Originally Posted by garysher

If you want to talk about illusions then you should mention Obama - his whole campaign is based on illusion!

And as you point out he has failed to beat Hillary in any of the big states so far - the ones who pay all the Federal bills and subsidies those empty "flyover" states.

Even with all his "momentum" he failed to beat Hillary in Texas, and she beat him comfortably in Ohio.

And she won Michigan and Florida - two more large states - that sooner or later will have to be counted. Several million voters cannot be ignored just because of childish Dem party politics.

All the nonsense about hating Hillary is irrelevant - 99.99% of voters will never meet her let alone spend time getting to know her.

As the weeks roll by and McCain's team start to beat up Obama we'll see who comes out looking the most electable.

We need someone with Hillary's feistiness to portray McCain for what he is - Bush Lite.

I still think the best result would be a Clinton/Obama ticket and based on her onterviews this morning she's starting to agree with me.

I wonder of she reads my posts?

Originally Posted by nuttyjoe

I liked your comment on McCain- a Bush Lite. You're getting better, Gary! I also caught Hillary's interveiw this morning. She is just trying to make the first suggestion to somehow break the deadlock. Smart politics; but it won't mean anything to Obama. Remember, she needs all the support Obama currently has if she can even hope to beat McCain. Obama is in a better position- he does not need her! He could do it with any of the other possible running mates I mentioned earlier.
Why do you think that McCain is prepping to go against Obama these last few weeks? Why is Rush Limbaugh and other Republican blowhards pushing for people to vote for Hillary Clinton? Easy: McCain believes (I would agree) that he would beat Hillary. He isn't so sure with Obama.

Originally Posted by nuttyjoe

I liked your comment on McCain- a Bush Lite. You're getting better, Gary! I also caught Hillary's interveiw this morning. She is just trying to make the first suggestion to somehow break the deadlock. Smart politics; but it won't mean anything to Obama. Remember, she needs all the support Obama currently has if she can even hope to beat McCain. Obama is in a better position- he does not need her! He could do it with any of the other possible running mates I mentioned earlier.
Why do you think that McCain is prepping to go against Obama these last few weeks? Why is Rush Limbaugh and other Republican blowhards pushing for people to vote for Hillary Clinton? Easy: McCain believes (I would agree) that he would beat Hillary. He isn't so sure with Obama.

Originally Posted by Gadgetory

Hilary won Ohio and Texas because of the perception she'd be better for the economy. Its that simple.

In your opinion. But you have no evidence




BTW...Rush is telling people to vote for Hilary to PROLONG the Dems election selection process..so the uncertainty lasts longer and they can position McCain as President and we start to see him as President ..are you really so naive you can't see this simple strategy??? No wonder you support Obama

Originally Posted by garysher

So you think registered Democratic voters take advice from Rush Limbaugh? So they can prolong the uncertainty in their own party?

You have the brains of a retarded mule and half the charisma.

Originally Posted by garysher

When you include Florida and Michigan Hillary is ahead.

BTW I'm still waiting for you to explain what Obama stands for and just ONE SINGLE achievement of his to date??

Originally Posted by highway80west

But you know, a presidential nominee has always chosen an unknown to be his running mate. I mean who could ever have heard of Spiro Agnew when Nixon chose him as his running mate, or Walter Mondale as Carter's running mate, or Dan Quayle as George H.W. Bush's running mate, or Dick Cheney as George W. Bush's running mate? Hubert Humphrey chose Edmund Muskie, and McGovern lost Thomas Eagleton to Sargent Shriver.

I think the lone exception was when Kennedy chose Lyndon Johnson as his running mate. Johnson expected to be the nominee, but Kennedy surprised a lot of people by being the nominee. I feel that we may see a repeat of this should Clinton choose Obama. I can't see that happening if Obama gets the nomination. Obama may choose an African-American as his choice.

Having said that, I think Hillary can stand up to McCain in debates, but I have a feeling that McCain could tear Obama apart in debates.

Wouldn't it be funny that if Hillary is elected president, that it would be like a battle between the Bushes and the Clintons in the last 20 years or so.

Originally Posted by pensacola_niceman

Remember when George Bush senior chose Dan Quail as a running mate? What a royal fuck-up that was.

Originally Posted by garysher

Originally Posted by Gadgetory

Except of course in many States you don't have to be a registered Democrat to vote in the Democratic primaries just a registered voter. So yeah I think Rush could get some people who'd normally vote for the GOP to vote for Hilary to extend the uncertainty..make sure you understand the weird ass 'democratic' processes of both parties before you type then you'd not look like a moron

I guess because you can't vote your not interested in the actual process but here you are babbling on about that which you don't understand anyway..like the sound of your own typing much???

My evidence as to why Hilary won Ohio and Texas is based on exit polls which true aren't the most reliable things in the world but you've no evidence to the contrary either..so I win this point too.

So you are less then a retarded mule and have no charisma

Originally Posted by nuttyjoe

I'll say one thing for you, Gary. You are about the most obstinate person I've ever spoken to. Let's try this one last time:
Obama's attraction is that he does not represent the politicians of old. People feel that he is the first (and only) politician that ever listens directly to what the public wants. Can he solve all the problems America faces today? I seriously doubt that Jesus Christ could.
But there's something to be said about his good judgment as to why he did not support invading Iraq, and not supporting NAFTA.
The ability to show good decision making ability is very high on my priority list, Gary; but I cannot speak for all Obama supporters.

Joe these are negative characteristics! It's very easy to be a "Monday morning Quarter back" criticising the decisions of others.

But he can't do that if he's President. He will have to deal with Iraq and NAFTA.

There is no way America can withdraw completely from Iraq no matter who is President - Obama knows that but won't admit it.

He says he wants to renegotiate NAFTA but doesn't provide any details - of course!

And there is a world of difference between obstinacy and tenacity!




As far as achievements, I think Katz said it best: Niether Obama nor Clinton have any achievements. Hillary can claim that she was married to a President; but is that really an achievement or experience? By that definition, Monica Lewinsky hasmore than all three candidates put together!
This is why Obama campaigns on the "good judgment" platform. He has shown that he has superior judgment on the major issues of the campaign. The other two will always try to say "experience". But what experience do they really have, besides McCain being a former POW?
As far as Michigan and Forida are concerned; you are correct. But that's assuming that they will be included. I really don't know how the Dems set themselves up for that mess; or how they will solve it. I know Hillary is banking on the inclusion of these two states. Will it happen? Your guess is as good as mine. But until t happens-if it happens at all- Hillary really didn't gain much overall by this last "Super Tuesday". I think she kept some delegates from defecting; but she gained little to nothing overall.