Quote:
Originally Posted by smitchell333
True, but the average joe conservative's vote counts just as much as yours. Probably even more so, if he's in a swing state and you're not.
Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by smitchell333
True, but the average joe conservative's vote counts just as much as yours. Probably even more so, if he's in a swing state and you're not.
What's scary is the thought of a McCain/Huckabee ticket. McCain is old, in case you hadn't noticed. there is a real chance of him dying in office. Step in Huckabee in that situation and you'd have a president who believes in creationism, thinks gay people just have mental problems and who would like to build a four lane highway from Maine to Florida because in his estimation it would help the economy. I think there are a lot of dumb people out there but anyone that supports that ticket would take the cake.
His mother is 95 and looks like she's 65, I think he'll be ok.Quote:
Originally Posted by Adolf Allerbush
mccain huckabee doesn't make much sense to me, but you never know. the RP has done stupider things.
strategically speaking, mccain giuliani would be very good. strategically speaking.
BTW how the hell could pat robertson endorse giuliani but be vocally opposed to mccain?? fuck if i know.. even average joe conservative can see through that piece of shit. anyway, it will be funny to see him squirm out of that situation - what would he do if the guy he endorsed was on the ticket of the guy he said "don't bother" for?
McCain/Huckabee won't happen. Neither will McCain/Giuliani.
McCain needs to bolster his cred with the conservative base of his party, and neither of those running mates would do it. (For some reason -- perhaps his perceived economic liberalism -- they don't trust Huckabee much more than they do McCain.)
it's all about principles. i used to be a huge woody allen fan until he became a pederast. now i wouldn't spend money to see one of his movies. same with the gop, who i believe stick to their principles more than demos. they simply cannot vote for a guy who they believe betrayed their core party principles.
I guess that's why the French still love him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parvo
Or they've become complacent after holding the White House for 20 of the past 28 years.
More liberal than Russ Feingold, Bernie Sanders, or Ted Kennedy?Quote:
Originally Posted by steve
Just like John Kerry was suddenly the most liberal senator, versus the same competition plus Paul Wellstone, according to the right wing back in 2004...no, this doesn't pass the common sense test.
It's well known that Clinton and Obama are both useless Wall Street stooges compared to Ron Paul and that I'll only vote for either as an alternative to John "100 years in Iraq" McCain. However, at least I get a big laugh at the expense of Rush Limbaugh and the rest of the neo-con talk radio hate machine, because they hate John McCain nearly as much as they hate Hilary Clinton, and this has to be driving them into an absolute rage. The one time I actually listened to Rush, he played some incredibly unfunny and vicious song about how John McCain was a traitor to the USA before spending half an hour taking fawning phone calls and congratulating himself. We can only hope that this raises his blood pressure so high that he pulls an Elvis.
Why not? There's a theory (an out-there theory, but a theory nonetheless) that the Clintons ensured four more years of Bush to give her a better shot at the job in '08. How sad do you think they were that Kerry lost last time around? Do you think she wanted to follow 8 years of Kerry or (even worse for her) 4 years of Kerry and 4-8 years of somebody else? While saying that they even passively undermined Kerry is tinfoil hat brigade material, I find it hard to believe that the Clinton camp was heartbroken when Kerry lost.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brock Landers
And I don't think it's tinfoil hattish to say that the Repubs could deal with 4 years of Hillary or Obama if they believed it was going to get them 8 more years of Bush starting in 2012. Remember, Jeb was the chosen one when it came to the presidency; George just happened to be in the right place at the right time.
Yeah, but at least this new Rush Limbaugh alias is a great addition to the Padded Room. :rolleyes:
He's an alias??? WHA?!?!? :eek: :eek: :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by RootSkier
McCain is actually fairly conservative. What conservative talk radio doesn't like about him is the independence and conviction he has shown. Rushannity wants people to vote with and stick to the party line all the time regardless of principles.
That's what I like about McCain. He is willing to stand up against his party for what he things is right. He earned alot of respect from me for his stand on campaign finance reform despite the heat he got from his party. That said, I disagree with him on most issues. But then again I rarely agree with anything republicans want to do.
Jeezus, this country puts another Bush in the white house and I'm gone. I'll live somewhere else, north or south of the border. I don't care where.Quote:
Originally Posted by pheenster
There. That oughta scare some sense into 'em!
That is spot on. The majority of the country has shifted to moderately left-leaning views because the neocons have pushed us so far to the right. To them, anything looks liberal if it's not 'ultra conservative'Quote:
Originally Posted by Spats
I'll preface by saying that it's going to come down to one simple issue for the General Election:
McCain - "I'm not leaving Iraq" "Give me 6 months and I'll sell you the War"
vs.
Obama or Hillary - "I will bring our troops home"
America has had enough of the neocon play. The Democrats are stupid if they don't play up in major advertising and stumping.
There are thousands of photos of McCain stumping for Bush in 2004 - it is easy to draw a correlation for another 4 yrs of Bush and make it stick.
If it's Obama vs. McCain, I predict a landslide victory for Obama
If it's Hillary vs. McCain, I predict a 3%-5% narrow victory by Hillary
FWIW, at today's caucus in Washington - many were overwhelming Obama victories.
Either way you look at the election were 1000000000x better off with anyone than King Bush.
Well said Squirrel. Were you surprised WA went so overwhelmingly to Obama?
the majority of washington dem caucus goers are white, educated (college), upper middle class people. that is obama's bread and butter.
BWWWWWAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by rideit
....
I can see Obama squeeking out a close win against McCain but Hillary doesn't have a chance in hell. If it's McCain vs Hillary it would be a blow out for McCain.Quote:
Originally Posted by Squirrel99
Even if that is true, what's your point? That if uneducated non-white people voted in larger numbers he would've lost? Or that uneducated non-white people vote for republicans? Do tell all knowing Kevin Garnett how you came to this conclusion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Garnett
You've never heard of exit polls?Quote:
Originally Posted by Adolf Allerbush
Why is it that when Republicans had a monopoly on the educated and upper-classes they were called just greedy elitists but now that some of the educated and rich are now going to the Democrats they are called being the smart educated reasoned voice????
Ummm... it is. There's a reason why the American Civil Liberties Union, an organization dedicated to the spirit and the LETTER of the Constitution, is considered a Liberal organization.Quote:
Originally Posted by DisArray
that in the democratic caucus in washington, the people who take part in the process are more likely to be in a demographic (among only democrats, this is the a primary genius) that is dominated by obama. thusly, if you are paying attentions to trends in this election you might have predicted washington to go the way it did. as such i was not surprised obama won there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Adolf Allerbush
is that hard to understand?
Disappointed that no one herebouts has chatted about more of the specifics of the just completed "Super Saturday" and what it's results could portend... Anyone?
you dont think the democratic party has always been supported by rich educated white people? the most influential liberals in the country are rich educated white men.Quote:
Originally Posted by YourSupremeExcellency
When the fuck did I ever say that? I said the exact opposite. Next time skip the draft and go to college dumbass. The fact is for the majority of the last century the masses of rich and educated people were diehard Republicans and the masses of poor and uneducated people were diehard Democrats. Now it is more evenly distributed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Garnett
OK, I won't wait for a taker... just throw this out hoping someone else is thinking about this.
I'm reading the news headlines from yesterday's Super Saturday (Feb. 9) contests as "Obama Dominates" and "McCain stumbles"
Dem side:
Obama sweeps the 3 states of Louisiana, Nebraska and Washington... and by impressive margins. Yes, and the Virgin Islands too. If he can keep this going for the next several contests, he may have a decent chance to pull a bit ahead because delegates are determined somewhat in proportion to the win (even when you add in the super delegates). Haven't seen anything on Maine yet, think they start coming in after 6pm eastern tonight? Clinton was WAY ahead late in '07, but I think Obama will pull out a victory, and in this caucus format he has been kicking ass, so it could surprise and be another big win?
Looking ahead at the next couple weeks, Feb 12 has Virginia, Maryland and DC - Feb 19 has Hawaii and Wisconsin (me). News/Pundits are saying Obama looks good up to Wisconsin, with Clinton ahead here by high single digits in polls. I really have nothing to base it on, but think it's a lot closer than that... and if Obama comes steaming in with big MO, I could see him getting ahead here too, we've a quite progressive past.
Looking to March and beyond, Looks like the big prizes will be Texas, Ohio and Pennsylvania... I could see that being the ball game for someone right there. Clinton just shuffled her top campaign staff today, they must be VERY concerned too?
Rep side:
EVERYONE is saying McCain has this sewn up. I think he has it "NEARLY" sewn up... Yesterday Huckabee took Kansas (no surprise - they don't believe in evolution either) and Louisiana. If they ever finish counting looks like McCain will take Warshin'ton? But he is at like only 26% to 24% ahead of Huckabee there... That's gotta be a bad sign. The presumptive nominee only gets 26% of the votes in the 1 of 3 contests he will win???
I had done some math in an different thread calculating that Huck needed about 2/3's of the remaining delegates to eek out a win... I didn't take into account that with the Republicans often using a winner takes all approach, he just needs to pull off some big states and some moderate ones, and then by 1% if they are a "take all" state. I have not looked out at it state by state, and honestly don't think Huck has good odds to pull it off... but if he was endorsed by Romney or had some other push it could be closer than people think?
I had called a Clinton/McCain finals in the pre-Iowa prediction thread... I'm on the fence here, maybe you could say I've withdrawn my Clinton prediction? But won't go so far as to jump over and call it for Obama YET!
Sorry to spout off... just needed to get that out of my system I guess. :redface:
I'd call bullshit... the top percent or two, especially "old money", have been Democratic for many generations now. The lower part of the top tier has been overwhelmingly Republican, especially "new money", unless they had advanced degrees/educations... then the Dems have had the larger portion. The middle class and poor have been split, often by region or religion, etc. For example; a large percent of white poor have been Republican.Quote:
Originally Posted by YourSupremeExcellency
Come on, I know a bunch of you guys want to flame this guy. Why must I be the one? What about all you bleeding heart liberals here who have just always loved labeling the Republicans as the rich greedy ones? Where are you dumbfucks because I'm getting tired of arguing with this moron.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvwcom
I am betting that Disarray doesn't even know what is IN the constitution.
You're just tired of "losing" :fmicon:Quote:
Originally Posted by YourSupremeExcellency
Edit: I bet I end up on your "ignore list"... SWEET!
Maine:
44 percent of precincts reporting:
Obama 57%
Clinton 42%
Yup, and Hillary is pissed.
Her campaign manager just 'quit' .
Hey Supreme... I know that Wikipedia is a soft source for an argument, and if you want I'll find further PROOF of my statement above... but for now I'll simply link, quote and highlight for your enjoyment.
(Sorry for the large bold red text, I had to make it VERY OBVIOUS since Supreme seems to enjoy quoting non-relevant portions of a post and continuing his/her argument)
Liberal Elite
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wikipedia
Losing???? Name one thread/arguement you've won. You either lose outright or you leave when you realize that you're not going to win. Ignore list? Don't flatter yourself, you're not that important. And I don't need a list to ignore anyone. I ignore half the stupid shit on this board and no one is on my list.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvwcom
He pretty much just schooled you in his last post.
you do look like a misinformed small minded individual lacking critical thinking skills, yse.
but then, tim was proving one of my earlier points, so i already knew what you looked like.
And how is that??? So him just saying that Republicans have always been the stewards of blacks (nearly all of which were all poor in the last century), hispanics (same thing), other minorities (same thing, lower class), labor (working class not rich), and those others without degrees and middle class or lower, while saying that Democrats represent Wall Street and big business and the fight against FDR and his politics that faught for social programs for the poor and middle class makes him right??? Look I'm not going to school you and all the other dumbasses here on history but that's the exact opposite of things. Big business, wall street, those with money, those with degrees and at the upper ends of society have for most of them for the last century and until recently been Republicans while the poor, the minorities, the uneducated have most always been Democrats the last century. It's like you want me to argue that the Earth is not flat. I'm not going to waste my time with such stupid shit. Go read a history book if your so fucking stupid that you believe what you believe, I'm not going to educate you on such stupid things myself.Quote:
Originally Posted by rideit
How about you try to educate yourself on the use of proper spelling, asshat?Quote:
Originally Posted by YourSupremeExcellency