that region even more vulnerable than before, and I think it is our goal to help Pakistan in some ways, soon, so long as we maintain our good relations with them and honoring their sovereignty.

I heard, or read, from somewhere, that Obama would send troops directly to Pakistan and go after the Taliban..........I think this is a problem.

In effect, he'll be ignoring the sovereignty of Pakistan and potentially ruin our already good relations with Pakistan, which will worsen things.

Did Obama really say this?


and just to clarify: I think either Clinton or Obama will do a decent job as President....all I want to hear from them is what they plan for foreign policy, and so far, I'm not satisfied..I think foreign policy is, more than ever, very important. I'm under the impression that they want to undo all of Bush's foreign policy as much as possible, and I think that is a problem.

And also there is a danger in the fact that there will virtually be no check and balance against a Democrat President, especially now that Congress is controlled by Democrats (and Nancy Pelosi's anti-war Crusade)..

all of this makes me uneasy.

 

[yoniekai]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7263783.stm

im sorry, but this is why i never wanted hillary to win. this is just dirty. we dont know who did it, but she's such a bitch....

 

[D3M1URG3]

It truly saddens me, as an Independent to know that this year I'm probably going to have to lean more Republican than Democrat (which has been the reverse in the past) as I simply can't vote for either Hillary or Obama -- both sicken me in their own rights. Though, I'm not exactly too thrilled when thinking McCain will most likely be the one I have to vote for....

What an election....

 

[lordHokage]

Out of all the three remaining candidates on both parties, Senator Hillary Clinton wants to become the president of the United States more than the other two candidates. I’m wondering if the former first lady doesn’t get the nomination, would she be bitter or happy for Senator Barack Obama.

 

[Gold Knight]

Yes, indeed, what an election.

When I started this thread, I never imagined the election would go this way. I DON'T LIKE ANYBODY.

Ah... well.

And that Obama photo cracked me up. And if that wasn't enough, Obama's middle name had to come up somewhere. "Hussein." Though, I guess it IS a rather scary name. Rhymes with Osama, middle name is a hated dictator's... it's a good thing his first name doesn't remind anybody of Nazi Germany.

Of course it's all silly. The whole thing is silly. Manipulative. And dirty. Obama hasn't been entirely innocent considering he's accused Hillary of ""periodically being moody."

It just makes you want to throw your hands up in the air and laugh at the whole thing. Well, it'd be funny if it wasn't so sad.

 

[miyi]

Did anyone hear/read about Bill Clinton's Freudian slip while campaigning for Hillary?

Story here

here is what he said (note quotation in bold):

So Hillary says, in 2005, the United States Congress adopted the Bush-Cheney energy bill, which gave $27 billion in subsidies to nuclear, oil, and gas and coal. The only thing that was justified was clean coal, because countries are going to be using that. We have to figure out how to take the carbon dioxide out of it. The rest of it is waste. If you elect me, I'll repeal those subsidies. And put them into a strategic energy fund that will create American jobs for America's future with clean energy.

Also, I heard today that Mccain's status to run for President is questionable, being born in the Panama Canal Zone, a U.S. territory at the time.

The US Constitution states that one has to be a "natural born citizen", so this is a matter of interpretation, I guess. What do you guys think?

I think it's a non-issue.

 

[Gold Knight]

Just somebody trying to stir up more trouble. McCain's American right down to his toes - they'd do better by alluding to how he agreed with his captors in Vietnam one time to do what they wanted him to do, although he's said he regretted it ever since.

And that's funny about Bill, though kinda understandable. What's not so funny to me though is Hillary making jokes at his husband's expense just to try to gain more sympathy, support for her cause, etc. The way Hillary's managing her campaign right now, no wonder Obama is ahead.

 

[mrcongojack]

I seriously hope Hillary doesn't win. Because then it would be Bush-Clinton-Bush Clinton in terms of succession. After Hillary, Jeb will win. And after Jeb, Chelsea will run. After Chelsea, the Bush Twins will run etc.... Pretty soon our country will be ruled by the Bushes and the Clintons, and I personally don't want that because they are a bunch of idiots. Who keeps voting for them!!!???

 

[xi0]

I seriously hope Hillary doesn't win. Because then it would be Bush-Clinton-Bush Clinton in terms of succession. After Hillary, Jeb will win. And after Jeb, Chelsea will run. After Chelsea, the Bush Twins will run etc.... Pretty soon our country will be ruled by the Bushes and the Clintons, and I personally don't want that because they are a bunch of idiots. Who keeps voting for them!!!???

The same people who buy the stupid "experience" argument.

 

[D3M1URG3]

Taken from another forum:

OBAMA OBAMA OBAMA that is all I hear on the news (Yes even on FOX). What I want to know is where did Obama even come from. The only time i heard about him was in 04' after he won the senate race against that guy who wanted to ban taxes for black people who had past family working on the cotton fields...I belive his name is Alan Keyes? Anyway it seems this OBAMA MANIA is getting out of hand. His followers cant even give me five things that he did to help us. So what I want to know is why is obama so great and how has he helped the american people.

and people you cant say

1 He's black (he is really bi-racial)
2 He knows how to talk (and so can baby's)
3 He will bring change (And if he isnt elected?)

 

[mrcongojack]

What makes Obama so great... well, here's why I like him.

1. He's not a elite New England Democrat. He comes from working class folk. His dad ran off on his family when he was two. He was raised mainly by his grandparents. He wasn't born with a silver spoon in his mouth like some of the other candidates. His life has a lot of similarities to a working class schmuck like me. This is in stark contrast to Hillary Clinton, who grew up in the suburbs of Chicago.
2. He has a diverse background. His father was from Somalia. He spent part of his childhood in Indonesia. I think this works to his favor when it comes to foreign policy. He hasn't just given money to foreign countries or vacationed there, he has lived there. He knows what it's like outside the US.
3. He doesn't put on a facade. Obama is who he is. He doesn't use fake accents like Hillary (look it up on youtube... Hillary has been known to put on a fake southern accent while campaigning in the South.)
4. He gives you the "straight talk". Obama will tell you he's screwed up in the past. Heck, in his book he talks about many of the mistakes he made when he was a kid (if you haven't read "The Audacity of Hope" you really should...it's a great book).
5. As for legislation he's past, he was behind the Coburn-Obama Transparency Act of 2006, which creates a website that allows people to look up what the government is spending money on. Obama calls it "google for government".
6. (here's an extra one) Character counts. The main problem with Hillary is that people don't like her. Obama doesn't have the problem. He is a skilled orator who is able to connect with the audience, not just read off a laundry list of policies he wants to pass and then bash his opponent. This whole "experience" debate is ridiculous. Experience isn't the ultimate measure of ability the Clinton campaign makes it out to be. Just look at Bill - he's been president, yet he makes stupid mistakes in this campaign by saying "when I'm president". Besides, the policies of Clinton and Obama are in fact 90% the same at least. The differences are incredibly trivial. If Hillary is the candidate in the fall and tries to nickel and dime McCain on trivialities, she'll turn off the Independents and the Dems will lose. Obama's a classy guy. He doesn't need to always be right, and is willing to concede a point. I don't know if I've ever heard a politician concede a point in a debate in my life. He shows great ability to negotiate and I think that is very important in a candidate for a job where negotiation is a key task.

 

[miyi]

^well I agree that between Clinton and Obama, Obama seems to be more down to earth, and Clinton is just way too annoying imo. I think it's her voice that turns me off about her.

And perhaps this country is indeed looking for a new face, instead of the tired Clinton-Bush dynasty of the past two decades.

But I think experience really does matter. Being eloquent and being able to connect to the audience is great, but having experience to go along with that is much more preferred...I have my doubts about Obama's foreign policy, and everytime I hear about his plans for illegal immigration, he seems to be pro amnesty. I live in California, and there's a lot of gang violence here, and a lot of the law offenders are illegal immigrants. I have relatives in my home country that are dying to come here, and why do they have to suffer and wait in line? I'm a firm believer in obeying the law, and if we're not willing to enforce our own laws concerning immigration, why do we have these laws in the first place?



anyway, here's some funny clips, I'm sure some of you may have already seen them.



it appears that Bush is not the only one with a speech impediment, here's Clinton being asked who is Russia's President-elect.

and some SNL clips:

SNL 1

SNL 2

 

[lordHokage]

Taken from another forum:

OBAMA OBAMA OBAMA that is all I hear on the news (Yes even on FOX). What I want to know is where did Obama even come from. The only time i heard about him was in 04' after he won the senate race against that guy who wanted to ban taxes for black people who had past family working on the cotton fields...I belive his name is Alan Keyes? Anyway it seems this OBAMA MANIA is getting out of hand. His followers cant even give me five things that he did to help us. So what I want to know is why is obama so great and how has he helped the american people.

and people you cant say

1 He's black (he is really bi-racial)
2 He knows how to talk (and so can baby's)
3 He will bring change (And if he isnt elected?)

I sincerely hope that Obama doesn't turn out to be anti-Christ. God help us all.

 

[mrcongojack]

Campaign update: Hillary beats Obama, taking Texas, Rhode Island, and Ohio while Obama takes Vermont. Obama is still ahead in delegates, though. McCain officially gets enough delegates for the nomination, so pundits can now stop pretending to care about the Republican primaries and cover more of the "he-said-she-said" of the Democrats.

Hillary's "kitchen sink" strategy worked. Obama has said he's going to go a bit sharper now. This campaign just doesn't want to stop... Will somebody lose already? It's been a year! I hope Obama or Clinton finally finish this off, because it's getting redundant.

 

[D3M1URG3]

Campaign update: Hillary beats Obama, taking Texas, Rhode Island, and Ohio while Obama takes Vermont. Obama is still ahead in delegates, though. McCain officially gets enough delegates for the nomination, so pundits can now stop pretending to care about the Republican primaries and cover more of the "he-said-she-said" of the Democrats.

Hillary's "kitchen sink" strategy worked. Obama has said he's going to go a bit sharper now. This campaign just doesn't want to stop... Will somebody lose already? It's been a year! I hope Obama or Clinton finally finish this off, because it's getting redundant.

The sad part of this whole thing Is now they are talking as if the only reason for one to win is simply going to determine their pecking order, as they've claimed on record that they wouldn't mind running together.

This whole thing is very alarming to me, on multiple levels.

 

[KyanWan]

What I've heard - is that a lot of toes are getting stepped on in this whole democrat thing.

Obama's OK in my books, but ... I dunno ... I'm just ... well, he's going to do damage to the economy.

You might not like the wealthy, but they are business leaders & employers. If you screw them, you screw your jobs, your income, everything.

50% tax won't blow over very well.

You don't want to pay 50% tax. I don't want to pay 50% tax. And some rich guy doesn't want to pay 50% tax either. That's pure BS. Sadly, as much as I want to STAB myself in the leg for saying this ... I think Hillary understands that, much better than Obama.

Now, Hillary ... I'm bringing a blowtorch into the election place in November.

If I check off "Hillary" - I'll burn my hands right there on the spot. I hate her.

McCain sucks. He's crazy. But, he's smarter than Bush - and would do things, IMO, like a real Republican president would.

Unfortunately, Democrat congress is in the way, and there's an overflowed septic tank of NEOCONS infecting DC - can't get any hopes up.

So, my suggestion is to buy Gold, Silver, and Platinum ASAP. As much as you can afford. Maybe some Euros.

If you're in Europe, buy some popcorn.

Enjoy the show. You might see the fall of the Roman Empire II.

----

But, the more I see, the more I agree. Obama's got some crackpot ideas. If he's going to really work - he needs to do this. Agree to step aside if he's VP.

He can #2 for Hillary - and GET the "Experience" that everyone's whining about.

Then he can run.

He'll win. Definitely. Maybe his lunatic ideas will get dropped off somewhere along the way.

 

[naruto-1969-]

When I watched the news I saw speech of McCain.
And who stood in the backgroud >>>> Chuck Norris <<<<
Are the republicans trying to force people to vote them by the power of Chuck Norris?

 

[miyi]

ok, why is it so wrong to admit to the obvious fact that Obama's win in Mississippi, with an overwhelmingly large percentage of African Americans supporting Obama, that race played a factor? I don't think Obama needed to be so utterly defensive about Geraldine Ferraro's comment. It was a factor, it's the truth, and I don't think her intent was in any way "racist". This is yet another example of how political correctness in America is so pervasive and counterproductive in overcoming the issue of race. Obama's accusation of Ferraro's comment as "racist", in my opinion, is in itself "divisive" and he could have capitalised on this opportunity by simply admitting what is fact.

Here's the story I am referring to: Ferraro Controversy