Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Giveaways? You mean Clinton isn't pandering to those communities she needs to pander in order to win? It's unfortunately all part of the game, sadly I've long come to terms with the practice.
I still don't see it, at best Obama is slightly left of Clinton on the issues. Their differences are modest...
Abortion: they both support it, though Clinton opposes late term abortions.
The Environment: again similar, except she has supported expanded off shore oil drilling
Healthcare: only real difference here is that Clinton has a mandate, whereas Obama does not
Immigration: Again I'm hard pressed to see a major difference, both support a path to citizenship, dream act, etc....
Gay Marriage: Both oppose it, but support Civil Unions.
The War in Iraq: It's pretty obvious where they stand.
Education: Both are against education vouchers, they're for smaller clasrooms, blah blah blah whatever, however she supports the NCLB
They don't have really radical differences, to say they do would be really stretching it. Frankly I could care less about gay marriage or abortion, and since Illegal Immigration is rather low on my list of concerns right now, I simply prefer Obama's minor variations of Clinton's stances.
Obama's like a shiny new house, paint still smells new, no gauges in the walls, carpets are nice and clean ... everything is new and people like it that way.
Giveaways? You mean Clinton isn't pandering to those communities she needs to pander in order to win? It's unfortunately all part of the game, sadly I've long come to terms with the practice.
I still don't see it, at best Obama is slightly left of Clinton on the issues. Their differences are modest...
Abortion: they both support it, though Clinton opposes late term abortions.
The Environment: again similar, except she has supported expanded off shore oil drilling
Healthcare: only real difference here is that Clinton has a mandate, whereas Obama does not
Immigration: Again I'm hard pressed to see a major difference, both support a path to citizenship, dream act, etc....
Gay Marriage: Both oppose it, but support Civil Unions.
The War in Iraq: It's pretty obvious where they stand.
Education: Both are against education vouchers, they're for smaller clasrooms, blah blah blah whatever, however she supports the NCLB
They don't have really radical differences, to say they do would be really stretching it. Frankly I could care less about gay marriage or abortion, and since Illegal Immigration is rather low on my list of concerns right now, I simply prefer Obama's minor variations of Clinton's stances.
AGAIN, read the list in the thread I started. I also posted why I disagree with some in particular. I see no need for me to repeat what I've already stated elsewhere. He proposes a whole lot of programs (such as federal bonuses for teachers) that Hillary does not.
AGAIN, read the list in the thread I started. I also posted why I disagree with some in particular. I see no need for me to repeat what I've already stated elsewhere. He proposes a whole lot of programs (such as federal bonuses for teachers) that Hillary does not.
Candidates propose all kinds of things; Congress decides on whether they will come to be. It is short-sighted indeed to judge a candidate's worth by how he/she campaigns, and what promises are made, issue-wise, before the nomination is even secured.
A candidate's style and leadership abilities are what count in the long run, but to the party and to the country as a whole. Hillary offers the same-old same-old gotcha politics of opportunism and partisanship; Obama wants to bring a whole new generation of people into the political process and move the country into the post-Boomer age.
See this is what I don't understand. The positions Obama and Clinton hold are virtually identical. So why is Obama suddenly the far left now? I'm a centrist and I can't see how you worked that out, all I'm seeing is 2+2=5.
Riddle me this, why does Obama have massive Independent support and even amongst moderate Republicans if he's supposedly an exteme leftist whackjob?
Please check Obama's voting record. Also, pay attention to the things he DIDN'T vote on that Clinton did. He refused to state a position on a lot of them. He's much farther to the left than Hillary.
Hillary should just chuck it in this weekend. I'm serious! She points out that LBJ is the one who signed the Civil Rights Bill, what happens, she gets branded a racist ... she points out that Obama worked with Reszko, what happens, she gets a innocuous photo shoved in her face and THAT becomes the focus ... she asserts that Obama plagiarizes his speech, Obama says he borrowed and SHE gets trashed ...
Hill ... you're not wanted at the party anymore, just go and let the GOP have at it with Obama, wish him well, wish him luck, wish him a jolly good time. But it's clear to me that the Democratic party wants nothing to do with you anymore and it's sad, congrats, you've been Dan Quayle'd.
It is not the media or Obama's fault that Hillary has floundered. She fooled herself into thinking that she could take the White House with a simple campaign that lacked substance and depth. Shame on her!
Candidates propose all kinds of things; Congress decides on whether they will come to be. It is short-sighted indeed to judge a candidate's worth by how he/she campaigns, and what promises are made, issue-wise, before the nomination is even secured.
A candidate's style and leadership abilities are what count in the long run, but to the party and to the country as a whole. Hillary offers the same-old same-old gotcha politics of opportunism and partisanship; Obama wants to bring a whole new generation of people into the political process and move the country into the post-Boomer age.
So, you're saying we need to vote on "style" and "abilities," however one might measure that. Obama doesn't have a very long resume of decision-making. He has spent a substantial portion of his first term in the Senate running for president and he has missed more than a third of the Senate votes because of this.
Thus, on one hand, y'all are saying he'll change things and do great things for this country and, on the other hand, y'all are saying we shouldn't listen to the things he proposes? Sorry, but that dog won't hunt.
Also, how do you think he's going to "bring a whole new generation of people into the political process" after they vote? Then what? Do you believe he's going to have a "new generation hotline" installed in the White House so they can talk to him? Do you think he's going to continue having rallies around the country?
Candidates propose all kinds of things; Congress decides on whether they will come to be. It is short-sighted indeed to judge a candidate's worth by how he/she campaigns, and what promises are made, issue-wise, before the nomination is even secured.
Democratic President, Democrat Congress -- hmmmm. Didn't Bush manage to push through the worst of his agenda (the War, the Energy Bill, the Patriot Act) with a Republican Congress?
When all three branches of government are held by one party -- LOOK OUT BELOW!!!!!!!
So, you're saying we need to vote on "style" and "abilities," however one might measure that. Obama doesn't have a very long resume of decision-making. He has spent a substantial portion of his first term in the Senate running for president and he has missed more than a third of the Senate votes because of this.
Thus, on one hand, y'all are saying he'll change things and do great things for this country and, on the other hand, y'all are saying we shouldn't listen to the things he proposes? Sorry, but that dog won't hunt.
Also, how do you think he's going to "bring a whole new generation of people into the political process" after they vote? Then what? Do you believe he's going to have a "new generation hotline" installed in the White House so they can talk to him? Do you think he's going to continue having rallies around the country?
Don't make me laugh. What decisions has Hillary made, aside from letting Bubba hound-dog it so that she could have her crack at power? Change comes from awakening the spirit, not from making deals with the devil.
Obama's young lions need to be unleashed to work for positive change -- this is not the time to settle scores for the emibittered middle-aged women who grimly hang on to Hillary's doomed and desperate grasping for power.
Don't make me laugh. What decisions has Hillary made, aside from letting Bubba hound-dog it so that she could have her crack at power? Change comes from awakening the spirit, not from making deals with the devil.
Obama's young lions need to be unleashed to work for positive change -- this is not the time to settle scores for the emibittered middle-aged women who grimly hang on to Hillary's doomed and desperate grasping for power.
Typical. A Hillary and Bill rant and no specific answers to my questions. Hint: They weren't rhetorical.
Teatime, you're valiant efforts (and I'm on your side!!) are the reason I created this thread. Hillary can't win for nothing. No matter what she does, if she found a cure for the common cold today, they'd find some way to make her look like she is the reason people have colds ... see what I'm saying? She's no longer welcome at the party that she and Bill came to in 1992 when they were the fresh young faces of the democratic party (remember, Don't Stop Thinking About Tomorrow?).
Let's see how far hope and change gets Obama as the president.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.