Election 2008

[DiggityDawg]

Looking at how things are now, I can't see how Clinton honestly thinks she has a chance at the democratic nomination.  This may be a reach, but I wonder if she might not be rooting for a McCain victory. If McCain wins, she could position herself for a 2012 run which seems much more realistic.

You're not the only one who thinks that. Personally, I find the idea repulsive - because of the lives in the balance over in Iraq. If she's just trying to make him unelectable to benefit herself in 4 years...disgusting.

[DaveKCMO]

Looking at how things are now, I can't see how Clinton honestly thinks she has a chance at the democratic nomination.  This may be a reach, but I wonder if she might not be rooting for a McCain victory.  If Obama wins the presidency the soonest she'd be able to run would be in 2016 (which would be a stretch for her, although not impossible seeing as McCain's creaking bones are running).  However, if McCain wins, she could position herself for a 2012 run which seems much more realistic.

i personally believe that the nomination has been brokered for some time between howard dean, obama, and clinton and that what's going on now is all just posturing. face it, if democrats were actually polling negative on the extended primary season (they're not) they'd have ended it months ago. he will offer her the VP slot, she'll politely decline (my new york people!), then he'll run around raising money to pay off her debt in return. she won't even serve in his administration unless it's "special adviser to health care" to shepherd that eventuality through a democratically-controlled 2009-2010 congress.

regardless, if you think HRC will wait until 2016 to run again you have no idea who we're dealing with.

[phxcat]

You're not the only one who thinks that. Personally, I find the idea repulsive - because of the lives in the balance over in Iraq. If she's just trying to make him unelectable to benefit herself in 4 years...disgusting.

The problem with this is that she is poisoning her own campaign in 2012 or 2016.  How many Democrats are there who would have been open to voting for her in the future had she gracefully exited the race in 2008 that now can't stand her?

[Maitre D]

I'm rooting for Obama to win only b/c there is a massive 18-30 demo that actually buys this guy's snake oil.  It's important for them to realize the Prez has very little impact on inflation, gas prices, jobs or disaster relief.


People who are 40 (even Dems) don't take him all that seriously but the youth do.  And they need to see President Obama while there's $4.88/gallon gas at the pump to realize some basic facts about economics, US Politics and that thing called Separation of Powers.  Carter taught a whole generation of them that, in the late 1970s and I feel we need another lesson.

[aknowledgeableperson]

The problem with this is that she is poisoning her own campaign in 2012 or 2016.  How many Democrats are there who would have been open to voting for her in the future had she gracefully exited the race in 2008 that now can't stand her?

Of course, Nixon was declared out of it in '60 and again in '62 (you won't have me to kick around anymore) when he lost the California governorship.  And guess what happens.  He wins not one but two presidental races.

[DaveKCMO]

I'm rooting for Obama to win only b/c there is a massive 18-30 demo that actually buys this guy's snake oil.  It's important for them to realize the Prez has very little impact on inflation, gas prices, jobs or disaster relief.


People who are 40 (even Dems) don't take him all that seriously but the youth do.  And they need to see President Obama while there's $4.88/gallon gas at the pump to realize some basic facts about economics, US Politics and that thing called Separation of Powers.  Carter taught a whole generation of them that, in the late 1970s and I feel we need another lesson.

then why support a candidate who will immediately cut the gas tax and give voting rights to puerto rico?

regardless, i don't claim to know what an entire demo is thinking but i will tell you why i was drawn to obama from the very beginning: he's elevating the discourse. and it's been proven time and time again on the campaign trail that HRC is not capable of such a standard (add on top of that her historically high negatives which you seem to conveniently keep forgetting about while you talk about black voting motivations). but, hey, if it's pure delusion that's fine with me... it's no different than the one about experience that HRC is pimping. we're not buying it.

[DiggityDawg]

then why support a candidate who will immediately cut the gas tax and give voting rights to puerto rico?

regardless, i don't claim to know what an entire demo is thinking but i will tell you why i was drawn to obama from the very beginning: he's elevating the discourse. and it's been proven time and time again on the campaign trail that HRC is not capable of such a standard (add on top of that her historically high negatives which you seem to conveniently keep forgetting about while you talk about black voting motivations). but, hey, if it's pure delusion that's fine with me... it's no different than the one about experience that HRC is pimping. we're not buying it.

What he said.

[coreyo]

Found an interesting article the other day....

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1211932 ... torialPage

Our Collectivist Candidates
By DAVID BOAZ
May 28, 2008; Page A17 [Wall Street Journal]

On Sunday Barack Obama urged graduates of Connecticut's Wesleyan University to devote themselves to "collective service." This is not an unusual theme for a commencement address. But it was interesting how long he went on discussing various kinds of nonprofit activism without ever mentioning the virtues of commerce or of individual achievement.

He also did not cite the military as an example of service to one's country. This is a surprising omission in a Memorial Day weekend speech to college-age students by a man seeking to be entrusted with the defense of the U.S.

Sen. Obama told the students that "our individual salvation depends on collective salvation." He disparaged students who want to "take your diploma, walk off this stage, and chase only after the big house and the nice suits and all the other things that our money culture says you should buy."

The people Mr. Obama is sneering at are the ones who built America – the traders and entrepreneurs and manufacturers who gave us railroads and airplanes, housing and appliances, steam engines, electricity, telephones, computers and Starbucks. Ignored here is the work most Americans do, the work that gives us food, clothing, shelter and increasing comfort. It's an attitude you would expect from a Democrat.

Or this year's Republican nominee. John McCain also denounces "self-indulgence" and insists that Americans serve "a national purpose that is greater than our individual interests." During a Republican debate at the Reagan Library on May 3, 2007, Sen. McCain derided Mitt Romney's leadership ability, saying, "I led . . . out of patriotism, not for profit." Challenged on his statement, Mr. McCain elaborated that Mr. Romney "managed companies, and he bought, and he sold, and sometimes people lost their jobs. That's the nature of that business." He could have been channeling Barack Obama.

"A greater cause," "community service" – to many of us, these gauzy phrases sound warm and comforting. But their purpose is to disparage and denigrate our own lives, to belittle our own pursuit of happiness. They're concepts better suited to a more collectivist country than to one founded in libertarian revolution – a revolution intended to defend our rights to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

One gets the sense that Mr. McCain would like to see us all in the armed forces. In a Washington Monthly essay published in October 2001, his vision of national service sounded militaristic. He wrote with enthusiasm for programs whose participants "not only wear uniforms and work in teams . . . but actually live together in barracks on former military bases, and are deployed to service projects far from their home base," and who would "gather together for daily calisthenics, often in highly public places such as in front of city hall."

Mr. Obama wouldn't send us into the military. All he wants is our souls. As his wife Michelle said at UCLA on February 3, two days before the California primary, "Barack Obama will require you to work. He is going to demand that you shed your cynicism. . . . That you push yourselves to be better. And that you engage. Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual, uninvolved, uninformed."

There is a whiff of hypocrisy here. Mr. Obama, who made $4.2 million last year and lives in a $1.65 million house bought with the help of the indicted Tony Rezko – and whose "elegant suits" and "impeccable ties" made him one of Esquire's Best-Dressed Men in the World – disdains college students who might want to "chase after the big house and the nice suits." Mr. McCain, who with his wife earned more than $6 million last year and who owns at least seven homes, ridicules Mr. Romney for having built businesses.

But hypocrisy is not the biggest issue. The real issue is that Messrs. Obama and McCain are telling us Americans that our normal lives are not good enough, that pursuing our own happiness is "self-indulgence," that building a business is "chasing after our money culture," that working to provide a better life for our families is a "narrow concern."

They're wrong. Every human life counts. Your life counts. You have a right to live it as you choose, to follow your bliss. You have a right to seek satisfaction in accomplishment. And if you chase after the almighty dollar, you just might find that you are led, as if by an invisible hand, to do things that improve the lives of others.

[DaveKCMO]

who would jesus charge?

[Maitre D]

"Barack Obama will require you to work...Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual, uninvolved, uninformed." - Mechelle Obama


Great.   I've always needed someone to look after me.  

[NDTeve]

she struggles.

[DaveKCMO]

"Barack Obama will require you to work...Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual, uninvolved, uninformed." - Mechelle Obama


Great.  I've always needed someone to look after me. 

what better way to cure the nanny state? it's a better idea that pulling the safety net out from under everyone.

[NDTeve]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 16_pf.html

War on Terror working? Surely not....

[Maitre D]

she struggles.

she sucks about as bad as anyone can suck.

[DaveKCMO]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 16_pf.html

War on Terror working? Surely not....

well, i'm glad we're not voting on a new CIA. back to the election...

[NDTeve]

well, i'm glad we're not voting on a new CIA. back to the election...

shocking response

[DaveKCMO]

thanks. i'm quite happy to confirm all your worst liberal nightmares.

[Jess]

Aaaaaand...my MO voter registration is processed...now I can go about the business of throwing my liberal vote in in this state.  Hollah.

[Maitre D]

Aaaaaand...my MO voter registration is processed...now I can go about the business of throwing my liberal vote in in this state.  Hollah.

That's good.  Because, Barack will never allow you to go back to your life as usual, uninvolved, uninformed.

[Jess]

then why support a candidate who will immediately cut the gas tax and give voting rights to puerto rico?

regardless, i don't claim to know what an entire demo is thinking but i will tell you why i was drawn to obama from the very beginning: he's elevating the discourse. and it's been proven time and time again on the campaign trail that HRC is not capable of such a standard (add on top of that her historically high negatives which you seem to conveniently keep forgetting about while you talk about black voting motivations). but, hey, if it's pure delusion that's fine with me... it's no different than the one about experience that HRC is pimping. we're not buying it.

Well-put, and cosign.  I know it's popular in some camps to think that all Obama supporters are naive puppies who don't have any legitimate reasons or depth behind their support; unfortunately, it's not really true.