The 2008 Democratic ticket will be Obama/Edwards

LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun

I could live with Biden i think. maybe.

RolandTD20Kdrummer

Am getting really curious to see what happens on Dec 16.

Songburst

Mestophar wrote:

Its ok to be scared man, "they" want you to live in fear and you are not alone. Just don't hang too hard onto the hope that Obama or Clinton are any different...

I'm sure I'll get by. All the patriotism and flag-waving that you yanks do is a bit much for this guy.

Yoyoyo

Songburst wrote:

I'm sure I'll get by. All the patriotism and flag-waving that you yanks do is a bit much for this guy.

True patriotism means burning the flag if need be. That's what I do.

beachdweller

onelongsong wrote:

there's a large percentage of dems that won't vote for a woman and won't vote for a black man. when it comes to the general election; they'll vote to keep either out.

no, their is a minority or possibly a small majority of republicans that will not vote for a women or black man, but I doubt there are a majority of dem's that wouldn't.

as for the general election, unless the Dem's completely frack it up, they'll win the whitehouse, more senate seats (so far 6 republican senators are retiring), and more seats in the house. Bush's plan that got press today about keeping 100k plus troops in iraq ongoing, while the iraqi government will give American corporations preference on contracts in iraq. That'll go over well, alone with the failing economy, the poor and middle class are about to be hit real hard by this.

Loving Scott McClellan for telling the truth about the white house cover up of the plame leak.

DriftingByTheStorm

Songburst wrote:

That's fucked up. When I started reading this post, my computer started playing the theme to Deliverance and it spit chewing tobacco at me.

Perfect example of how ignorance and intolerance are working to keep even "enlightened" folks in shakles, and ultimately bringing about the death of the once great America.

Heaven forbid someone want to stand up and protect what were decreed to them as natural born, godgiven, inalieanble rights ... only a halfwit readneck would want to do that!

:rolleyes:

Songburst

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

Perfect example of how ignorance and intolerance are working to keep even "enlightened" folks in shakles, and ultimately bringing about the death of the once great America.

Heaven forbid someone want to stand up and protect what were decreed to them as natural born, godgiven, inalieanble rights ... only a halfwit readneck would want to do that!

:rolleyes:

Who decreed these god-given rights and are these god-given rights dated at all? The devout defence of the second ammendment is everything that is wrong with America today. Take a leap into the 1900s at least.

ledvedderman

beachdweller wrote:

I saying there is no chance of this happening, first Edwards won't run as VP again, second I don't think Obama and John see eye to eye, I'm thinking a midwest or southern running mate is guarrenteed, but it won't be Edwards. I don't think Obama is seen as midwest either, so his choice will be interesting if he get's the nomination.

Hillary isn't even close to being finished. Curious to see if Dem's really want change (Obama) or that comfortable old friend (Hillary).

I also don't believe that Hillary is what the Republican's want to run against, they'll attack her, and it will backfire. Not sure how they will run against Obama, maybe the lack of experience, nieve, etc...

If I'm the Republicans I would keep doing what they are doing---making it seem as if Hillary is the handsdown candidate to win. Why would they do that? A recent poll shows Hillary losing to EVERY Republican frontrunner. If she wins the primary it's only going to get worse. This is a change election and she is not the candidate to run.

Thecure

ledvedderman wrote:

If I'm the Republicans I would keep doing what they are doing---making it seem as if Hillary is the handsdown candidate to win. Why would they do that? A recent poll shows Hillary losing to EVERY Republican frontrunner. If she wins the primary it's only going to get worse. This is a change election and she is not the candidate to run.

see that is where i think different from most people. i don't think that this is a change election. viewing from outside of america, what i see is still a country that is still split. sure the war is viewed very much the same by most people. social issues are still the same. there is a big gap between the right and left. if thi swas a change election, Ron Paul would win the rep. nomination (he is not) and dennis would win the dem. nomination (he is not).

DriftingByTheStorm

Songburst wrote:

Who decreed these god-given rights and are these god-given rights dated at all? The devout defence of the second ammendment is everything that is wrong with America today. Take a leap into the 1900s at least.

Declaration of Independence, dated 7-4-1776
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."


In contrast,
i believe the idiotic willingness to relinquish any and all rights thats politicians see fit, is what is wrong with America.

Ok. Why don't we jump to the 1900s and just surrender to some Nazis and get it over with.

What is your problem with civil liberty and the right to personal freedom?

ledvedderman

Thecure wrote:

see that is where i think different from most people. i don't think that this is a change election. viewing from outside of america, what i see is still a country that is still split. sure the war is viewed very much the same by most people. social issues are still the same. there is a big gap between the right and left. if thi swas a change election, Ron Paul would win the rep. nomination (he is not) and dennis would win the dem. nomination (he is not).

I think it's very much a change election. The last two Presidents have been one who was impeached and one who should have been, and for the first time since 1956 there is no sitting President or former Vice President running for President.

A change for Kucinich or Paul would be a culture change, not a political change. Because they don't stand a chance doesn't mean this isn't a change election.

Thecure

ledvedderman wrote:

I think it's very much a change election. The last two Presidents have been one who was impeached and one who should have been, and for the first time since 1956 there is no sitting President or former Vice President running for President.

A change for Kucinich or Paul would be a culture change, not a political change. Because they don't stand a chance doesn't mean this isn't a change election.

what then would you say a "change election" means? is it just that a president ot vice presedent is not running?

my2hands

ledvedderman wrote:

I think it's very much a change election. The last two Presidents have been one who was impeached and one who should have been, and for the first time since 1956 there is no sitting President or former Vice President running for President.

A change for Kucinich or Paul would be a culture change, not a political change. Because they don't stand a chance doesn't mean this isn't a change election.

i agree...

ledvedderman

Thecure wrote:

what then would you say a "change election" means? is it just that a president ot vice presedent is not running?

I think people want a change of someone who is fairly new to DC and outside of the current ring of corruption that have made the headlines for the last 10 years.

Thecure

ledvedderman wrote:

I think people want a change of someone who is fairly new to DC and outside of the current ring of corruption that have made the headlines for the last 10 years.

I understand that. the problem that i see is that if you get someone who is "new" to DC there is going to be issues of experience. see Obama.

if you get someone not "new" to DC you get someone who is intrenched in the system. see Clinton, and alot of the rep.

DriftingByTheStorm

Thecure wrote:

I understand that. the problem that i see is that if you get someone who is "new" to DC there is going to be issues of experience. see Obama.

if you get someone not "new" to DC you get someone who is intrenched in the system. see Clinton, and alot of the rep.

and Ron Paul?

Thecure

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

and Ron Paul?

true enough, but i don't see Ron Paul winning anything.

sweetpotato

ledvedderman wrote:

Okay, you don't like any mainstream candidates, that's very indie of you. I don't think though that if ANY of the mainstreamers win that "we're in deep trouble".

I agree w/ a lot of what Ron Paul says, but how anyone on the left can support him w/ his gun control policy is a mind fuck to me.

and let's not forget his staunchly anti-reproductive choice stance. i wouldn't vote for him strictly based on that.

RainDog

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

and Ron Paul?

People are far more likely to be civil libertarians than capital "L" Libertarians. Most people hate the IRS, most people hate government regulation, but most people, when they look deeper into it, don't really want to get rid of either.

It's a lot like Communism. Sure it looks good on paper, but......

DriftingByTheStorm

Thecure wrote:

true enough, but i don't see Ron Paul winning anything.

Why is that exactly?
I'm curious as to why so many have written him off?

Unlike other candidates, his poll numbers and financial numbers are RISING, and he actualy has visible support via signs and bumper stickers.

The other candidates seem to be treading water or in decline from a numbers standpoint (aside from huckabee), and they are all seeing their campaign contributions ($$$) decline.

Yet Ron Paul is on the march?

What in those indicators gives you the impression he doesn't have a chance?