Thread: Hillary or Obama

I'd prefer Sen. Clinton to Sen. Obama, based on their overall positions. She is very slightly more moderate than he, though both are quite liberal. However, I do think Obama would bring some measure of civility to politics, while Clinton would bring the very opposite.

However, since AZ already had its primary (from which I abstained), and since I have no plan to vote for any of the three candidates mentioned, I won't be switching my affiliation to Democrat. I will very likely switch to Independent when I get home, though, since a party that nominates Sen. McCain can no longer be my political home.

should we cross over and vote in the democratic primary to help choose his opposition?

Personally I think we should drop to our knees and pray to God for the future of this great nation. Divine assistance is what it's going to take to turn the tide IMO.

Tweedle-dee or tweedle-dum? Some choices.

I think that Hillary is a much tougher opponent for Senator McCain. In most polls, she would win the general election over him. Obama is riding a huge wave but McCain has too much experience for Obama. McCain is also a pretty moderate guy so he can sway the swing voters who want change. Also, I think if Hillary wins the nomination, Obama would be the VP choice and he would accept making it a very tough ticket for republicans to beat. If Obama gets the nod, I don't think Clinton will go on the VP ballot, thus leaving him out there alone or with Edwards but I think McCain can win that battle.

Republicans should be praying for Obama to win the nomination.

Well I think Obama could do the most out of ALL of the candidates when it comes to "International Relations" (something this country could really use right now whether you can admit it or not). Clinton has more experience but Obama is one hell of a public speaker.....quite the contrast from the current office holder.

One way or another this is going to be one of the more entertaining elections. (If your looking for any sort of silver lining). You've got an African American, a Woman and a Maverick. For better or for worse it looks like history will probably be made in this election.

I know that 99% of this board can't stand any of the choices, but truth be told any one of them would be a major improvement compared to Bush.

Originally Posted by Fred40

...Clinton has more experience ...

I Hate this retoric. I feel it is like Bill Clinton saying he has more experience giving birth because he was at Hillary's side when Chelsey was born. (Don't know if he was or not, not my point).
She is a junior senator from NY!!!!!!!!!! (hate to admit that)

There are only 3 people alive who can claim to have experince as president: Geroge H Bush, Bill Clinton And Geroge W Bush.

Overall, I'm ready to write in vote for Jessie Ventura. It would be nice to have an intelligent President again

Hard, bad choices, but Obama thinks no one should be able to carry a conceal weapon. A 3rd Clinton presidency would be a zoo, and maybe that will keep anything of negative substance from happening. I would love to see Bill in a nice Jacalyn Kennedy red dress though for the inaguration!

Originally Posted by XD_Hokie

Hard, I would love to see Bill in a nice Jacalyn Kennedy red dress though for the inaguration!

Did ya see Rudy Julie-Annie in his!

Originally Posted by Fred40

Clinton has more experience but Obama is one hell of a public speaker.

Can you tell me exactly what experience she has? I know the media is struggling with her "so-called experience" as well. And regarding Obama the public speaker. Yes, he is a good public speaker, but many in history have pulled the wool over voters eyes just on that alone. Don't be fooled, just because he dresses well and speaks well. Unfortunately, IMO, I believe Bush has pissed off to many republican voters and they may jump ship.

Originally Posted by Ram Rod

Personally I think we should drop to our knees and pray to God for the future of this great nation. Divine assistance is what it's going to take to turn the tide IMO.

Ain't that the truth!

We should all write in Wandering Man for president.

Originally Posted by Fred40

Obama is one hell of a public speaker.....

So was Adolf Hitler... What's your point...?

Obama is an idiot with absolutely no experience, which in todays world is extremely dangerous...

Hillary is an idiot and a marxist...

McCain is an idiot who is really a liberal pretending to be a conservative...

All three will raise taxes, All three want to grant amnesty to 11-30 million illegal Mexicans, All three want an open southern border with Mexico, All three want a weapons ban.

and then there is this...

Obama will be assassinated if he wins: Nobel winner Lessing

STOCKHOLM (AFP) - If Barack Obama becomes the next US president he will surely be assassinated, British Nobel literature laureate Doris Lessing predicted in a newspaper interview published here Saturday.

Obama, who is vying to become the first black president in US history, "would certainly not last long, a black man in the position of president.


They would murder him," Lessing, 88, told the Dagens Nyheter daily.
Lessing, who won the 2007 Nobel Literature Prize, said it might be better if Obama's Democratic rival Hillary Clinton were to succeed in her bid to become the first woman president of the United States.


"The best thing would be if they (Clinton and Obama) were to run together. Hillary is a very sharp lady. It might be calmer if she were to win, and not Obama," she said.

Source: http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/afp/08020...sweden_lessing

and this is coming from someone who won the Nobel Peace prize, but then again, we all know they just give those things to just anyone...

I certainly hope the US has moved well beyond the racially/politically motivated assassinations of the 1960s.

But I also have a hard time lending much credence to the pronouncements of Nobel Laureates, considering that Nobel committees have also honored such "luminaries" as Jimmy Carter, Kofi Annan, Yasser Afafat and Nelson Mandela, and in literature a long string of weirdo socialists and existentialists. (Though I concede that they have also honored Hemingway, Churchill and Solzhenitsyn for literature.)

I am sure the run-up to this election will produce a lot of sound, fury and saber-rattling on the internet - signifying nothing, as usual. And I am sure we will see the reemergence of the awful "Charleton Heston is my President" type of bumper stickers, should the Democrats win the day. I don't think "John Sigler is my President" has quite the same ring to it, though.

And of course we'll start seeing even more of the chest-pounding "The Day We Lose the Second Amendment Is the Day We Start the Second Revolution!" drivel. I can't quite figure out why the same people who insist we have to keep the military in Iraq to fight terrorism - to "fight them in Baghdad instead of Boston" - are so willing to turn America into their own private battlefield.

Anyway, I've said it before and I'll say it again: the Republic has endured bad presidents in the past, and it will endure them again. There seem to be only bad choices in 2008, so I will be sitting this one out unless something changes.

Originally Posted by niadhf

...
There are only 3 people alive who can claim to have experince as president: Geroge H Bush, Bill Clinton And Geroge W Bush.
...

Ford and Reagan are no longer with us but Carter is.

How about Obillary?????

Originally Posted by Mike Barham

I certainly hope the US has moved well beyond the racially/politically motivated assassinations of the 1960s.

But I also have a hard time lending much credence to the pronouncements of Nobel Laureates, considering that Nobel committees have also honored such "luminaries" as Jimmy Carter, Kofi Annan, Yasser Afafat and Nelson Mandela, and in literature a long string of weirdo socialists and existentialists. (Though I concede that they have also honored Hemingway, Churchill and Solzhenitsyn for literature.)

I am sure the run-up to this election will produce a lot of sound, fury and saber-rattling on the internet - signifying nothing, as usual. And I am sure we will see the reemergence of the awful "Charleton Heston is my President" type of bumper stickers, should the Democrats win the day. I don't think "John Sigler is my President" has quite the same ring to it, though.

And of course we'll start seeing even more of the chest-pounding "The Day We Lose the Second Amendment Is the Day We Start the Second Revolution!" drivel. I can't quite figure out why the same people who insist we have to keep the military in Iraq to fight terrorism - to "fight them in Baghdad instead of Boston" - are so willing to turn America into their own private battlefield.

Anyway, I've said it before and I'll say it again: the Republic has endured bad presidents in the past, and it will endure them again. There seem to be only bad choices in 2008, so I will be sitting this one out unless something changes.

You may not like any of the choices......but I still say any one of them would be an improvement over Bush. I honestly think George W. will go down in history as one of the worst Presidents we've ever had........and that's saying a lot.

Originally Posted by Fred40

George W. will go down in history as one of the worst Presidents we've ever had........and that's saying a lot.

This is true!

Originally Posted by MLB

Ford and Reagan are no longer with us but Carter is.

DOH!!!
I stand Corrected.

Originally Posted by Fred40

You may not like any of the choices......but I still say any one of them would be an improvement over Bush.

Perhaps. But since one of the three of them is going to be president anyway, they can do it without my support and the tacit approval of my vote. Not that I am deluded enough to think my one vote makes a difference, anyway, so it's more for me than for them.

I honestly think George W. will go down in history as one of the worst Presidents we've ever had........and that's saying a lot.

Maybe. I think we will see a big effort by the "neocon" wing of the GOP - as represented by The Weekly Standard - to rehabilitate his image as the years go by. A lot of that rehabilitation will depend on the ultimate outcomes of Afghanistan and Iraq. President Truman sent us to another war-without-end in Korea, and left office with low approval ratings, but he has subsequently been rehabilitated.

Originally Posted by Fred40

You may not like any of the choices......but I still say any one of them would be an improvement over Bush. I honestly think George W. will go down in history as one of the worst Presidents we've ever had........and that's saying a lot.

Which presidents are you comparing him to? I hope you are going back to the beginning, starting with Washington, correct? Or, are you simply a Bush-hater, no matter what information you have? Facts please...no opinions.

Originally Posted by MLB

Ford and Reagan are no longer with us but Carter is.

His experience was all bad. Remember the sweaters, gas lines and 18% mortgage rates. Ahhh yes the good times. Easy to see why he was left out.

Re Hillary's experience: The best line I heard about that is she had 8 years in the White House and so did the pastry chef.

Re Obama: He does have the charisma and is a good public speaker that talks in platitudes but offers nothing.

Re McCain: The third democrat in the race. Enough said.

Mike: What will you do when they tell you to turn them all in? Revolution and resistance can happen non-violently by simply refusing to comply. My state of NH has a license plate that's saying is "Live Free or Die". Can you live free without the means to defend yourself?

Originally Posted by TerryP

Mike: What will you do when they tell you to turn them all in? Revolution and resistance can happen non-violently by simply refusing to comply. My state of NH has a license plate that's saying is "Live Free or Die". Can you live free without the means to defend yourself?

I don't think they will demand a mass turn-in. Rather, I think they will slowly make it more difficult to own guns, "grandfather in" existing owners, and just let the tradition of gun ownership die out.

I am all for a non-violent revolution, but of course you don't need guns to stage a non-violent anything. We have a chance for a non-violent revolution every time we go to the polls, though, and we don't seem to take advantage of it.

Anyway, if it comes to some battle in the streets against some hypothetical future tyranny, I think explosives will be much more useful than firearms. Such has been the modern history of asymmetrical warfare.

Originally Posted by Fred40

You may not like any of the choices......but I still say any one of them would be an improvement over Bush. I honestly think George W. will go down in history as one of the worst Presidents we've ever had........and that's saying a lot.

That is where I think the Bush bashers are wrong. If you take an honest look at what led up to 9/11 and you see a pattern of America being attacked and the response: this as a police matter and will not happen again. The first World Trade Center, the embassy bombings, the USS Cole all acts of terrorism that emboldened the terrorists.

Remember the stock market crash in 2000 and the 1999 irrational exhuberance? The recession that followed the crash.

These are all precusors to Bush's presidency. Bush went to war to stop terrorism in this country. He took it to the terrorists and as has been the case in the last 40 years this country doesn't have the stomach to fight an extended war. No one wants to see our young men and women die in war but the fact still remains we have been repeatedly attacked, action was necessary and we have not been attacked at home since. The question then becomes what would someone else have done? So let's hear it what would you have done? What would the anticipated results be and how would you accomplish it. Don't bother with what you wouldn't have done what would you have done to protect this country.

Originally Posted by TerryP

Bush went to war to stop terrorism in this country. He took it to the terrorists and as has been the case in the last 40 years this country doesn't have the stomach to fight an extended war. No one wants to see our young men and women die in war but the fact still remains we have been repeatedly attacked, action was necessary and we have not been attacked at home since.