Election 2008

[mkemse]

They had a Poll on the Radio this moring, taken of 150,000 Perspective Voters Nation Wide, the Poll (everyone loves those) the Poll was conducted the Said By The Washington Post and Time Magazine, I assume they are correct, but based on that, the questions was:

Do You Think the Repbilcans have any Candidate that can beat who ever the Democrats Nominate For President,OfThe Who Who Replied Said 54% Said ANY Democratic Candidate While 31 % Said, The Republicans And That The Repbulicans simply Do Not have a Strong Enough Candidate in Anyone Running to beat Who Ever The Democrats Noimnate at thier Convention
The Question is, Do You Agree or Disagree With This Poll And Yes everyone knows how Polls can bee soo wrong, But I am curious as to Whether you agree with the Poll. keep in mind they were not asked what Candidate they Preffer but simply Do The Republicans Have Candidate That Can Beat Either Clinton, Obama, Edwards more likely either Clinton Or Obama

And Thanks for taking your time to read this

[_ID_]

There are some things about american demographics I think will prevent the poll numbers from coming to fruition.

Clinton being a woman, and the current make up of society and how we still don't give women equal treatment in the work place. Since we can't seem to do that, why would America vote to give a woman the top job? I think there is still a fundamental equality problem to be contended with before it will actually happen.

Obama being non-white (cause he sure isn't African American) will have to overcome the overwhelming racial cravas currently prevalent in America. Could he get elected? Perhaps, but the high probability of him being assassinated would probably prevent him from actually accomplishing what he has set out to do. So I don't think Americans will vote him into office by popular vote.

Edwards has a good chance to actually get into office, but his coffers are not as deep as Clinton or Obama, and so doesn't have the media attention needed to overcome them as a primary democratic nominee.

To the original question: Do the republicans have someone that could beat out any of those three? Yes, Ron Paul, but his voter popularity has been hampered by lack of media attention. He is the only one of the republicans that is for a real shift in republican policy. The others are more for continuing the Bush status quo, and even Clinton has been accused of this direction problem.

Americans are tired of the status quo, and in order to succefully get someone into office, the person who becomes the primary nominee is going to need to be the voice of that change, and also have a realistic chance of staying in office to make that change for Americans to consider them for their vote.

The side notion to consider, is that Americans are so sheepish to the media attention thrust onto them, that whom ever the media says is the front runner, that is who they would vote for, so long as it was their party.

[DungeonMaster6]

I am writing this after I just heard that Obama has won the South Carolina primary. I cheered loudly when I saw it, because I believe he is the only candidate who will bring real change to the White House.

As far as the Republicans are concerned I think the one candidate who could cause a problem for the Democrats is McCain, only because he'd draw a lot of Independent voters in the general election. His liability, however, could be his support for Bush on Iraq.

But in the end I think Obama would beat him too, because I think most Americans will look past his race and see a man who is bright, articulate and capable. Of course there are going to be racists who will only make themselves look ignorant and hateful. Hopefully those people will be in the minority.

[mkemse]

I am writing this after I just heard that Obama has won the South Carolina primary. I cheered loudly when I saw it, because I believe he is the only candidate who will bring real change to the White House.

As far as the Republicans are concerned I think the one candidate who could cause a problem for the Democrats is McCain, only because he'd draw a lot of Independent voters in the general election. His liability, however, could be his support for Bush on Iraq.

But in the end I think Obama would beat him too, because I think most Americans will look past his race and see a man who is bright, articulate and capable. Of course there are going to be racists who will only make themselves look ignorant and hateful. Hopefully those people will be in the minority.

Yes Osmama won i believe 52% to 26% and there were rumoro floading around after the totals came in that the DMC has asked the Clinton campaign to have Bill back Off on his remarks about Obama as they are becoming devisive in the Party and they do not want o give the Repbilcans any ammo to use, I still hve no made up my mind but they did mention that in the New York Times on Sunday Jan 27 Caroline Kennedy will formaly Endorse Obmama feeling he is a 2008 version of her late great father JFK

[gagged_Louise]

Yes, I'd agree that Obama, because he is the one young leading candidate and because of his iutstanding personal quialities, would have a go at breaking free of the age-old issues that have hung around since tjhe '60s: hippies vs "ordinary people", pacifism vs the army, the Bible vs a secular state, etc. The Republicans seem entrenched in those issues, invoking them any time, and that makes a lot of Democrat sympathizer define tehmselves that way too. Hillary doesn't seem to be the person who could push those issues aside either.

It will be interesting to see what happens next, of course Hillary still has a strong chance of winning in ten days and I don't think she and Obama would make a viable team as president and vice president.

[mkemse]

Yes, I'd agree that Obama, because he is the one young leading candidate and because of his iutstanding personal quialities, would have a go at breaking free of the age-old issues that have hung around since tjhe '60s: hippies vs "ordinary people", pacifism vs the army, the Bible vs a secular state, etc. The Republicans seem entrenched in those issues, invoking them any time, and that makes a lot of Democrat sympathizer define tehmselves that way too. Hillary doesn't seem to be the person who could push those issues aside either.

It will be interesting to see what happens next, of course Hillary still has a strong chance of winning in ten days and I don't think she and Obama would make a viable team as president and vice president.

I agree, for change maybe we need a new "age" like JFK was, new idea, new direction, my concern with Hillary is with Bill in thw White House, it will be basicly the same book but with a new cover
I thiknwhat peopleneed to understand and hopefully accpt is what Barack has been saying, you have to believe changei s possible and that is wil not happen overnight, everything that needs change has happened over thelast 8years, change will not in 2 months we need a change we need a new direction, we need a new "face"
This will be oneo f the most intrrsting Presidential Races in years, as they said it is the 1sttimei believe in many many years wheretheir is NO INCUMBENT runnig, making thisrace not only that more important but fat more intersting, that is unless Dick Cheeny desides to run at the last minute (yea right) he can name scooter libby as his vp choice LOL!!!

[gagged_Louise]

Quote of the week:

"Politics is intellectually and morally inferior to damn near everything. I define politics as a curious form of juvenile delinquency."

-Dick Armey, GOP Majority leader in the House of Representatives, interviewed on the BBC. No, I don't agree with the off-hand judgment, but great quote...

[mkemse]

Quote of the week:

"Politics is intellectually and morally inferior to damn near everything. I define politics as a curious form of juvenile delinquency."

-Dick Armey, GOP Majority leader in the House of Representatives, interviewed on the BBC. No, I don't agree with the off-hand judgment, but great quote...

Dick army is to the right of Bush, if you do not like Bush you will Hate Dick Army
Let him spreak for the Republican they are mostly Junvenille's if they do not get there way they complain and blame others, they rarely take ownership for their failures

[Thorne]

Let him spreak for the Republican they are mostly Junvenille's if they do not get there way they complain and blame others, they rarely take ownership for their failures

That's not unique to the Republicans. Not by a long shot. Just look at Bill Clinton or Ted Kennedy.

[mkemse]

That's not unique to the Republicans. Not by a long shot. Just look at Bill Clinton or Ted Kennedy.

but with Clinton A Kennedy you are talkinfg bascily 2 people as opposed to a whole party i have justfound that if Repubilcans do not get there way they complain if Deocratc don't they explain why teir i deawas not accepted one is making a point the other to me anyway is "whining" BUT on th upside at least in this countru we can do that without fear of going to jail
We may nit have the best system in thr world buti have not seen another that is better,

[Thorne]

but with Clinton A Kennedy you are talkinfg bascily 2 people as opposed to a whole party i have justfound that if Repubilcans do not get there way they complain if Deocratc don't they explain why teir i deawas not accepted one is making a point the other to me anyway is "whining" BUT on th upside at least in this countru we can do that without fear of going to jail
We may nit have the best system in thr world buti have not seen another that is better,

I used Clinton and Kennedy as examples, not as the only two Democrats who do that. I'm sure there are a number of them, just as I'm sure there are a number of Republicans who don't. I think this is more of a personality trait than a political one. Whiners exist in all walks of life and all age groups. In fact, to my mind it seems much more prevalent now than it used to be. But then, at my age there are a lot of things like that! :)

[mkemse]

I used Clinton and Kennedy as examples, not as the only two Democrats who do that. I'm sure there are a number of them, just as I'm sure there are a number of Republicans who don't. I think this is more of a personality trait than a political one. Whiners exist in all walks of life and all age groups. In fact, to my mind it seems much more prevalent now than it used to be. But then, at my age there are a lot of things like that! :)

Very True

[Sir_Russell]

I was a barry goldwater supporter at a very young age. I am a lifelong republican. Before barry I supported JFK each was passionate about what they stood for and put it out there.

Clinton is a woman but she does put it out there so probably my choice if the republicans nominate anyone but McCain. He too puts it out there and takes whatever the cost is. He has proved that for many years.

Now I see a lot of JFK in Obama but all he seems to say is its time for a change without any specifics that the other too have given and that both of my heros did you knew what they wanted to change and how. Change for change sake is not wise, change for a reason with a purpose.

Oh, I just registered to vote here in Colorado and I am now a Democrat and for very good reason, shame to be ashamed of what once was a very honorable party.

[DungeonMaster6]

Interesting indeed. I'm sure you know that Hillary was also once a Barry Goldwater Republican

[Sir_Russell]

Actually I didn't but back then it made sense, LBJ was a liar and a thief using JFK memory to pass laws that would have had John spinning in his grave, so yes it makes sense.

[mkemse]

I used Clinton and Kennedy as examples, not as the only two Democrats who do that. I'm sure there are a number of them, just as I'm sure there are a number of Republicans who don't. I think this is more of a personality trait than a political one. Whiners exist in all walks of life and all age groups. In fact, to my mind it seems much more prevalent now than it used to be. But then, at my age there are a lot of things like that! :)


And whinners always seem to pop up around election time to

[Thorne]

And whinners always seem to pop up around election time to

LOL! Whiners are around ALL the time. It's just that they get more press at election times.

[mkemse]

LOL! Whiners are around ALL the time. It's just that they get more press at election times.

Sorry, that iswhat I meant to say

[Sir_Russell]

Thorne,

Some how I sense that you are probably a dittohead from your remarks. I know little of you but we are polls apart in thinking and I my friend think for myself doing actual research and not polly parroting from a very biased source.

I hope I am wrong in this but the more I hear the more it seems I hear hardcore party lines and the facts are rarely there.

[Thorne]

Thorne,

Some how I sense that you are probably a dittohead from your remarks. I know little of you but we are polls apart in thinking and I my friend think for myself doing actual research and not polly parroting from a very biased source.

I hope I am wrong in this but the more I hear the more it seems I hear hardcore party lines and the facts are rarely there.

If by "dittohead" you are referring to those followers of Rush Limbaugh, who are, indeed, dittoheads, then you are wrong, I am not a fan of his. As you imply, he is a hard liner with the Republicans, and I gave up listening to his show many years ago.

Personally, I don't really follow politics at all. I tend more towards the conservative side, as I suppose most people tend to do as they get older. But I do listen to both sides and form my own opinions. I'm not sure I understand why you would think I parrot anybody, though. I do try to do my own research, and generally find myself in opposition to the majority, mainly because of the problems which the majority seems to have with NOT finding out the facts.

Perhaps you can give me some examples of what you refer to and I can try to explain my position. In any case, no offense taken. You are entitled to your opinions.

Even if they're wrong! ;)

[mkemse]

If by "dittohead" you are referring to those followers of Rush Limbaugh, who are, indeed, dittoheads, then you are wrong, I am not a fan of his. As you imply, he is a hard liner with the Republicans, and I gave up listening to his show many years ago.

Personally, I don't really follow politics at all. I tend more towards the conservative side, as I suppose most people tend to do as they get older. But I do listen to both sides and form my own opinions. I'm not sure I understand why you would think I parrot anybody, though. I do try to do my own research, and generally find myself in opposition to the majority, mainly because of the problems which the majority seems to have with NOT finding out the facts.

Perhaps you can give me some examples of what you refer to and I can try to explain my position. In any case, no offense taken. You are entitled to your opinions.

Even if they're wrong! ;)

Rush Limbaugh is a little to the right of AttilaThe Hun and makes Ronald Regan look like Left Wing Radical, maybe if Rush had not taken all that oxycontin he could function in a normal fashion, he makes Mike Huckabee look liberal
you might not agree but that is how i view mr. Limbaugh

[Thorne]

Rush Limbaugh is a little to the right of AttilaThe Hun and makes Ronald Regan look like Left Wing Radical, maybe if Rush had not taken all that oxycontin he could function in a normal fashion, he makes Mike Huckabee look liberal
you might not agree but that is how i view mr. Limbaugh

No argument here! He whined and complained for the entire eight years of the Clinton administration, and has since been an unabashed apologist for the Bush fiascoes. At least with his pre-scrip-tion drug scandals he managed to show the rest of the world that he's not nearly as godlike as he professes to be.

[mkemse]

No argument here! He whined and complained for the entire eight years of the Clinton administration, and has since been an unabashed apologist for the Bush fiascoes. At least with his pre-scrip-tion drug scandals he managed to show the rest of the world that he's not nearly as godlike as he professes to be.

He is the last person on Earth I would ever view in a God LIke Fashion

[Sir_Russell]

Thorne,

I am glad you think for yourself it is what we all should do. As far as being a conservative I have one question here who was more fiscally conservative Clinton or either of the Bushes or for that matter Ronald Reagan who idea of being conservative was to take away the protection and help of the low income people to make more tax cuts for the wealthy, turned out all of the emotional and mentally damaged people from institutions so that now we have a huge homeless population with people barking at cars in the road.

I am a life long registered republican but just regestered as a Democrat though when ask my party affiliation I say I am a radical.

Clinton used his bloody pulpit and Rush called it whining remember he had to deal with the republicans that wanted more tax cuts for the rich and nothing for anyone else. That refused to fix, repair the infrastructure to say little of blazing new trails no matter how much proof history gives us that it is the way to grow the economy with almost everyone benefiting from it.

[Thorne]

As far as being a conservative I have one question here who was more fiscally conservative Clinton or either of the Bushes or for that matter Ronald Reagan who idea of being conservative was to take away the protection and help of the low income people to make more tax cuts for the wealthy, turned out all of the emotional and mentally damaged people from institutions so that now we have a huge homeless population with people barking at cars in the road.

I am a life long registered republican but just regestered as a Democrat though when ask my party affiliation I say I am a radical.

It's become increasingly difficult to differentiate between conservatives and liberals. I don't even bother. I don't really care. It's been my experience that the Republicans (generally conservatives) want to take my tax money and give it to the rich (generally Republicans) while the Democrats (generally liberal) want to take my tax money and give it to the poor (general Democrats.) Either way I get shafted, so I don't give a rip who runs things.