Democratics side show, vote now!! Clinton or Obama??

Post Reply New Topic

McCain is a Liberal Republican which is quite true. All politicians are talked but Clinton she doesn't when to give up when she lose the battle.

the 3 major candidates' platform are so similar, how can anyone differentiate.

i mean it's pretty much you're just picking whether you want a black guy, a woman, or another old white cracker in as president. i mean clinton's and mccain's platforms are almost mirror images. obama provides a different look to his proposals but they're the same failed ideas that've been tried already and the rest is just a semantic difference between the other two but nothing signicantly more than that.

Well, the tax holiday itself is not the only thing, but also how strongly he aligned himself with the supply side recently things seem, so I don't trust McCain to be anything other than a bushite Republican any more. You have a good point though, but all candidates suck.

Well, we've managed to survive under Bush, so I'm really just hoping that the next person doesn't manage to screw up any more than Bush did.

just because we've survived his terms in office doesn't mean his policies don't have ramifications that'll be affecting us for decades.

I doubt hell be a Bushite. Might be rhetoric to get hardline republicans.

Well, I doubt he'd be as bad as a Bushite, but I don't know. Perhaps I am just being a bit distrusting of McCain.

nah, he's been falling more and more in line with the neo-con ideals (bushite).

Thats why some Republican supporters don't like McCain at all.

Well, McCain knows that there are republicans who wont vote for him. In the elections there were about 30% who did not like him, and even some who said they'd rather vote for Hilary.

McCain afterwards have been getting closer and closer ties with Bush. In my opinion, it just seems like PR. The history of McCain doesn't show him to be a true Bushite republican, which by any other definition is not even republican.

While, Obama is mostly talk, many people buy into it; and because of that, he could potentially put some of his negative policies into place if he is elected. Clinton would be so divisive, she'd have a much harder time doing so (which is why regardless of party, one should hope for McCain vs. Clinton, 2 of the lesser of 3 evils wins at least). Interestingly though, while people claim Obama is the image of change, I don't think people actually want major change of current government policy overall, just faces (with the exception of Iraq, maybe). Of course people like to claim they support change.

Okay, IMO this part is unfair. Obama really did try to stand by Jeremiah Wright, and gave what was probably the best speech about addressing racism since Martin Luther King. Then his pastor, upset over the critisms of his sermons, gives a bizarre temper-tantrum of a speech with assertions like 'the Americain government invented the HIV virus to decimate blacks' .

I do agree that Jeremiah Wright is a good man, who has done a lot yo help the world; but his speech really was bizarre and kind of racist. If he's really for improving the lot of blacks, why would he have something so sabatoging of what may be the first black president, particularly after Obama had gone so far to defend him? If it was really important to him, couldn't he have waited until after the election to say it? What exactly was Obama supposed to do? If he stubbornly stayed by his pastor, the media would have jump on the chance to say 'Obama believes the governement invented HIV' and murdered his chance for the presidency.

Over all, I think I way prefer Obama's 'inconsistancy', that leads to him changing his mind when it becomes obvious that things have changed, then Bush's 'stay the course, stay the course, never mind the facts, there totally are WMD!'

But Jeremiah Wright IS that kind of pastor. Do you think he just came to a "realization" of those ideas afterwards? I am not going to generalize all black-majority churches but many of them HAVE these kinds of views. Obama should have denounced his statements from the beginning. Remember, it is politics.



About the "Stay the course, never mind the facts" what other option is there? America created the mess, it cannot walk away from it and must face the consequences until some kind of light pierces through. Pres. Maliki is getting a back-bone finally, why would the US pull out in such a crucial time?

No, he was right to stand by his pastor. Wright is a Vietnam veteran, and has been an amazing force of good for his community, all of it, not just the black bits. When listened to in its entirety, even his 'God damn America' sermon is uplifting and has a very valid point.

Obama specifically stated in his 'A More Perfect Union' speech that he doesn't agree with all of his pastors views. Wouldn't it be nice to have a president who's first thought isn't politics, but to act in a moral manner and stand by those he respects even when they aren't obediant yes-men? And when, after supporting and risking his election chances, his pastor got up and said some stupid things in a fit of frustration after being cruxified by the media, to still have the courage to say 'that was wrong?' I'd take that over a conniving president who only cares about politics any day!

As far as the war goes, of course completely pulling out right now would be stupid. Where Bush fails as a president was his insistance that Iraq had anything to do with 9/11, despite having no proof. It was his insistance that Iraq had WMD, when investigation after investigation BEFORE the war showed there were none. It was his insistance to go into Iraq unilaterally, and not to listen to the UN.

It was his insistance to go into Iraq with insufficient soldiers, despite the fact that every general who actually FOUGHT in a war was telling him that more soldiers were needed to properly occupy the country and control the rebellion. It was his insistance that Iraqis would greet the American invaders with flowers and candy, after US led embargos had starved the country for 10 years, and shock-and-awe had just destroyed their electricity and water supply! It was his insistance to disband the Iraqi army, firing thousands of people trained in warfare, who now had no way to make money and nothing to do but sit at home and be pissed!

The war was a mistake, and was conducted in a stupid manner that everyone who had actual experience with war was predicting! So yeah, now it's stay the course, but if Bush hadn't ignored the facts around him, it probably wouldn't have happened, and if it did it wouldn't have been as bad.

It's either McCain or Obama for me... I will NEVER vote for hillary clinton for one simple reason...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_Ent ... ection_Act

Hillary Clinton supports Jack Thompson... 'nuff said...

What does being a war veteran have anything to do with anything other than being a war veteran? John McCain is a war veteran, so is John Kerry. They get abused as much as any other. You say he has valid points. I'm pretty indifferent to the man and only state what is true to the situation, which is Wright's view has a negative impact on Obama's image. This is politics. That is how things work, not "But what he said might have been true" or "Well, he has some points." All of these are irrelevant because there are people in this country who are very patriotic and to have a candidate that has close ties with a person who speaks out against the country he is running to be in power for, that would be unheard of. I can also see the fact that he has ties to one of the terrorists that bombed buildings in the 60s having a negative impact.

It would be nice to have a president whose first thoughts are not politics, but sadly he wouldn't even be a president. A president is political. He is supposed to if he plans to stay in power. Leave morality to the saints.



I agree with some of your final points, but it was not ALL Bush's fault. There were many mistakes that Bush cannot be blamed for them alone. A big part of the blame also lies with Congress. A great deal of people are at fault. I am ambivalent to the war on Iraq. I cannot say it was justified, neither will I say it was not. The only mistakes were the mistakes made after Mission Accomplished. Frankly, I couldn't care less about what people think of the US because the US is one of the few countries that will actually go through with what it says, instead of just shouting "It needs to be changed" and sitting idly by.