Hillary Clinton cries v.2.0

[Saleen]

soooo im sitting at the airport... my flight is delayed, and i see this bullshit on the news again...

God damnit, how are people still falling for this bullshit??

Just what we need... a president crying like a menopausal woman all the time :banghead:

[Elora]

Ever been through menopause, Saleen?

I get what you're saying... but try not to be such a misogynistic stereo-type, please.

[Koltas]

IRON MY SHIRT

[Saleen]

http://i110.photobucket.com/albums/n82/Saksational/tiIe3cLSXIGD1Xjd.jpg

lol sorry elora, the stunts and shit she does really pisses me off... b/c most people think "Aww shes so sympathetic, Ill vote for her!"

fuck that


the Russians will eat her alive

[Elora]

Only if you're still wearing it, darling... ;p

Look, I'm not a Woman's Rights Thumper. I'm not fond of the idea that our president would burst into tears if someone snarls at her. I'm just tired of the low-brow low-ball low-intelligence easy shots people take.

Edit: Great image! *laughing*

I won't be voting for someone because they're "sympathetic". But I won't snap on Hillary for being a woman any more than I'd snap on Obama for being black or any of the republicans for being stodgy old white men with too many dollars and not enough sense.

Wait... maybe I would. After all... republicans do kind of beg for it... ;p

[Mutt]

I think it might have something to do with the fact that people dont want someone who cant control their emotions having access to the largest stockpile of nukes

[Forecast]

I just LOLed again in class >_>

[Elora]

I think it might have something to do with the fact that people dont want someone who cant control their emotions having access to the largest stockpile of nukes

Fine... I'm with that... I get it and I understand it and I agree with it. But it isn't because she's a woman. It's because she cries in public. I bet Margaret Thatcher never cried in public.

[Silver]

When did she cry again?

[Diraker]

Wait but having an idiotic apocalyptic loving white guy's finger on the button is like so much better.

Never mind the countless other white male politicians who have cried in public. Anyone remember that Alaskan Senator, whaaa whaaaa. Or Bush Sr. etc etc

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16053170/


Whaaaa whaaaa. Aging white men can't control their emotions.

[Konrad]

What is disturbing is not that she cried, it's how so precisely calculated it is. She just happens to "show her vulnerability" a day before Super Tuesday...when was the last time she cried again? Oh yeah, the day before the New Hampshire Primary! Now the bitch wants to garnish my wages to pay for someone's health care even if I opt out of it...makes me want to cry.

[Diraker]

So Hillary is either "weak" or "calculating". What about those other politicians that cry? What's their story? Double standards 4tl.

eta: some commentary about it

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftLyDACCRwo

[Silver]

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[Elora]

Still not defending her... but this isn't exactly bursting into hysteria...

(from MSNBC.com)

On the Democratic side, Clinton held an emotional reunion with a colleague from the early days of her legal career as a child advocate. The moment came as she revisited her law school days while hosting a campaign event at the Yale Child Study Center where she first pursued her interest in child advocacy.

Penn Rhodeen, a New Haven public interest lawyer who worked with Clinton as a student, recalled her showing up on his doorstep wearing purple bellbottoms.

"It was so 1972," he recalled, praising Clinton for her longtime interest in helping children.

"Here is the abiding truth we know - you have always been a champion for children. Welcome home, dear friend. We are so proud of you," he said.

Clinton responded emotionally to Rhodeen's praise, at one point wiping her eyes with her hand. But unlike her teary-eyed moment in Portsmouth, N.H., her voice never broke and she tried make light of her emotion.

"I said I would not tear up. Already we're not on that path," Clinton replied to laughs.

[Dong]

I think Hillary's a fake, but it's funny how the same people who rag on her for crying are in tears when a patch comes along for a game that isn't in their favor.

[Cinnabar]

I think Hillary's a fake, but it's funny how the same people who rag on her for crying are in tears when a patch comes along for a game that isn't in their favor.

lol

[Forecast]

One of my friends interned in the US Senate and each group was assigned groups of Senators. They were to hear the Senators speak and interview their staff...

Well my lucky friend had Hillary in her section... Hillary never spoke to them, not once in the whole assignment... She also sent her peons to speak to them and none of them answered any of their questions. My friend is Taiwanese and she kept asking about China, and why Hillary is pro-China and they declined to respond. I would never vote for anyone who would encourage a communist nation (China) to take over surrounding free democratic ones (like Taiwan). Fuck that bitch, and wild bill

[Virt]

Only if you're still wearing it, darling... ;pOh Snap! :whip:

[Elgarond]

This morning as I lurk the Poop deck I am once again confronted with irrational hate for Hillary. I am forced to assume that the last 12 years of chain emails sent forth from the bowels of the right have tricked people into believing that Billary is somehow worse than our other representatives.

Should we compare her to our current president? I doubt the haters would like the outcome. She can speak in complete sentences which pretty much trumps ol bushie.

She wants to spend our tax dollars on universal health care? What an evil bitch. Why I wouldn't be so angry if she gave out no bid contracts to past employers or invaded an oil rich country so a few companies could shatter earnings records year after year. No taxations without representation! Please, I implore you, my representatives, take 30% of my 40k and give it to KBR. God knows they need it more than my children or I. They even need it more than Timmy’s grandmamma who can't afford her pacemaker. Fuck that bitch and anyone who thinks they can tax me and use 1 red cent of it to help someone with a medical need. Any of my tax dollars that are not directly or indirectly aiding the wealthy are wasted! Fuck you Timmy, everyone dies. Health care is big business and doing anything to hamper those profit centers is socialist.

There are no reasons to hate Hillary. You can disagree with her policies, be angry that she voted for the patriot act, that she supported /suports the war in Iraq, but hating her proves that you do not approach politics rationally. Her success and power are a testament to her intelligence. If she were elected she will be far and away better than the embarrassment of corruption and ineptitude we have witnessed over the last 8 years. She will be competent in her corruption which is sadly the best we can hope for given the state of politics today.

[Koltas]

lol Elg I <3 you

[Whisper]

If she were elected she will be far and away better than the embarrassment of corruption and ineptitude we have witnessed over the last 8 years. She will be competent in her corruption which is sadly the best we can hope for given the state of politics today.
That is golden.

[Saleen]

http://thephoenix.com/OutsideTheFrame/content/binary/hillary_clinton.jpg

[Elora]

Elgarond for President!

That was stunning, Sir.

[Mutt]

This morning as I lurk the Poop deck I am once again confronted with irrational hate ..... of corruption and ineptitude we have witnessed over the last 8 years. She will be competent in her corruption which is sadly the best we can hope for given the state of politics today.Obama would be better. Corruption Lite(tm) with a side of Net Neutrality

[Shokar]

I miss Elg. :puppy_dog

[Spawl]

I will end up voting for Hillary. I believe she will better develop the consensus to get things done. Obama has no hope of implementing all of the "change" that he is striving for. The sheer volume of change he is advocating just isn't going to happen. He doesn't have support for everything within his own party let alone across the aisle where he will also need votes.

I tend to vote for candidates that express a realistic approaches to government. The problem is that all of my personal interests cross party lines back and forth so I tend to be a bit more moderate than most people. The less I see government, the better I like it. I just want it to work in the background without me knowing it is there, kind of like the grounds keepers for sports. Unfortunately, more often they change the entire layout of the field, changing the rules of the game and often you don't know the rules until you get on the field.

I really hate all the posturing around election time. There is too much bravado and not enough performance. Just get done what you say you will and you have my vote.

[Cinnabar]

She's going to lose today.

[Mutt]

If Obama takes cali he wins

[Diraker]

This year for the democrats it's not winner take all per state. One can win some delgates and some go to the loser. Also there are super delegates which aren't committed to anyone in particular (they might have pledged but they can still vote for whoever at the convention, if need be).

Just saying. IMO either Hillary of Obama would be better than more republicans. And again, I'll repeat that, for me, this election is about judicial nominations and appointees.

[Elad]

Well sadly Cinn without counting CA, she's definitely winning..I don't know, I'd shrug and vote for her if she's the pres candidate, most likely because Obama would hopefully be the VP. I didn't even know until today that McCain was anti drilling in Alaska and is actually pretty different from a lot of republicans. However, he's still a military hot head. I think that'd be his downfall image wise in the long run..I just don't think the republican ticket is flashy or popular enough to make the American public not want a change over the last 8 years.

[Soushia]

Well sadly Cinn without counting CA, she's definitely winning..I don't know, I'd shrug and vote for her if she's the pres candidate, most likely because Obama would hopefully be the VP. I didn't even know until today that McCain was anti drilling in Alaska and is actually pretty different from a lot of republicans. However, he's still a military hot head. I think that'd be his downfall image wise in the long run..I just don't think the republican ticket is flashy or popular enough to make the American public not want a change over the last 8 years.


Well it is midnight est and it looks like Hillary has the upper-hand. But then again...she gets ZERO delegates for Florida and Michigan. I guess whoever gets the higher % in Cali will be ahead of the pack.

Personally I have no problem with Hillary being a woman or the former first lady. I do however think she is even more of a true "politician" than Bill was (damn I miss Bill!) and would make one shady president!

The trick here is that if it comes down to McCain -vs- Clinton she will lose. You think the "Swiftboat Veterans" trash machine was bad last time? They will have a friggin field day on her and her campaign will get bogged down and lose traction. Plus if she wins she most definately wouldn't put Obama on the ticket with her. She would have to go with a white man who appeals to the center because the mid-american wingnuts will need a good fucking reason to pull the switch for a woman.

Obama has a shot to beat the Republicans head to head...Hillary doesn't. So if Obama doesn't get the nomination we will have another term of gridlock with a Republican pres and a Democrat congress.

Did I mention I REALLY want to move to Canada right about now?!?

[Cinnabar]

I don't seeing Hillary getting the nomination simply because the democrats know that the republicans know that she would lose against McCain.

[Mutt]

Personally I have no problem with Hillary being a woman or the former first lady. I do however think she is even more of a true "politician" than Bill was (damn I miss Bill!) and would make one shady president!

The trick here is that if it comes down to McCain -vs- Clinton she will lose. You think the "Swiftboat Veterans" trash machine was bad last time? They will have a friggin field day on her and her campaign will get bogged down and lose traction. Plus if she wins she most definately wouldn't put Obama on the ticket with her. She would have to go with a white man who appeals to the center because the mid-american wingnuts will need a good fucking reason to pull the switch for a woman.

Obama has a shot to beat the Republicans head to head...Hillary doesn't. So if Obama doesn't get the nomination we will have another term of gridlock with a Republican pres and a Democrat congress.

Did I mention I REALLY want to move to Canada right about now?!?Wait until after the election, its ass cold right now. But yea I think the same way. If Hillary wins, McCain wins. If Obama wins, thats what scares the republican pundits.

[Diraker]

The GOP, RNC, and their echo chamber of pundits fear Hillary more than Obama. Just look at who they attack more. The GOP and friends want Romney vs Obama.

Anyway IMO look for less evangelical religious social conservatives voting and more young people voting this election (relatively as compared to past elections). I think the GOP and crew are overestimating the evangelical vote and underestimating the young people vote. This election cycle is showing to be very popular and maybe we can expect abnormally (but abnormal in a good way) high voting rates this year. Larger voting turnouts historically means more democrats voting. And I can't imagine democrats and independents who are supposedly so anti-war (I am not) voting for McCain who says we'll be in Iraq for 100 years.

[Mutt]

Every conservative guy on CNN last night wanted Hillary to stack up against McCain

[Silver]

Anyone but Hillary... I may even vote Obama if he gets the Dem nod.

What I would love to see is McCain v Clinton, and McCain have Obama be his VP

[Soulein]

I don't think McCain would pick Obama for his VP... but it's possible that he could pick Lieberman. Although, it looks like he might need a more conservative VP to unite the party, which I think is dumb because they can either wake up and smell the coffee or get stuck with Hillary.

[Diraker]

McCain I think will pick Huckabee for his running mate. After all if it wasn't for Huckabee Romney would be faring better vs. McCain. McCain also has to play to the ultra right social conservatives. Remember that he called Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell "agents of intolerance" and that crowd hasn't forgotten.

eta: regarding Hillary and the democrats. It's noteworthy to realize that the democratic primaries are drawing many more voters than the republican primaries. In some places the top democrat is getting more votes than all the republicans combined. If this trend is indicative of turnouts during the presidential election in Nov (and it might not be) we are looking at landslide victories for the democratic nominee.

[Konrad]

I agree that McCain will probably invite Huckabee to be his running mate, and I feel that Huckabee right now is continuing to run simply for that reason. I would not be surprised if McCain would ask a conservative Democrat like Lieberman to run with him.

To win the general election most candidates must gear more centrist after they receive their party's nomination. I believe McCain is contrarian enough that he will be forced to do the opposite. With both Obama and Clinton being fairly leftist, he should be able to retain independents and take some moderate Democrat votes while moving his message to the right to retain the Republican base. Adding Huckabee to the ticket will help to satisfy the religious right and also helps with anti-tax Republicans.

While I'm not entirely happy with McCain winning the nomination, I believe that he is very well positioned for the general election and will be hard to beat by whomever wins the Democrat nomination. He is probably the only Republican who could win. That and he understands the threat posed by Islamists and will continue the American presence in the Middle East.

[Mutt]

Microsoft backs Clinton more than Obama and Google backs Obama more
Who do you trust more?

[Silver]

McCain I think will pick Huckabee for his running mate. After all if it wasn't for Huckabee Romney would be faring better vs. McCain. McCain also has to play to the ultra right social conservatives. Remember that he called Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell "agents of intolerance" and that crowd hasn't forgotten.

eta: regarding Hillary and the democrats. It's noteworthy to realize that the democratic primaries are drawing many more voters than the republican primaries. In some places the top democrat is getting more votes than all the republicans combined. If this trend is indicative of turnouts during the presidential election in Nov (and it might not be) we are looking at landslide victories for the democratic nominee.


The popular vote doesn't dictate who wins the Presidency. The Electoral College does, that is why a vote for a Republican in New York state means nothing because the State almost always goes to the Democrat.

It also allows me to vote for a third party person as a Republican in New York State without wasting a vote.

[Mutt]

In other news:
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=4066#more-4066

Why americans continue to use these machines is beyond me

[Diraker]

There are charts of total votes everywhere and in several otherwise red states the turnout for democrats was significantly larger. These states might go blue in Nov. Whatever, we'll just see. I'm no fan of the electoral college. I'd like instant runoff voting or something like that.

[Silver]

There are charts of total votes everywhere and in several otherwise red states the turnout for democrats was significantly larger. These states might go blue in Nov. Whatever, we'll just see. I'm no fan of the electoral college. I'd like instant runoff voting or something like that.

How many of those states allow cross party voting? It is possible that Republicans are voting Democrat because that race is much more hotly contested than the Republican race.

[Elgarond]

Diebold has known who our next president will be since 06.

[Diraker]

I don't know Zilver. But I think it's pretty widely accepted that the republican candidates are generally lacking compared to the democrats. Sure there are the Ron Paulites but for the most part republicans aren't as excited about their candidates as the democrats are about theirs. I think this is showing in the number of voters showing up for the primaries.

And for anyone, here's Laura Ingram (right wing talk radio pundit..the GOP RNC on message type) reading something from James Dobson (religious leader) about how if McCain is the nominee, he's staying home on voting day.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_RVZcZ3b9RI&feature=related

All the big time right wing radio hosts have been slamming McCain. Anyway if McCain ends up winning the nomination I wonder how they'll change their tune. With that said IMO I like how those pundits are having less of an influence. Less 'ditto heads' is IMO good.

[Silver]

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[Spawl]

So what happens if neither Hillary Clinton nor Obama go into the convention with enough votes to win?

Then it all falls to the superdelegates, like senators, congressmen etc. If that happens, or if the delegate margin is enough that superdelegates can overcome the difference, there will be lobbying like seldom has been seen.

Either way, once the convention is over, there will be a victor.

[Mutt]

I think what they said is that so far Hillary is winning in terms of vote in delegates, but Obama has more pledged delegates overall. Does that mean some of the super delegates has pledged his way?

[Soushia]

I think what they said is that so far Hillary is winning in terms of vote in delegates, but Obama has more pledged delegates overall. Does that mean some of the super delegates has pledged his way?

I think that is due to the fact that she got more votes...but didnt actually earn any of the delegates in Michigan and Florida because they don't count due to them moving their primaries.

[Spawl]

It is the superdelegates that they are referring to. Each state has their own format for determining their delegates for the national convention. How the caucuses or votes go will determine those delegates. They are required to vote the way the constituents decided.

The Democratic party leadership receives one vote for each state and federal positions (these are the superdelegates). They are not required to vote any particular way, but what happens is that the media "predicts" that they will vote in line with their constituents for the areas that they represent. There have been a few cases where people have lost their seat during the next vote due to voting out of line with their constituents, but there have also been some that have gotten away with it.

God I hate party politics sometimes.

[Diraker]

I've heard that the super delegates are there in case the people vote for some weirdo no hope of winning candidate and the establishment can sort of over ride the vote. Not something I agree with but I guess a safeguard of sorts is ok. Anyway either Obama or Clinton IMO is fine so I doubt these super delegates will be doing anything crazy.

[Mutt]

The GOP, RNC, and their echo chamber of pundits fear Hillary more than Obama.http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/08/20008.matchups.schneider/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

Then their fear is unfounded

[Diraker]

According to that article what is unfounded the the notion that McCain would assuredly beat Clinton. Not that I would put any sort of confidence in these polls. Never mind that the election is still over eight months away. A lot can still happen. No running mates have been declared, no october surprises, no head to head debates yet, etc.

Anyway I voted for Hillary but if Obama is the nominee I will vote for him.

[Mutt]

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2008/02/10/hillary-manager.html?ref=rss
This is a bad sign right? Struggling to raise half as much funds as Obama, losing 4 states in a row (and some by good size margins) and now firing your campaign manager?

[Silver]

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[Diraker]

Sorry but for me it takes more than rhetoric and cadence to earn my support. "Hope" and "believe" are buzz words that turn me off. IMO I just think Obama is rushing his presidential bid. He's a one term senator who won his seat without a fight.

I was trying to like Edwards but every time I heard him speak he was speaking about things and in a manner just didn't do anything for me. He seemed like he was always tired, like he didn't want to be there but at the same time saying that he's a fighter. Just didn't add up for me.

I like Hillary because she's tough and she's proven that she can withstand attacks and smears. When I compare Obama's, "everyone will just melt in front of my awesomeness" to Hillary's, "I know how to play the system" Hillary is the better choice in a rough and tumble political environment. Obama and his supporters just seem, to me, to be naive in thinking that reaching out and conciliatory politics will work to help progressive policies...just look at the so called 'do nothing congress'. Look at why folk like Reid and Pelosi aren't popular, they wanted to reach out and they have accomplished nothing. As far as policies go, there isn't much difference between Hillary and Obama. And I will support whomever is the democratic nominee.

[Diraker]

This (rather long) write up by Joe Wilson (ya know Valarie Plame's, outted CIA agent, husband) pretty much describes why I support Hillary over Obama.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joe-wilson/battletested_b_86355.html

Just to quote a portion.


...

Sen. Barack Obama's promise of transformation and an end of partisan politics has its seductive appeal. The Bush-Cheney era, after all, has been punctuated by smear campaigns, character assassinations and ideological fervor.

Nobody dislikes such poisonous partisanship, especially in foreign policy, more than I do. I am one of very few Foreign Service officers who have served as ambassador in the administrations of both George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton, yet I have spent the past four years fighting a concerted character assassination campaign orchestrated by the George W. Bush White House.

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is one of the few who fully understood the stakes in that battle. Time and again, she reached out to my wife -- outed CIA officer Valerie Plame Wilson -- and me to remind us that as painful as the attacks were, we simply could not allow ourselves to be driven from the public square by bullying. To do so would validate the radical right's thesis that the way to win debates is to demonize opponents, taking full advantage of the natural desire to avoid confrontation, even if it means yielding on substantive issues. Hillary knew this from experience, having spent the better part of the past 20 years fighting the Republican attack machine. She is a fighter.

But will Mr. Obama fight? His brief time on the national scene gives little comfort. Consider a February 2006 exchange of letters with Mr. McCain on the subject of ethics reform. The wrathful Mr. McCain accused Mr. Obama of being "disingenuous," to which Mr. Obama meekly replied, "The fact that you have now questioned my sincerity and my desire to put aside politics for the public interest is regrettable but does not in any way diminish my deep respect for you." Then one of McCain's aides said of Obama, "Obama wouldn't know the difference between an RPG and a bong."

Mr. McCain was insultingly dismissive but successful in intimidating his inexperienced colleague. Thus, in his one face-to-face encounter with Mr. McCain, Mr. Obama failed to stand his ground.

What gives us confidence Mr. Obama will be stronger the next time he faces Mr. McCain, a seasoned political fighter with extensive national security credentials?

...

[Mutt]

Part of Obama's strategy is to be positive, getting into a battle for words would derail his momentum, which isnt actually as close as the numbers show. Super delegates will not be split close to the same proportians as the state pledged delegates. They will be used to push one candidate over the top once they are close enough for the super delegates to do so. In this case, Obama is leading handily in that area with 120 more than Hillary.

More worrisome is how in a speech last week Hillary said she will stand up to Oil Companies and as well as "stand up to oil producing countries."

Stand up to oil producing countries? Stand up for what? Its their oil, they can do what they want with it. I presume that most of this is aimed at Venezuala, but still. What right does she think she will have to dictate to a country as to how it uses its resource?

[Elgarond]

What right does she think she will have to dictate to a country as to how it uses its resource?


The precedent was set by the current administration.

[Diraker]

I didn't hear that speech Mutt but from that short quote, for me, it means to take a stand again Arab countries that are producing oil. To me it means that where Bush just loves and kisses Saudi Arabia, she will not.

[Diraker]

Although an announcement has not been made this could make things a bit more interesting. Edwards might endorse Clinton.

http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=4281404&page=1

[Mutt]

he meets with obama on monday

[Mutt]

http://i.l.cnn.net/cnn/2008/POLITICS/02/14/clinton.obama/art.clinton.ohio.ap.jpglol

[Silver]

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[Diraker]

Anyone who saw what happened in 2000 should know that Florida is a very important state. Didn't (barring election fraud) the republicans win by 200 votes or some shit? It's a so called "battleground state". It only does the democrats harm to not include Florida in the primary process. What better way to get people to not 'bring out the vote' when you snub them several months earlier.

"I believe our nominee will need the enthusiastic support of Democrats in these states to win the general election, and so I will ask my Democratic convention delegates to support seating the delegations from Florida and Michigan," she (Clinton) said. - from the AP story last month.

She's right. Unless of course you want FA to go republican again.

Anyway the media is finally picking up on what I've been saying about Hillary's strength vs Obama's timidness. The media clearly wants a close race because it makes them money. When you hear about Obama raising $5 million in January where does a huge chunk of that money go to? Right, ads. The media just loves elections and election money.

[Silver]

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[Diraker]

I am a Republican

http://www.chevroncars.com/learn/img-old/ear-muffs.jpg

[Silver]

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[Diraker]

Ahh the myth of the welfare queen driving around in Cadillacs having babies so they can get a few extra bucks from government handouts. That's totally from the Reagan era. Anyway people do abuse the system and IMO there a lot of room for improvement. But still, there needs to be some safety net programs because you can't just let people starve on the streets.

About 20% of tax dollars go to the military. 20% to social security. 20% to Medicare and health care stuff. 10% to safety net programs (like welfare). 10% to interest on debt. And 20% to everything else like science funding, education, infrastructure, benefits for federal workers (including veterans), etc. And I don't know exactly what percentage but programs like the Faith Based Initiative is giving billions of tax dollars to religious institutions.

Also many corporations aren't paying the taxes they should. They go off and hide in Barbados or where ever, and they have all these deals with the government. Some would call it corporate welfare. Make big business pay their fair share and the burden wouldn't have to be dumped on working people.

And I don't mind that people who make a lot of money pay more in taxes because people who make a lot of money benefit the most from the stability of the US government. Without the government offering police and fire depts, public schooling, roads, general military protection, courts (relevant to you and me both), etc most of us couldn't even make money in the first place.

eta: added courts duh!

[Soulein]

I just can't stand the naive notion that socializing something will make it better. And the Dems want to do this for Student Loans, and Healthcare. Their job is to create an "even playing field", not total economic equilibrium. Like when Theodore Roosevelt took on the meat industry because of the abominable way they treated workers... there was clear and total abuse going on there. This is not the case today. Corrupt business practices like those seen in the Enron scandal should be the on the Government's mind, but destroying competition and dampening our ability to succeed is not the answer.

[Diraker]

And conversely I just can't stand the naive notion that privatizing something will automatically make it better. Anyway I favor regulation not necessarily socialization. I am a capitalist, as are the vast majority of democrats.

I also don't get this notion that somehow republicans are better at managing government money. Debt goes up when republicans are in control. Republicans, take back your party. Corrupt neo-cons and bible thumping social conservatives control it. Your party has been hijacked. I would love to get back to T. Roosevelt and his anti-trust policies. I would love a republican who truly stood for fiscal conservatism.

[Silver]

[xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[Diraker]

I can't feel that much sympathy when others are starving or working 3 jobs to just stay afloat. If you don't like being self employed or if it's too rough for you, switch things up. You're smart, educated, have capital, etc. You have the luxury of being able to determine at least some of your future and dictate your current circumstances. I think the real question is Zilver, can you see out of your privileged upper class bubble and understand what it's like to not be so lucky? (granted "lucky" might not be the best word because many people have earned their "luck" as opposed to being born into a rich family).

Currently I am a stay at home dad. I quit my job in the corporate computer world to care for my three daughters. Luckily my wife is a lawyer who makes enough to support us all. We figured that it was pretty stupid to pay other people to raise our kids for us. And I feel like I am super lucky that I have that privilege.

I file taxes jointly with my wife. But when I was working my income was taxed. I forget what percentage but it was a pretty significant proportion. Every two weeks it was the government taking what I earned. Same for my wife, her salary is taxed. Money removed even before we get to touch it.

And like I said before, only 10% of your tax dollars are going to fund social programs you hate so much. If your beef is taxes then I suggest you vote for someone who will make big business pay their fair share of taxes to lessen the burden you have to pay. Although none of the top three candidates seem like they would do this.

eta: forgot to mention that (and it's partly relevant) I took a few semesters worth of graduate study going for my MBA in Public Management. This was based on the idea that I'd work for the EPA or other government agency that is related to science. That it would mesh well with my B.S. in Natural Science.

[Silver]

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[Soulein]

Dir, you are right, the Republican party as of late has been spending and subsidizing like Democrats. They haven't stayed true to their fiscally conservative roots. Earmarks and entitlements are the name of the game. One thing I like about John McCain is that he is one of the few who recognizes that the Republican party has lost its way.

That being said, I don't think that the Democrats are going to do any better. A proper amount of regulation is healthy, Dir, but Hillary and Obama are looking to socialize student loans and healthcare, and have said nothing about cutting back on entitlements (to my knowledge).

[Diraker]

Said the guy WHO DOESN'T HAVE TO WORK.

STFU.

Seriously.

been there, done that

Have you ever tried taking care of three children? It's much more work than what I was previously doing. But definitely more gratifying and fulfilling.

And of course you haven't addressed anything I said regarding politics. Instead you just make ad hominin attacks on me. Typical of folk who don't have a good argument or good reasons for believing what they do.

[Silver]

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[Diraker]

And Soul, if you mean "as of late" to mean since 1980 then I agree. But I too thought McCain wasn't like the usual republican politician until he said that he'd nominate judges like Roberts and Alito to the supreme court. Or until McCain turned into a super hawk regarding Iraq, saying that American's understand that we need to be there for 10,000 years. (I'm hawkish but not that hawkish, eesh). I haven't heard what McCain has said regarding economics other than he has seemed to flip flop regarding Bush's tax cuts. He was against them before he was for them.

Anyway regarding healthcare, student loans, and so called "entitlements" (eww what an icky word) WWJD?

[Diraker]

Now I understand why you are voting for Clinton...

All you women stick together.

Yup and PROUD!

[Silver]

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[Silver]

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[Diraker]

I like Obama but I prefer Hillary. Zilver, shouldn't you be, you know, like working or something. Gotta keep up with all that taxation going on. Uncle Sam has it in for elite working white men, ya know.

[Silver]

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[Gargamel]

Shouldn't you be folding laundry and watching Opra, while waiting for your wife to come home so she can fuck you in the ass with a strap on?
Fuck you. His wife is busy fucking me in the ass w/ the strap on while I skull fuck your wife.

[Silver]

Obama hits Clinton on lobbyist money

Barack Obama accused opponent Hillary Clinton Friday of “defending Washington lobbyists” and special interests.

“Yesterday, Sen. Clinton unveiled her latest in a long line of slogans, which argues that she’s proposed solutions while others have not,” said Obama, who returned to the campaign trail in Wisconsin after a one-day break.

He said both candidates had good ideas but that Washington was a place “where good ideas go to die. They’re the victim of petty, partisan politics, point-scoring, and special interest influence that’s out of control. …

“You know, after defending Washington lobbyists as people who ‘represent real Americans’ at a debate in August, Sen. Clinton said yesterday that she would take them on as president,” said Obama, who alleged the New York senator had taken almost twice as much money from lobbyists as any other presidential candidate this cycle.

“That’s not being a part of the solutions business. That’s being a part of business-as-usual in Washington,” said Obama.

The two candidates have been locked in an increasingly bitter war of words as they battle for pledged delegates awarded in primary and caucus votes, and superdelegates, who can shift their allegiance at any time.

–CNN Associate Political Editor Rebecca Sinderbrand

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/02/15/obama-hits-clinton-on-lobbyist-money/

[Mutt]

Shouldn't you be folding laundry and watching Opra, while waiting for your wife to come home so she can fuck you in the ass with a strap on?If Dir was a Oprah watcher he would be pro Obama

[Silver]

If Dir was a Oprah watcher he would be pro Obama

You're right...

I'm sorry about that.

[Roxie]

Lol.



Who's Gargamel?

[Diraker]

From your posts Zilver, I am now fully aware why you consider yourself a republican.

[Gargamel]

Lol.



Who's Gargamel?
Gargamel the sorcerer is the sworn enemy of the Smurfs. He is an evil wizard, though his powers appear very limited; he actually seems to be more of an alchemist as his main ability is to create magic potions. His main goal in life is to destroy the Smurfs. He is perpetually stooped, his robe is worn and patched, and his teeth are rotten.
He lives in a run-down hovel with his flea-bitten cat Azrael. In later episodes he acquired an apprentice named Scruple, who seems moderately brighter and more savvy than his master, though still inexperienced in the ways of magic.
When he first appeared in The Smurfnapper (published in 1959) he captured a smurf which he needed as an ingredient for a potion to make gold (according to an old magic spell). The other smurfs rallied against him, freed the kidnapped smurf and the sorcerer was defeated and humiliated. Gargamel swore revenge: from now on the conflict would be personal.
Sometimes he wants to eat the Smurfs, other times he wants to use them to make gold, and still other times he has even more bizarre uses for them. Though he often catches Smurfs who wander by his home or which he happens across in the forest, he does not know the location of the hidden Smurf village, a fact which continually frustrates him.
On some occasions, he has discovered the location of the village, but sooner or later gets led away from it due to either a magic spell put on him by Papa Smurf or because of some other bizarre factor. Sometimes it is simply a matter of his being led away from the village while chasing the Smurfs, losing them and then being unable to find his way back.
Gargamel is an eternal bungler. Some of his schemes to catch Smurfs border on the bizarre (such as a "blue magnet" that attracted solely blue items). He has a seemingly endless library of spellbooks, potions, and gimmicks for his life's passion. However, no matter how elaborate Gargamel's plans, they invariably end in failure, causing him to spout his catch phrase: "I hate those Smurfs!". (It is worth noting that he does love at least one Smurf, his daughter/creation Sassette who refers to him as "pappy Gargamel.")
Despite his never-ending hatred and frustration for the Smurfs, more than once has he had to rely on Papa Smurf to help save him from a more wicked enemy's plans (such as Balthazar) or to rescue him from a potion gone horribly wrong. On another occasion, the episode "The Fountain of Smurf", Papa Smurf drinks too much water from the fountain and becomes a smurfling. The Smurfs rely on Gargamel to come to their aid and help turn Papa Smurf back. In quite a funny, and ironic, ending, Gargamel and Azrael, themselves, fall into the Fountain of Youth.
In the original series, Gargamel was voiced by the late Paul Winchell, and Azrael's voice was provided by the late Don Messick.
[edit]

[Silver]

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[Silver]

Key Clinton ally defects to Obama

THE US Congressman John Lewis, an elder statesman from the civil rights era and one of Hillary Clinton's most prominent black supporters, said he planned to cast his vote as a super-delegate for Barack Obama in the hope of preventing a fight at the Democratic convention.

"In recent days, there is a sense of movement and a sense of spirit," said Mr Lewis, a Georgia Democrat who endorsed Senator Clinton last year. "Something is happening in America and people are prepared and ready to make that great leap."

Mr Lewis, who carries great influence among other members of Congress, disclosed his decision on Thursday. His comments came as fresh signs emerged that Senator Clinton's support was beginning to erode from some other black politicians who also serve as super-delegates.

Another Georgian Congressman, David Scott, who was among the first to defect, said he would not go against the will of voters in his district, who overwhelmingly supported Senator Obama last week.

The developments came on a day in which Senator Clinton set out anew to prove the fight for the Democratic nomination was far from over. Campaigning in Ohio, she pursued a new strategy of biting attack lines against Senator Obama, while adopting a newly populist tone as she courted blue-collar voters.

Senator Clinton also intensified her efforts in Wisconsin, which holds its primary on Tuesday and where she and Senator Obama now have the first duelling negative television advertisements of the campaign.

In the ads, Senator Clinton taunted Senator Obama for refusing to debate her. She and Bill Clinton prepared a new fund-raising blitz to try to counter Senator Obama's edge of several million dollars in campaign cash.

The New York Times

[Soulein]

WWJD? Sorry, I'm not taking that bait. But as a person with Judeo/Christian values, I can tell you right now that creating a culture of dependency is not a road I want to tread. It is my opinion that we should take care of the poor and help those in need... but the policies of people like Obama and Clinton go beyond that.

But wait, I'm a Republican, so that means I have to wake up in the morning and beat up homeless people... or so the stereotype you SEEM to be supporting says.

[Silver]

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[Soulein]

I'm sure he does a good job raising his kids and there is nothing wrong with that. But it is my opinion that Democrats play on people's emotion and good will to promote their socialist agendas. I listen to their speeches and this is what I hear. If Dir buys it then thats his deal, but I'm not going to vote for someone like that.

[Diraker]

Wave more epeen? Jeez.

/eyeroll

[Diraker]

"culture of dependency"
"entitlement programs"
"socialist agendas"

?!?

c'mon those are just buzz words straight from folk like Ann Coulter, Rush, and Sean Hannity.

and

But wait, I'm a Republican, so that means I have to wake up in the morning and beat up homeless people... or so the stereotype you SEEM to be supporting says.

I said nothing of the sort.

[Soulein]

"socialist agendas"


What else would you call socializing Healthcare and Student Loans? Sounds socialistic to me.

[Miach]

We have no party anymore that is fiscally responsible.

I have no problem paying taxes. I have a problem paying taxes and seeing it wasted everyday on a worthless foreign policy, subsidization of big business, poorly run government programs...you name it.

I have zero confidence in the ability of the government to run a new healthcare program. They should focus on tort reform and fix the BS dispartity between billing people with and without insurance so doctor's don't have to send out a $4,000 claim to an insurance company to get $400 bucks back.

And enough with the personal attacks. All it does is detract from your arguments and dumbs down an otherwise interesting thread.

[Soulein]

We have no party anymore that is fiscally responsible.

I have no problem paying taxes. I have a problem paying taxes and seeing it wasted everyday on a worthless foreign policy, subsidization of big business, poorly run government programs...you name it.

I have zero confidence in the ability of the government to run a new healthcare program. They should focus on tort reform and fix the BS dispartity between billing people with and without insurance so doctor's don't have to send out a $4,000 claim to an insurance company to get $400 bucks back.

And enough with the personal attacks. All it does is detract from your arguments and dumbs down an otherwise interesting thread.

Agreed on all points except the one pertaining to Foreign Policy. Both parties spend our tax money like a teenage girl who stole her Dady's credit card.

[Elgarond]

Wow Zilver. You fail at remaining objective. Thanks for going off the deep end with the personal attacks and for speaking for everyone in your guild. Two very stereo typical republican traints over the last 8 years. I guess go fuck yourself works for Cheney when he is painted into a corner. Why shouldn't it work for the "big shot" lawyer who argues like an angry 9th grader.

And if your stupid enough to beleive that everything has to be run "free market" you fail. If the money behind our current medical system (most notably drug manufacturers) didn't have a vested interest in things staying as they are do think the debate would have some substance instead of OMG PINKO COMMMIE LIBERAL WARNING.

Had those who can't see what is influencing them one way or another on any social issue been born in a mideast country you can bet your bottom dollar they would be zipping women up in white cloth bags and burying them up to their waist in sand in order to better stone them. Stay angry. Stay stupid.

[Diraker]

The notion that both parties equally spend too much and run up deficits is just flat out wrong. Under Clinton we ended up going from a deficit to a surplus. After Clinton we went back to running a deficit. Not that I think the president is the be all end all of what happens economically. Much of it depends on outside forces and the actions of congress.

http://www.cbo.gov/budget/data/historical.htm

It's a chart so I doubt it would paste well. But this is the title:

"Table F-1. Revenues, Outlays, Deficits, Surpluses, and Debt Held by the Public, 1968 to 2007, in Billions of Dollars"

Note that this is the official government site (Congress Budget Office), not some odd ball opinion or hack site. All the charts are IMO pretty interesting on that page. Other charts show where we get government revenue from (like from individual taxes, corporate taxes, etc) and some of where we spend the money on (defense, domestic, etc).

[Silver]

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[Miach]

Changed my mind...don't care enough about the thread to continue. :)

[Mutt]

Unless there is less money owed at the end of budget than at the start then any surpluses are wasted anyways.

[Diraker]

You're right the charts I linked talk of PUBLIC debt. Thanks for the info.

Did you get your info from here?

http://www.letxa.com/articles/16

It's one of the top google hits and it uses much of the same language you used. For example it's actually "intragovernment" (according to the TreasuryDirect.gov site) not "intergovernment" as it's called on lexta. Also I tried to do some searching and many other sites seem to use that lexta site as their base too (including the same intergovernment misnomer. Also that lexta site is right wing, just look at the 'my positions' page but until I see otherwise I am going to accept at least some of it's take on public vs national debt.

Anyway I still stand by the notion that republicans aren't any better at being in charge of the economy than democrats. And like I've said before I don't necessarily think the economy is something can be manipulated at a whim, that there are too many outside forces at play. But I won't be saying that Clinton ran a surplus anymore. Thanks, I love to be shown where I was wrong.

[Miach]

You're right the charts I linked talk of PUBLIC debt. Thanks for the info.

Did you get your info from here?

http://www.letxa.com/articles/16

It's one of the top google hits and it uses much of the same language you used. For example it's actually "intragovernment" (according to the TreasuryDirect.gov site) not "intergovernment" as it's called on lexta. Also I tried to do some searching and many other sites seem to use that lexta site as their base too (including the same intergovernment misnomer. Also that lexta site is right wing, just look at the 'my positions' page but until I see otherwise I am going to accept at least some of it's take on public vs national debt.

Anyway I still stand by the notion that republicans aren't any better at being in charge of the economy than democrats. And like I've said before I don't necessarily think the economy is something can be manipulated at a whim, that there are too many outside forces at play. But I won't be saying that Clinton ran a surplus anymore. Thanks, I love to be shown where I was wrong.


Lots of websites use intragovernmental or some such. I saw Lexta.com but it looks biased to me in someways (even thought he figures are in the ballpark at least of being right). When I was searching I used both intra and inter...same thing pretty much anyways.

Here is a better link:

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/NPGateway

You can see there that they keep the "intragovernmental(!!;)) holdings" separate from the "Debt held by the Public". Then they show the figure with them together.

If you run a search for the data from say 1/4/93 through 1/4/07 you will see that the combined figure goes up every single year, even the years when Clinton was President. Bushjr is far worse though...hes almost doubled the combined debt since hes been in office.

And even the combined figure on that page doesn't account for the future liabilities we have as a country for medicare and social security which are underfunded to the tune of 40+ trillion at this point.

[Gnioss]

hey zilver pls feel free to flip out and be a total e-badass. The future of the country depends on this interweb debate. DONT LOSE.

[Cydus]

Said the guy WHO DOESN'T HAVE TO WORK.

STFU.

Seriously.

BTW: do you get an allowance?

Zilver's 3 step approach to winning an argument:

1. Talk about how much money you make and how successful you are.

2. Berate any opposers with witty quips like "GET A JOB YOU WOMAN!!!"

3. Continually mock any opposers.

---


Honestly man, I understand we all feel passionately about the issues, but there's a fine line between debating and being completely retarded.

[Soulein]

To be fair, Diraker was baiting him... but yeah, personal attacks = no no.

[Diraker]

They want me to fund all of the *African Americans* on welfare that have 6 illegitimate children with 6 fathers who are all in prisons. They think that I should be punished...

Yup, I'm a Republican, but one who thinks, unlike many Democrats who are behind some useless cunt merely because she has the same last name as her husband.

As they say: "if you are under 30 and a Republican you have no heart and if you are over 30 and a Democrat you have no brain."

...

Do you work? Do you pay taxes? Do you have any idea...

Do you have any idea how little I benefit from my tax dollar?

Seriously bro, what do you do for a living, and what are you paying in taxes that makes you feel so comfortable having me pay $100,000.00 per year to fund your social programs?

I think my response was much more civil than his statements.

And I baited him...yeah right.

Anyway Zilver can speak for himself...as can I. Frankly I don't care when people get all bent out of shape on forums and attack me. I'm a big boy. I can handle it. I have thick skin. I'll play "let's battle RL" with anyone because I'm happy and my life is good.

[Shokar]

I'm happy and my life is good.


:smile_ok:


And, my hat's off to ya for being a stay home dad and raising three girls. Probably a harder and more stressful job than most of us 9-to-5 working types have.

Now, you guys can get back to your political debates. Sorry for the intrerruption.

[Oakbone]

The whole budget for the coast guard for a year, 7 bil.. The largest gov. dept (department of homeland security) is around 40 something bil if I remember correctly. Obama's Heath care plan is 6o something bil? Hillary care was well over 100 bil? I'm sorry but there is no way any one should look at that and say it's a good idea.

Even if our health care is fubar right now I still believe it's one of if not the best in the world. The last thing we need is another thing for the government to fuck up. I don't trust them. Name one big program the gov't runs efficiently.

It's hard to spend your own money... It's easy to spend other people's money. Thats the problem with all these taxes. I read an article which I believed to be politically neutral that explained how the big oil company's paid more in taxes than the whole bottom 50% of individual taxpayers. Now I'm now all for oil company s ( I do think they are a tad crooked but meh) but since when is an effective tax rate for them over 40% ok... Of course they will just pass the costs on to consumers. That is why everyone wanting to tax the rich folk = not a great idea. The rich folk and business provide jobs for one. Jobs bring more money into the economy than any fake stimulus package.

There is no doubt we hav'nt had a true conservative in office for more than 20 imo... That explains the financial mess we're in now. One of the few things I did like about Bush was the tax cuts. We cut cut and raised MORE gov't revenue. That tells me we didn't cut taxes enough.

My big thing I'm voting on this year is economics which is why I can't currently support any of the candidates still in. They are all big gov't. I'll prob write in for pres. The local stuff will be very important this year tho, more important than the presidency for sure. Imagine Hillary or Obama with a Senate and House that can't stop them... That's scary, and if were not heading into recession that will surely do the trick and the markets know it... You think all the volatility in the markets has nothing to do with that fear?

I can only pray that the republicans can block any big gov't programs in the senate so nothing gets done. That's right, we'd all be better off if NOTHING gets done the next 4 years and maybe then we can see a real fiscally respinisble leader running for office...

I'm so sick of the gov't wanting to socialize and control more and more of our lives. This election is about FREEDOM, and we're losing it fast and none of the canidates understand that.

I'm off too work just had to rant a bit. I just can't understand how all of you can justify voting for any of these choices. Fair Winds mateys!

[Ven]

Im curious as to what you all would think of Micheal Bloomberg launching an independent campaign? Theres been talk of it for awhile. If he were to run, which current candidate would be hurt most by it?

[sema]

Taxes.

Taxes are a motor for our societies, for humanity.

Taxes make wonders possible.

Taxes help the poorest to live.

An estimate: 1% of the populate will suffer from cancer - 0.01% of the population makes enough money to pay for medical care.



We are what we are because good men have helped each other. Human kind have achieved greatness because we have understood that 2 indivodualscan together achieve more than than 2 induviduals can alone.

Greed and egoism are the primal destructive force in the world.

[Ternach]

Taxes.

Taxes are a motor for our societies, for humanity.

Taxes make wonders possible.

Taxes help the poorest to live.

An estimate: 1% of the populate will suffer from cancer - 0.01% of the population makes enough money to pay for medical care.



We are what we are because good men have helped each other. Human kind have achieved greatness because we have understood that 2 indivodualscan together achieve more than than 2 induviduals can alone.

Greed and egoism are the primal destructive force in the world.

Word.

[Dong]

Unfortunately, we don’t live in a world where every tax dollar goes to what‘s needed. Our government is inefficient and money that could go to doing great things is wasted. In addition, two individuals achieve more together, but when one individual is doing the work for two, the one individual is better off alone.

I’m all about charity and giving to who is in need. However, I don’t think forced charity is the best way to accomplish this, especially with our inefficient government.

We're to blame by electing the problems into office. When we settle for the lesser of two evils, we're contributing to the problem. We need to get the problems out and hold represenatives accountable - ensure they are actually representing us instead of other interests.

[Mutt]

Honestly, I have doubts about how well socialised medicine will work in the US. Canada has its own challenges with our system (largely lack of rural services and urban overuse) and it would be on a much smaller scale than what is proposed in the US.

That said, while the dems would "waste" money on that kind of initiative, the reps would rather dump that into a war, that likely will not be "won" without a generation or two of change.

So its really how do you want your govt to waste you money? Trying to setup a national healthcare system, or fighting a war that is draining the govt of funds at its own enormous rate.

[Dong]

Democrats voted on the war and continue to support measures to throw money at it, so can't pin it on Republicans only.

[Mutt]

True, but Obama didnt, and he spoke up publicly against it during his campaign for the senate.

I wasnt for action like this in the first place, but Im also of the mind that once you begin an operation like this its not a short term thing. I dont think pulling back wholesale is a good solution either.

I do however think there is room to scale back the operation and differentiate the roles that people are playing over there while still being on hand to support the government and the people while it gets their country on the track they need to be.

[Whisper]

When I say, "cut that personal shit out before I ban your twitchy asses" please understand that I say that with the very best of intentions. That was the deal setting this contentious forum up, keep the bullshit at one another low-key. It remains so.

Only warning.

[Mourne]

Ron Paul. That is all (hahah it rhymes!)

I would drop some F bombs on you guyz but Whisper would pwn me.

Seriously though, I know Ron Paul can't win but he's still my candidate. Big government is bad, economy in shambles, Constitution for the win etc. etc.

[Soulein]

Ron Paul. That is all (hahah it rhymes!)

I would drop some F bombs on you guyz but Whisper would pwn me.

Seriously though, I know Ron Paul can't win but he's still my candidate. Big government is bad, economy in shambles, Constitution for the win etc. etc.


kekekeKEkekeEKEKekekeke Mourne 4tw.

[Mutt]

big loss in wisconson

[Diraker]

Clinton is banking on Texas and Ohio.

http://onegoodmove.org/1gm/1gmarchive/2008/02/be_prepared.html

"Can you name one legislative accomplishment performed by Obama?"

silence, followed by, but but but he's inspirational...

[Mutt]

The comment below the video links to lots of information on things he has done.

And of course Ohio and Texas are her big targets. She hasnt won any of the last 12 states. She needs to win both of those states by double digits just to keep pace.

Last night Hillary Clintons biggest reason for supporting her was "Ive been through the republican meat grinder". lol

If republicans strategy is to demonize and and attack people on, who do you think is the easier target? Hillary or Obama?

I mean look at the numbers for Obama in Wisconson which is a swing state. Obama had more votes than every other candidate for both parties combined.

[Diraker]

Obama's novice status compared to McCain's lifetime's worth of politics will IMO be worse than anything the republican smear machine can do to Hillary. She's waded through it already. Obama is fresh meat who hasn't proven himself to be able to withstand it. This time around the smears might not be so intense, or they might just not stick, but maybe not.

Anyway I like both Hillary and Obama and I think either would make a better president than McCain. I also think both can beat McCain in a presidential election.

And for the record, Clinton won New Mexico which cuts into Obama's streak of wins. And in Wisconson Obama got 645,954 votes and Clinton got 452,757 votes. Big victory for Obama but not the "Obama got more votes than anyone combined" victory. The main point is that three times as many democrats voted in WI than republicans. But of course McCain is pretty much a sure in. Why vote at all if you are republican?

[Mutt]

Debate really didnt do much to rally for Clinton. That said, with the fairly good terms they seem to remain with each other would it be far fetched to see an Obama/Clinton presidential race? I mean because this has been such a tight race, every state they have gone into they have to be 2 of the most recognizable people across the country simply due to the prolonged amount of rallying they have needed to do.

As well since some people are apt to vote along simple gender or race lines, would it be such a bad thing to pair black man with a white woman? That doesnt address the white male, but numbers show they are much more likely to vote republican anyways.

[Elgarond]

The McCain Rice ticket pwns all.

[Saleen]

Nader yo!