Obama Forms Committee to Weigh 2008 Presidential Bid

I like Chris Dodd, he did an interview today on Tucker and went "I'm not doing that lame exploritoy committee, I'm just throwing my hat into it". I don't know what he stands for, but the fact he's not doing the pointless step makes me like him more than the rest.

On the race sex issue. People say they don't care if the person is a women or black, but in the booth no one knowws and they can vote a different way.
 
[quote name='2Fast'] I think the Dems will build Kerry/Edwards back up.[/quote]

no chance, kerry is a goon. if he couldn't even beat bush he has no chance now against anyone else. i voted for him last time but not because of who he was, i was just voting against bush. also, i did like edwards, he could be good.
 
[quote name='luffy_kun']no chance, kerry is a goon. if he couldn't even beat bush he has no chance now against anyone else. i voted for him last time but not because of who he was, i was just voting against bush. also, i did like edwards, he could be good.[/quote]
I'm really indifferent about Kerry to be honest, but I think he's their "safest" bet.
 
Edwards has a few advantages, such as the fact that, like Bush and Clinton, he has that kind of everyman southern likability and charm. As I said before in this thread, I hate that such a thing matters, but it does, and Edwards has it.

I don't think the fact that he's a lawyer hinders him, because the talking points tend to single out trial lawyers, and people who hate trial lawyers make these false claims about how trial lawyers do nothing but help idiots sue McDonald's for spilling coffee on themselves, winning millions in the process. They never will admit that (1) such cases are anomalies, (2) the good that can happen from the class-action lawsuits that do occur, and that in those "dumbass wins millions in a lawsuit" cases, without fail, die in appeals court after the fact. I defy anyone to point out, to me, where a company actually was forced to follow through in paying out a bajillion dollar settlement because someone did something frivolous. The whole "trial lawyer" stigma is a red herring, IMO.

The two very legitimate sources of stigma Edwards has is the "loser" stigma from 2004, as well as the fact that he has about as much political experience as Obama does. I truly think that Edwards has a very good chance.

I'd be amazed if it was anyone other than Edwards or Obama; Clinton would only take the nomination, IMO, through some insidious political backstabbing that is not beneath her. I don't think that the Democrats want to take such a risk in 2008. But anyone outside of those three ought to give it up now. Even Dennis Kucinich, a man I greatly admire. He's in the "Ralph Nader" position this election, it seems.

2Fast, more people feel more negatively about Kerry than Clinton. Even *I*, the great liberal hope, would be extraordinarily reluctant to vote for Kerry, and if offered a moderate Republican in 2008, would possibly vote for them. Kerry's political career is over, and I'd be surprised if he ran and was relected to the senate when his next term is up. He's persona non grata amongst Democrats, so he stands as much of a chance of running as Alan Keyes does of getting the Republican nomination.
 
[quote name='usickenme']If you were that smart you would know how to get a point across. So you can't write or were intentionally dishonest. Either way, you were too busy playing "gotcha" to add anything to the discussion.[/QUOTE]

If you can't read, it's hard to get a point across. So, again, you're a fucking idiot.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']2Fast, more people feel more negatively about Kerry than Clinton. Even *I*, the great liberal hope, would be extraordinarily reluctant to vote for Kerry, and if offered a moderate Republican in 2008, would possibly vote for them. Kerry's political career is over, and I'd be surprised if he ran and was relected to the senate when his next term is up. He's persona non grata amongst Democrats, so he stands as much of a chance of running as Alan Keyes does of getting the Republican nomination.[/quote]

I think I'm just big on thinking about Kerry because he, out of every possible Democratic candidate, is the de facto most qualified to handle the mess in the Middle East (I also thought his policies in '04 were *okay*). Now that I think about it however, you're probably right about Kerry.

I just think the Democrats severely lack a decent candidate. I don't think people will vote for Clinton, Obama, or Edwards.
 
[quote name='Quillion']
Romney: Savvy businessman, Republican governing a strongly liberal state. Not much political experience (which for a Republican appears to be a plus)[/QUOTE]

You are truely a dumbass.

First of all Mass is not a "strong liberal state", in the last election almost 40% of the people in Mass voted for Bush. Also he was voted into office because the person running against him was a jackass no one liked so we voted for someone who wasn't even in the state before he ran. Turns out he wouldn't be in the state after he won too. Do people really want a business man right after the mess with all the coruption? And he does have political experience, he ran against Kenedy for Senator back in the early 1990s. His running platform was "I'm more liberal than Kennedy". He was in favor of abortion and fgay marriage. Since becoming so called "Governor" he has changed all his views so he can run for president. He is evil. If the choose comes down to him vs Clinton I'm leaving the country for real.
 
[quote name='David85']You are truely a dumbass.

First of all Mass is not a "strong liberal state", in the last election almost 40% of the people in Mass voted for Bush. [/QUOTE]

36.78%. Which if you knew anything, you'd know that it was the lowest percentage in ANY state. Notice I said state, because DC isn't. (9.34%, which shouldn't surprise anyone in the least) The only other state in which Bush scored lower than 40% was Vermont.

Just shows that just because you live there, doesn't mean that you know anything.

Who's the dumbass?
 
[quote name='CocheseUGA']

Who's the dumbass?[/QUOTE]


Oh it's still you. I live in the fucknig state so I know how much of a jackass Romney really is. You seem to be a southern asshole so you should really like him.
 
[quote name='David85']Oh it's still you. I live in the fucknig state so I know...[/QUOTE]

Nothing, as I've pointed out.

02owens2.jpg


Next question.
 
At this point I think it will be hard for any Republican to win in '08 regardless of who the Dems pick. Bush has already dragged the GOP approval ratings down and with Dem control of Congress, new hearings for the next two years are not going to help. The GOP candidate is going to be starting from a deficit and will have to distance himself (because they won't nominate a woman this time around) from the White House at all costs. This means the White House won't be able to throw its weight behind any fund raisers. In '06 the majority finally woke up to realize the bad job Dubya has been doing. I don't think that perception is going to swing 180º in the next2 years.
 
[quote name='CocheseUGA']Is it possible for you to be further left?[/QUOTE]


Is it possible for you to be a biggest dumbass?
 
[quote name='David85']Is it possible for you to be a biggest dumbass?[/QUOTE]


That'd only be possible when you commit board suicide.

Keep spouting filth...I'll always be here to correct you.
 
Wow, this discussion has degenerated quickly.

Anyway, back to the issue. I think it is a mistake to say the GOP is dead in '08. Way too premature to say that. 18 months is an eternity in politics. Hell, Clinton looked like a one-termer 2 1/2 years into his presidency.
 
[quote name='CocheseUGA']

Keep spouting filth...I'll always be here to correct you.[/QUOTE]

Correct me. I said around 40% and it was 36%ish. Oh no! :roll:

How about you go to the football thread where I was right and you were so very wrong on every account.

I think I was right about 10 times and you were once. I win.

I haven't ignored anyone yet this week. You would make a great start!
 
[quote name='David85']

How about you go to the football thread where I was right and you were so very wrong on every account. [/QUOTE]

The thread where other people are having to step in and correct you because I don't have the time to do it? Sure.

No, where you are wrong is where you talk about something in your state, as if you're the only person qualified to do it. And you don't even do it well. You're just like every other pretentious college kid who thinks he knows everything when it couldn't be further from the truth. Full of piss and vinegar and can't see beyond his own 4-inch e-dick. Feel free to keep mouthing off, everyone sees how full of shit you are.

Oh, and if you ignore me I'll be the happiest person in the world.
 
[quote name='sgs89']Anyway, back to the issue. I think it is a mistake to say the GOP is dead in '08. Way too premature to say that. 18 months is an eternity in politics. Hell, Clinton looked like a one-termer 2 1/2 years into his presidency.[/QUOTE]
I'm not saying they're completely dead, but they will have a steep uphill climb. The Abramoff scandal has already netted one convict. I would be willing to be there will be more. Scooter Libby is about to start his trial which will be lots of negative press for the White House. Not to mention long overdue Congressional investigations.

One of the few Republicans who had a chance to be an outsider to the Bush administration was McCain but he's been cozying up for so long he will be tarred with the same brush when it comes to Iraq.

Barring a good juicy scandal like Mark Foley, I think the Dems will have an excellent chance at another sweep.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Kerry drops out early (before even making a formal announcement, I think). Good for him.[/QUOTE]
He'll be missed... by the GOP and talk radio.
 
[quote name='MrBadExample']I'm not saying they're completely dead, but they will have a steep uphill climb. The Abramoff scandal has already netted one convict. I would be willing to be there will be more. Scooter Libby is about to start his trial which will be lots of negative press for the White House. Not to mention long overdue Congressional investigations.

One of the few Republicans who had a chance to be an outsider to the Bush administration was McCain but he's been cozying up for so long he will be tarred with the same brush when it comes to Iraq.

Barring a good juicy scandal like Mark Foley, I think the Dems will have an excellent chance at another sweep.[/QUOTE]

i think you're not far off

but i do also remember after Bush's (43) first election, a lot of people on the right saying things like "Good, now no Democrats will ever be elected again..." etc...

which of course was silly

but it was that kind of blind arrogance and hubris that lead the spectacular implosion of the Republican party last election

NOT saying you are going anywhere near that level.. just pointing out that tendency on both sides of the aisle

no matter what 08 should be interesting

so far, no candidates on either side i REALLY like

Obama kinda rocks but i'm not sure he's ready for POTUSA, maybe after another 4 years
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top