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.
Are Clinton supporters bitter, vindictive, sore losers who care more about being right and/or winning than improving the state of our country? Many seem like children who do not get their way and throw a tantrum.
Your thoughts are welcome.
That's a good question. Let me pose a better one. Would Obama supporters be bitter, vindictive, sore losers who care more about being right and/or winning than improving the state of our country? if something happened at the convention (or before) that would make Hillary the candidate?
That's a good question. Let me pose a better one. Would Obama supporters be bitter, vindictive, sore losers who care more about being right and/or winning than improving the state of our country? if something happened at the convention (or before) that would make Hillary the candidate?
Start a new poll asking just that. Let's find out.....
That's a good question. Let me pose a better one. Would Obama supporters be bitter, vindictive, sore losers who care more about being right and/or winning than improving the state of our country? if something happened at the convention (or before) that would make Hillary the candidate?
Yes, but in about half the numbers. At least according to a recent poll.
Not that I believe you actually care in the slightest about why people who support Hillary won't vote for Obama, but since I wrote substantively about it on another thread, I thought I would post it here, as well. You probably won't even read it but at least it prevents you from reducing sentient individuals who have pondered long and hard to knee-jerk, bitter reactionaries.
Quote:
I can only speak for myself but it's not that platforms that are important to me but the PHILOSOPHY I can glean from their platforms and what they say. I take the platforms with a grain of salt. They're campaign promises, basically, and I don't believe that Hillary or Obama would be able to bring the troops home as they say they will. Frankly, I think McCain is far more realistic about that.
It is Obama's philosophy I can't abide. Not only does he promise that he and the government can fix everything fairly easily, but he moves beyond that into insisting that he will change the world! First off, I don't believe government can fix everything nor would I want it to do so. Secondly, I am very leery of a candidate (especially one with his extremely limited federal experience) who somehow wants people to believe that once he sweeps into office, everything will change, he will fix things, and then he'll move on to inspire and fix "the world." I mean, WTH???!!! It's one thing to have confidence in oneself but another to be operating from some sort of irrational la-la land.
The thing I respect most about Hillary is that she is the first to admit that the job is going to be extremely difficult. That it's going to take very hard work to accomplish anything at all. She is not proposing giveaways on nearly the scale of Obama but she is promising to lead and direct with the goal of government assisting where it can to provide stimulus for the free market to improve things. She rightly says that if she is going to work on health care, EVERYONE has to be on board or nothing will change. That is very true. Either people want the system to change or they don't. There's no effective middle way to succeed.
We know from her past experiences that Hillary is a hard worker and tenacious. She is shrewd, knows the game, and knows what can be accomplished and some of this has come from the valuable experience of failing. Yes, that IS valuable. She has worked in the private sector, for non-profits and has sat on the boards of large corporations. These experiences moderated her philosophy away from "the government will solve all of your problems" to "the government, with some smart policies, can help effect change but it's not the total answer." Hillary understands the role of the presidency in the system of checks and balances and doesn't aspire to be a world potentate.
Obama, on the other hand, seems impatient and impulsive. Even flattering biographies I've read about him say that when "action" is slow and change doesn't happen quickly, he gets bored, frustrated, and wants to move on. He was reportedly very disillusioned by the slow process of legislation in the Senate. So, after a year of it, he wants to be president. Huh?! And, the presidency isn't enough -- he wants to "change the world." Huh, again?
I cannot agree with this impatience or his philosophy of government as the salvific action for the people.
I would add, though, that if a left-leaning candidate had much more experience than Obama and a substantial track record I could study, particularly in crafting compromises with the other side of the aisle, I might be more comfortable voting for the lefty Democrat. But Obama does not have nearly enough experience to even consider it, from my point of view.
I read a poll that was taken of voters in one state. 39% cited "inexperience" as the reason they didn't vote for Obama which was the #1 reason.
Someone in another thread pointed out that the President gets the codes to start nuclear war, etc. Do you really trust a guy with a mere 8 years as a part time State Senator to get this job? I don't.
Not that I believe you actually care in the slightest about why people who support Hillary won't vote for Obama, but since I wrote substantively about it on another thread, I thought I would post it here, as well. You probably won't even read it but at least it prevents you from reducing sentient individuals who have pondered long and hard to knee-jerk, bitter reactionaries.
So you'd vote for McCain instead? That makes perfect sense . . .
I don't understand why people are going to vote for Barack O'Whiner... And why they think the people who would vote for the Fighter are now going to vote for the Complainer?
Kinda curious why this poll is open until June 6th. June 3rd I can understand, or June 4th. But why June 6th?
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.
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.
