Obama Sinks as He's Vetted

[MystikWizard]

So do you want to take my bet? $100 US on that Obama will be the Democratic nominee for president this year? I have Obama and you have Clinton ok?

I'm dead serious with this.

Man up.

He knows it is inevitable. Why him and Iman continue their antics is beyond me. Instead of coming together, they seem contempt on dragging this thing out and prolonging the process.

Obama is all over the media now. And him and McCain have set their sights on each other.

Clinton lost even more superdelegates just yesterday. Now, I believe she has a lead of less than 10, and is losing momentum every day.

This contest will be between Obama and McCain and there's no way around it.

 

[MystikWizard]

Nasty, divisive, destructive.

All words that could equally be used to describe Clinton supporters let's be honest (don't believe me? look at the polls about percentage of each side that would support the other side if nominated) And again, neither side started off this way imo. But the length of the game makes everybody more entrenched in their side.

I have to agree with you there, 100%. More Obama supporters would clearly support Clinton if she was the nominee, then the other way around. There's no way around the selfishness of the Clinton supporters and those polls show that.

 

[syntax]

An update on the poll that started this thread.

 

[Supernature]

"Reeking with bitterness"...hmmm...I'm still trying to get my mind around what Obama supporters have to be bitter about.

I think jockboy01 is correct though. Loyalty is really what seems to be driving Hillary supporters as opposed to logic. What else could explain how they can blindly ignore her lies and racebaiting while still believing she's entitled to the nomination despite being behind in delegates, states won, and the popular vote? It's as if Obama's lead was a fluke instead of the result of a very intelligently run campaign.

 

[syntax]

An update on the poll that started this thread:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/107278/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Maintains-6Point-Lead-Over-Clinton.aspx

 

[Kulindahr]

I think jockboy01 is correct though. Loyalty is really what seems to be driving Hillary supporters as opposed to logic. What else could explain how they can blindly ignore her lies and racebaiting while still believing she's entitled to the nomination despite being behind in delegates, states won, and the popular vote? It's as if Obama's lead was a fluke instead of the result of a very intelligently run campaign.

It will be worse now: with Edwards going for Obama, assuming his delegates vote for Obama, then the Illinois Senator is less than a dozen votes from having a majority of pledged delegates. So will loyalty trump good sense?

 

[kneelin]

"Reeking with bitterness"...hmmm...I'm still trying to get my mind around what Obama supporters have to be bitter about.

I think jockboy01 is correct though. Loyalty is really what seems to be driving Hillary supporters as opposed to logic. What else could explain how they can blindly ignore her lies and racebaiting while still believing she's entitled to the nomination despite being behind in delegates, states won, and the popular vote? It's as if Obama's lead was a fluke instead of the result of a very intelligently run campaign.

He has run a very good campaign especially in playing the 'caucus game' BUT that still doesn't make him the better candidate.

 

[syntax]

An update on the poll that started this thread:

 

[NickCole]

^^ It's revealing that despite being the assumed winner throughout the media amid catcalls for Hillary and all but ignoring her huge WV win from the media, and the Edwards endorsement and all the new delegates trotted out etc, that Obama has not pulled ahead in recent days.

He still cannot close the deal.

 

[greydog]

^^ It's revealing that despite being the assumed winner throughout the media amid catcalls for Hillary and all but ignoring her huge WV win from the media, and the Edwards endorsement and all the new delegates trotted out etc, that Obama has not pulled ahead in recent days.

He still cannot close the deal.

Not to worry!
I'm sure the deal will be closed on or before 18 days from now.

 

[greydog]

The deal's not closed by Obama, but by either the delegates needed to reach the magic number, or by Rodham reading the handwriting on the wall. You think either will happen within the next 18 days?

I'm no expert like you, but, "YES", I think we'll have a pretty good idea on or before June 3rd.

 

[syntax]

He still cannot close the deal.

Then why don't you start another thread with that title? Maybe you'll have better luck with that one because the premise upon which you based this thread has been shown by your own evidence to be a fallacy.

 

[chance1]

he aint sinkin

he's winning

the far left have taken control of the party

scary shit

 

[chance1]

far left is no better than the far right

the diff is the "far right" have not been running the repub party

 

[chance1]

Obama is not a part of the far left, and the Democratic Party fails to show any signs of being under the control of the far left.

As for what has been controlling the Republican Party, and the moron you defend so often in the White House, if the midpoint between the two parties is already right of center for decades now, and the obvious sway the religious right has had recently, the 'far right' should be your real concern.

The "moron" is out real soon

His handling of the Iraq war has been atrocious - his appts brutal - never suggested o/w

but much like mccain's 100 yr remark - u will misrepresent it and me - ur decision

the religious right has less influence now than they have ever had

obama is the most liberal senator there is - his voting record and stands on issues speak for themselves - they r what they r - doesn't make him a bad guy - just an extreme liberal guy

on taxes - i don't dig that
on defense - i don't dig that

great orator - and he is empowering the black people in an enormous way and making college students feel part of the process - his organization has been flawless

but he's a far left politician - who is swinging more and more left - and it is why he won the dem primary

is what it is

 

[Kulindahr]

And Obama should take a Hillary supporter as his running mate.

In the unlikely event of Hillary winning the nomination, she should do the same and choose an Obama supporter as running mate.

That's a good idea. There's no way these two would make a believable ticket, but someone from 'the other side' who hasn't been up there being contentious could help heal any breach.
Nice thinking!

^^ It's revealing that despite being the assumed winner throughout the media amid catcalls for Hillary and all but ignoring her huge WV win from the media, and the Edwards endorsement and all the new delegates trotted out etc, that Obama has not pulled ahead in recent days.

He still cannot close the deal.

"Pulled ahead" -- care to define that? He's been pulling ahead pretty steadily -- he almost has a majority of pledged delegates, he's won more states, he's ahead in the popular vote, and he's ahead in 'superdelegates'... what more do you want? A gold meteor to fall in Obama's yard, big enough to pay off the national debt? That could close some serious deals....

Obama is not a part of the far left, and the Democratic Party fails to show any signs of being under the control of the far left.

As for what has been controlling the Republican Party, and the moron you defend so often in the White House, if the midpoint between the two parties is already right of center for decades now, and the obvious sway the religious right has had recently, the 'far right' should be your real concern.

For the U. S. of A., Obama's about as far left as they come.

Watch it, there; don't be calling Bush a moron! We know his IQ is on par with JFK, so he has no deficiency of intelligence.
It's just that he misplaced about 40 IQ points on the way to his first inaugural, and no one's seen them since.

 

[chance1]

^^ yeah he's the guy i voted for - explained that

far left means:
overtaxation/redistribution - let the govt decide what to do with the added taxes

soft military - negotiate from weakness rather than strength - blame the U.S. for world problems - weak on israel plus

i don't do talking points - i read/watch all ideas - and u don't - ur taking the u know everything approach - good luck with that

as for obama being the most liberal senator - ck the rankings from the wash post and the national journal - get out there and read my man

the RR has some voters - yeah - and they gotta vote for someone - and mccain is the lesser of 2 evils

speaking of evil - how's rev wright doing? or bill ayers?

now that's evil

 

[Sammie13]

For the U. S. of A., Obama's about as far left as they come.

You got that right!!!! For anyone to think Obama is not liberal makes me wonder if they even follow politics. I'd like to see some evidence produced from those merely making claims that he is some sort of moderate or conservative Democrat. The next thing you'll hear is that Obama is to the right of Sam Nunn or Joe Lieberman.

The nice thing is that Obama doesn't really deny his liberal record...he doesn't run from it in the way that Kerry/Edwards did. That said, the liberals hijacked the Democratic party and won't let go...that's how the GOP was able to worm there way in during the '80's.

 

[Kulindahr]

the RR has some voters - yeah - and they gotta vote for someone - and mccain is the lesser of 2 evils

speaking of evil - how's rev wright doing? or bill ayers?

Wright has some problems, but I wouldn't call him evil. McCain though is definitely evil. He has the "straight talk" act down pat, but if you look at his record and statements, it's plain there's not much in the Bill of Rights he cares much for; what he wants is "effective government", and if that means strangling free speech, free press, freedom of association, or anything else, he's right there with that crimson cord. We can all see from his behavior that he doesn't believe in freedom of religion, and from his votes that he doesn't believe in protections against search and seizure. What McCain is really about is winning, and if he has to toss out basic rights to do it, that's where he'll go.

The US is guilty of some world problems, but I'd say even more blame goes to Europe, and definitely the UK. And the US can't negotiate from weakness as long as it overspends the next 25 countries' defense budget combined---and still sits on an arsenal.

How much it spends doesn't mean much if we don't get effectiveness for it. Right now Bush has demonstrated to the world that the U.S. can't even handle one medium-size conflict followed by an occupation; to be negotiating from strength we ought to be able to handle that, stand ready to fight another medium-size (or larger) engagement, and have a reserve in case something else crops up.
Right there, BTW, is where Obama comes off as more credible on the military than McCain: McCain talks about getting the job done, but Obama has stated that we need to drastically increase the size of the military. In line with being able to handle multiple conflicts, that expansion should be enough to be able to send the National Guard back home to be where it can guard the nation.
Building THOR would help, but I cringe at the thought of some future Bushoid having it his fingertips.

 

[syntax]

^^ yeah he's the guy i voted for - explained that

Chance, you should preface every post you make from here on out with this statement: Obama "yeah he's the guy i voted for - explained that."