Great Jumping Horny Toads! Kennedy Endorses Obama

[classicman]

Originally Posted by tw

Well, you have defined the same reasons why so many feared Kennedy as President in 1959. Missing, though, is a fear based in religion. That was another reason why many saw Kennedy as a poor choice for president.

Oh please do tell. I need to know this before the election.
C'mon -gimme, gimme, gimme.

[TheMercenary]

Hitlery Clinton is SSDD. She is NOT change. We are just swapping these dynasties back and forth. Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton. No more. Put an end to it now. Same coin, different side.

[classicman]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Hitlery Clinton is SSDD. She is NOT change. We are just swapping these dynasties back and forth. Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton. No more. Put an end to it now. Same coin, different side.

Yeah really - after she's done we can have President Jeb

[lumberjim]

here's a great obama video i found......somewhere



do you like turtles?

[Clodfobble]

My junior high school took us on an official field trip to a campaign rally for Ann Richards, the incumbent Democratic governor at the time (who ended up losing to George W. Bush.) A whole lot of parents were pissed as all hell when they found out that we were basically taken out of class without notice or permission to be used for a photo op for a politician they didn't necessarily support. Can't say any of the students cared one way or the other, except it was nice to be let out of class to go outside.

[BigV]

Originally Posted by glatt

She's trying to convince me to vote for Clinton, but I'm trying to convince her to vote for Obama.

Sounds like my house, except I'm smarter than you. I don't need to pick that battle.

[Tink]

Originally Posted by BigV

Sounds like my house, except I'm smarter than you. I don't need to pick that battle.

That's what makes debating fun! Except I wouldn't dare try to convince you to change sides. Oh hell no!

[aimeecc]

My husband and I agree - were both for Clinton.

I found an interesting article on the battle between Clinton and Obama: http://www.economist.com/displaystor...ry_id=10656864
The entire article is good, but I found the below excerpt very perceptive:

The deadlock is deeper than geography or demography: it is about different forms of leadership. Mr Obama is the most inspiring American politician for a generation. Mrs Clinton is an inspiration-free zone—her speech on Tuesday was particularly excruciating—who nevertheless exudes an air of serious-minded competence. Mr Obama's supporters want a president who can inspire Americans to be their better selves. Mrs Clinton's supporters want a leader who can negotiate health-care reforms and mortgage bail-outs. The Obamaites regard Mrs Clinton as a divisive bore. The Clintonites dismiss Mr Obama as a talented wind-bag.

I know a lot of people view Clinton as polarizing. Both her and McCain are abrasive and irritating. I think there's some people, like my husband and I, who this personality trait doesn't bother, wheras others can't stand these traits and will automatically shut out people like that. And my husband and I are cynical when it comes to inspirational poetry. I understand why people like Obama and dislike Hillary, I just don't agree.

[classicman]

Originally Posted by aimeecc

My husband and I agree - were both for Clinton.
I understand why people like Obama and dislike Hillary, I just don't agree.

Why don't you agree? Are your politics morwe in-line with hers? Does she excite you in some fashion? What is it about her that you like?

[aimeecc]

Originally Posted by classicman

Why don't you agree? Are your politics morwe in-line with hers? Does she excite you in some fashion? What is it about her that you like?

I think she has the committment to see something through that requires dedication, and the courage to back down and change positions when all key indicators are for another approach. Some say this is flip-flopping ala Kerry, but its not flip-flopping when it is infrequently done and only after analysis as shown a different approach is warrented. I know people look at the cronies she would appoint and claim same old washington politics. Truth is anyone brings in their favorites. She has a larger pool of advisors to pull from, advisors that are tested, experienced, and know their way around Washington politics. Everyone can say they don't want an insider, but an insider knows how to accomplish things whereas an outsider spends the first years trying to find out who really pulls the strings. She is smart and cunning. I say that in a positive way. I don't want a naive can't we all just get along President who is blind to others motivations. If you look at her positions, she is not as far left as Obama - and I am not far left, so I tend to agree with her positions more. She has more thorough plans than Obama; very solid well defined plans. And she makes decisions. Its all nice and well for Obama to claim he was against the war, but if he had been in the Senate, who knows how he would have voted. If you look at his voting record, he uses the vote of "present" to avoid being criticized. I don't want a President that won't make a decision for fear it would alienate someone.

I like her serious attitude. I like her take no prisoners approach.

It has also annoyed me how the media is hyping up Obama. A few weeks ago, when Obama was behind, instead of headlines like "Clinton wins x state", it was "Obama narrowly loses x state". That was done purposely to continue to paint him as a pontential victor. Yet when Clinton loses a state, its "Obama triumphs!", not "Clinton narrowly loses". When Clinton wins, its because the "middle age female voters came out en masse." Its not "Obama won because black voters came out en masse" when he wins. They've painted Clinton as only getting middle aged women votes, which isn't true.

I'm highly educated - so according to the pollsters I should be for Obama. I'm in my early 30s, so not middle aged - yet - so I should be for Obama. My husband is in his 40s, and a white male, and highly educated, so he should be for Obama. No, he's for Clinton too. Why? She knows how to get things done. And there were no pollsters where we voted.

I voted yesterday. My state went to Obama. I guess I'll vote McCain in the general election because I don't think Clinton's going to get the nomination. Obama's too far left for me, and I don't think he could handle another 9/11.

[Torrere]

Black voters probably don't make up as large a portion of the electorate as middle-aged white women. However, the press has been astounded by the way that Obama has carried the black vote by 90% in most states since South Carolina.

Recently there seemed to be a demographic divide between the Clinton and Obama supporters: Obama has carried young voters (where by "young", I mean under 45), black voters, and the well educated / well off. Clinton has carried older voters (ie > 65), white women, hispanics, and unions.

In yesterday's Virginia primary, however, Obama won every demograpic group except white women, and I think that Clinton's only strong bastion of support was among white women older than 45.

[classicman]

The Media is pushing Obama hard and most people are sheep - they will just follow along and "do as they're told." Either way, it looks like he's got it wrapped up unless she can pull some of Jimx's magic rabbits out of her a**.

[aimeecc]

I'm confused by the polls stating its this or that demographic voting this or that way. There were no pollsters where I voted. So what, they stand at one station and get the snapshot of American voters from there? Or do they just pull this stuff from their behind and convince us its true?

Just think. We get to do this again in 4 more years. I bet Jeb Bush will run then.

[Griff]

Originally Posted by aimeecc

I'm confused by the polls stating its this or that demographic voting this or that way. There were no pollsters where I voted. So what, they stand at one station and get the snapshot of American voters from there? Or do they just pull this stuff from their behind and convince us its true?

I was polled coming out of a rural voting station once. I think it was back when I voted for Ron Paul as the Libertarian's candidate for Pres. I'd suggest that they can do a decent job on polling if that's their goal. NPR did a piece this evening on a Clinton supporter, who is being sued by stockholders, who paid Bill three million bucks and happens to do CNN's polling... The media may really be jumping ship.

[lookout123]

well, if he doesn't you don't have to worry long. Neal Bush and Chelsea will be ready soon.