Not really, I think the next president’s job will be to stabilise and rebuild after the bush years.
USA uses brain for once: Obama 'clinches nomination'
- Thread starter KNiVES
- Start date
Not really, I think the next president’s job will be to stabilise and rebuild after the bush years.
Clinton got a lot of votes from hispanics. Certain candidates have always appealed to different races more. I've watched a lot of their debates and speeches and Obama definitely seems the best for the job (don't even mention mccain!). His policies are good, he's got an integrity lacking in the rest of american politics, doesn't make personal attacks, and is in countenance, presidential.
Hillary will be his running mate because the democrats will want it and it will gather more support against mccain.
Last edited:
The establishment in Washington will run rings around Barak Hussein Obama imo. He's a one-term senator for crying out loud.
If anyone is going to continue the policies of Bush it will be Obama - pander to big business, big oil and the Christian Right
If anyone is going to continue the policies of Bush it will be Obama - pander to big business, big oil and the Christian Right
The establishment in Washington will run rings around Barak Hussein Obama imo. He's a one-term senator for crying out loud.
If anyone is going to continue the policies of Bush it will be Obama - pander to big business, big oil and the Christian Right
Have you even been watching the campaign?
McCain is very similar to bush but Obama is not and will not continue his policies.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 13 Nov 2006
- Posts
- 5,798
24 paved the way for a black president.
Yes I have. Have you?
Why? Because McCain is white and Obama is black?
Tbh I have a suspicion that the reason Obama has won the democratic nomination is because a lot of Bush supporting republicans have registered as democrats this time and voted for Obama in an effort to keep Hilary out at all costs - even if that means a democratic president. A lot of republicans hate McCain, but Hilary is the one they fear - she might actually tax the super-rich in order to try to achieve some sort of social justice across America, which obviously can't be tolerated. I think I'm right in saying that the Vote Obama campaign has received more money than either Hilary's or McCain's.
Last edited:
No he says he won't, yet how often do polititions even come close to their election promises?
Yes.
No. Because a large part of his campaign has been about changing the culture of washington. Were he to pander to oil companies and big business he would be going against the core of his campaign. McCain has continued the bush rhetoric concerning the war on terror. Even hillary used obliteration when talking about iran and nuclear weapons. Obama has said he could talk to iran and the president and refused to talk about possible military action. His whole ethos is different. This is why he is different, not because of his skin colour.
Obviously one must trust that he'll do as he has said. Looking at his whole campaign, throughout which he didn't spend time criticising others and making cheap attacks, I believe he can continue that in the whitehouse, and that he is a good deal more honest than the vast majority of politicians.
Yes, you can. Australia is already undergoing significant change, and our new government hasn't even been in power for 200 days yet.
That was n the event that Iran had launched a nuclear strike against Israel, personally I think the "you just killed hundreds of thousand to millions of our allies civilians time to fry" than "well that was naughty lets discuss how you can undo the nuclear inferno you just sent down upon a city".
From the ABC:
In the frenzied end-game, Senator Clinton has said for the first time she may be ready to serve as Senator Obama's vice-president, in a phone call with law-makers from her New York state, a staffer with the New York delegation told AFP.
Interesting.
Senator Clinton has refused to formally concede defeat, demanding respect for the nearly 18 million people who voted for her and leaving no doubt that she considered herself the best potential president.
"...has refused to formally concede defeat". Is this woman even on the same planet as the rest of us?
In the frenzied end-game, Senator Clinton has said for the first time she may be ready to serve as Senator Obama's vice-president, in a phone call with law-makers from her New York state, a staffer with the New York delegation told AFP.
Interesting.
Senator Clinton has refused to formally concede defeat, demanding respect for the nearly 18 million people who voted for her and leaving no doubt that she considered herself the best potential president.
"...has refused to formally concede defeat". Is this woman even on the same planet as the rest of us?
That was n the event that Iran had launched a nuclear strike against Israel, personally I think the "you just killed hundreds of thousand to millions of our allies civilians time to fry" than "well that was naughty lets discuss how you can undo the nuclear inferno you just sent down upon a city".
The sentence about obama is his response to iran in general not to the hypothesised nuclear attack that hillary answered a question on! I realise the juxtaposition is confusing!
Hardly a fair comparison at all then was it and was only written to try and show her as a war monger aid him a saint.
It's over. Obama has the majority of delegates. Clinton is dead in the water.
It meant to show that in the scale of old-school american scaremongering and unhelpful rhetoric Mccain >> Hillary > Obama. (in my opinion)
I would not call her a warmonger or him a saint. I was trying to differentiate Obama from McCain and less so from Hillary.
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Nov 2002
- Posts
- 16,379
- Location
- 38.744281°N 104.846806°W
Well I don't trust Obama at all, and for that reason, I'm out.
How does i how the scale though, or do you think that if Iran launched a nuclear attack on Israel, Obama would just twiddle his thumb and talk to them?
It's like asking one person how they would deal with someone they had a disagreement with, and then asking another how they would deal with someone who stabbed their mate. You're obviously gong to get very different answers, one extreme one mild.
She didn't say she was going to obliterate them for no reason.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
every damn candidate in the history of any politics talks about change, and rarely if ever gets it. Saying he wants stuff to "change" doesn't really mean anything, at all. Every single bill he tries to get passed in the house still gets voted on, by all the same people who are infact all being guarenteed jobs in big business after they finish in politics, this is how their voting goes. THe president in charge doesn't even have a huge amount to do with policy anymore as everything he brings up can be shot down, and the other side can STILL do a lot and have their stuff passed. THe upshot is the president can veto bills he doesn't want, but this brings with it a LOT of political downside so if he did it to every opposing bill, nothing he ever wanted would pass either. Its a cat and mouse game and the pres won't likely ever have a massive advantage in this game. so again, what changes will he bring?
We haven't even started campaigning properly yet, when its Obama vs McCain EVERY SINGLE rally, every single speech will be about war heroes, who do you want in charge of the military. Every single death in Iraq will become a campaign symbol of, "if there isn't a military man in charge next, just think how many more will be dying than there are now".
McCain ISN'T like Bush, but you have to remember, BUsh was terrible, absolutely horrible for 4 years and still got relected.
This whole, its a younger America and they have different ideals, again this is a campaign sounding slogan you've heard in every election since the 60's. yet young voters still never turn out in big numbers.
Black people do not vote in large numbers, and even all those who think they want Obama and "mean to register to vote" won't get around to it, its the same in every single damn election. THere won't be a 100% voting turn out, if theres 50% they'll be incredibly lucky. more people than ever are disillusioned with the process as they realise who is in the presidents seat doesn't matter. Even with Bush out, all the men behind all his bills and passing all his stuff in the house, will still be in place, still put bills forward and still get them passed. It just looks better when they have their own President in, it doesn't matter if they don't.
Obama, other than "change" has very very little real opinion on anything. BOth he and Clinton have just been pandering, every speech blindly promises whatever the audience in that area wants.
If it came to it, say you could get 10% of non voters to come in and vote, 10% of the black population, compared to some guys going into bumsville Alabama and running around saying "sign up now or a black guys in charge and he hates you all for all that lynching" whose going to get a bigger turn out?
Not to mention that it turns out Obama's religious, spiritual and personal advisor for the last 30-40 years turns out to be a complete god damned whack job.