"Palin is Hillary's Gift to Obama"

[naked gent]

Either you support Democratic views, or you don't. It's really that simple. If you don't, and if you care more about Personalities than about Issues ... then by all means, vote for McCain. Nobody is going to stop anyone from doing so.

way too simplistic

and wrong

and i think u might confuse leadership with personality

I think midnight is exactly right chance. Issues matter.....and they should matter more than leadership. Why would anyone care how good a leader a candidate might be if they disagree with them on the issues?

In fact if a candidate is a good leader but I think he's wrong on the issues I'd be a damn fool to vote for him since he's likely to successfully pursue issues I'm against.

I'd rather vote for a poor leader who agrees with me than a good leader who doesn't.

BTW by their actions the McCain campaign disagrees with you on the value of leadership vs. personality......unless you believe Mrs. Palin was chosen for her leadership qualities and that is the prime reason she's been received so well.

 

[chance1]

I think midnight is exactly right chance. Issues matter.....and they should matter more than leadership. Why would anyone care how good a leader a candidate might be if they disagree with them on the issues?

In fact if a candidate is a good leader but I think he's wrong on the issues I'd be a damn fool to vote for him since he's likely to successfully pursue issues I'm against.

I'd rather vote for a poor leader who agrees with me than a good leader who doesn't.

BTW by their actions the McCain campaign disagrees with you on the value of leadership vs. personality......unless you believe Mrs. Palin was chosen for her leadership qualities and that is the prime reason she's been received so well.

u misunderstood me or i wasnt clear

sure issues matter

for sure and my personal reasons for supporting mccain rest on issues as well as leadership

my point is "personality" is not so important

as this is not highschool with the prom king

and u really need to get off palin - it's a LOSER

simple stupid answer is id rather have inexperience in the 2 slot than the 1 slot

 

[Spensed]

simple stupid answer is id rather have inexperience in the 2 slot than the 1 slot

A number of folk have posted links showing Obama's experience both in the Senate and State Senate. So your simple stupid answer is just that. LOL.

 

[MystikWizard]

^^Some people are capable of only single-line thought, as in voting only "issues" or only personality or party.

Others are interested in a much broader perspective.

When, as a Democrat, I twice voted for Giuliani for Mayor, my decision was based on a number of elements, only one of which was "issues," and that was true for millions of Democrats in New York City. For example it doesn't matter where a candidate says he stands on issues if there's legitimate concern that he won't do as he says.

Your attempts to define me and my decision making may be perfectly honest in characterizing your view of me but it has nothing to do with the truth of who I am and how I choose which lever to pull on Election Day.

So, what you are saying is that you have no problem voting for someone, even if you don't agree with where they stand on the issues, at all?

In that case we could use a hypothetical example that I don't agree with any of Adolph Hitler's views or policies ... but since I know he should be a strong leader, I should vote for him, right?

What issues of McCain, do you either support or not support? I'm anxious to hear your opinions on his policies.

 

[chance1]

A number of folk have posted links showing Obama's experience both in the Senate and State Senate. So your simple stupid answer is just that. LOL.

yep

keep telling urself that

Obama is EXPERIENCED

try selling that one

why don't u ask the american public?

oh yeah i forgot - they're stupid

 

[Spensed]

^ We'll see this time whether enough of them aren't.

A lot of the US public did vote Bush in a second time and look were we are now. If that isn't stupid, I don't know what is.

Not all gay voters vote for candidates, who oppose legislation against anti-gay discrimination an' such. Oh never mind. LOL.

 

[chance1]

^ We'll see this time whether enough of them aren't.

A lot of the US public did vote Bush in a second time and look were we are now. If that isn't stupid, I don't know what is.

Not all gay voters vote for candidates, who oppose legislation against anti-gay discrimination an' such. Oh never mind. LOL.

yes we will indeed

u r the master of the obvious i see

so we're clear - ur smart - regular people aren't

i get it

and as snap has suggested .................

cya

and a final farewell LOL

 

[chance1]

Spensed why bother? Chance1 can be quoted as saying McCain is NOT a liar... anyone who says something like that loses all credibility in my book.

ur breakin my heart newbie

 

[Spensed]

Spensed why bother? Chance1 can be quoted as saying McCain is NOT a liar... anyone who says something like that loses all credibility in my book.

Clearly so. But we, at least, have to try to save gay folk, who support anti-gay candidates, from themselves.

They can thank us when Obama gets elected. LOL.

 

[NickCole]

A number of folk have posted links showing Obama's experience both in the Senate and State Senate. So your simple stupid answer is just that. LOL.

His experience is extremely thin for a Presidential candidate, and he has never distinquished himself with a consistent achievement. His tenure as a community organizer, state Senator and US Senator have all been unremarkable. All the legislation he claims credit for has been the work of others that he attached himself to. Despite being intelligent and well educated, he's never authored a piece of legislation.

Being somewhere isn't experience; it's what you do there that counts.

 

[MystikWizard]

His experience is extremely thin for a Presidential candidate, and he has never distinquished himself with a consistent achievement. His tenure as a community organizer, state Senator and US Senator have all been unremarkable. All the legislation he claims credit for has been the work of others that he attached himself to. Despite being intelligent and well educated, he's never authored a piece of legislation.

Being somewhere isn't experience; it's what you do there that counts.

Some people that recognize what the dire alternative is, are willing to take that chance. I and others are still interested in hearing what policies of McCain you agree with, that you would consider supporting him.

http://www.justusboys.com/forum/showthread.php?t=231605

 

[NickCole]

So, what you are saying is that you have no problem voting for someone, even if you don't agree with where they stand on the issues, at all?

No that's not what I said.

I don't agree with either Obama's or McCain's positions on all the issues, and I don't disagree with every position of either one. I also didn't agree with all of Hillary Clinton's positions, which I've posted about over the years here.

In that case we could use a hypothetical example that I don't agree with any of Adolph Hitler's views or policies ... but since I know he should be a strong leader, I should vote for him, right?

If that works for you.

It wouldn't for me.

Do you really need me to list the reasons I wouldn't vote for Hitler?

What issues of McCain, do you either support or not support? I'm anxious to hear your opinions on his policies.

Unfortunately you'll have to continue to be anxious. You're not one of the people I trust to have that conversation with.

 

[NickCole]

Some people that recognize what the dire alternative is, are willing to take that chance.

Yes I know.

Millions of them.

I don't go along with what others are doing just because they're doing it.

I do what my judgement tells me is the best choice.

There are plusses and minuses with both Obama and McCain. Some people recognize Obama as "the dire alternative." I've been hearing it from both sides.

 

[MystikWizard]

Unfortunately you'll have to continue to be anxious. You're not one of the people I trust to have that conversation with.

When you are ready to discuss actual issues and policies, instead of Personalities, please let me know. Until then, ICO is right. Back on the ol' Ignore List.

 

[NickCole]

ICO is right. Back on the ol' Ignore List.

Gee and it's not even my birthday!

 

[Spensed]

His experience is extremely thin for a Presidential candidate, and he has never distinquished himself with a consistent achievement. His tenure as a community organizer, state Senator and US Senator have all been unremarkable. All the legislation he claims credit for has been the work of others that he attached himself to. Despite being intelligent and well educated, he's never authored a piece of legislation.

Being somewhere isn't experience; it's what you do there that counts.

Your jaundiced assessment simply doesn't tally with the facts.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.co...hris-matt.html

Also, unlike McCain's, Obama's Senate record on gay issues is highly rated by the Human Rights Campaign. Obama scores 89% to McCain's 33%.

http://www.hrc.org/documents/HRCscorecard2006.pdf

 

[NickCole]

Your jaundiced assessment simply doesn't tally with the facts.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.co...hris-matt.html

My assessment is spot-on with the facts, and Andrew Sullivan is as insane about Obama as he was about Bush in 2000 and 2004, and as he was about Iraq. His track record is not good. I'll be gracious and not mention other stuff but bottom line: his judgment cannot be trusted.

Also, unlike McCain's, Obama's Senate record on gay issues is highly rated by the Human Rights Campaign. Obama scores 89% to McCain's 33%.

[URL]http://www.hrc.org/documents/HRCscorecard2006.pdf[/URL]

Of those seven issues the only one I care emphatically about is the first, and both Obama and McCain voted the right way. That one would be a deal breaker for me. McCain got it right.

According to your link Obama voted against this:

Senators were asked to co-sponsor legislation (formerly called the Permanent Partners Immigration Act) that would amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to provide same-sex partners of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents the same immigration benefits legal spouses of U.S. residents enjoy.​

and that's a good example of what frustrates me about Obama. It's not marriage, what possible reason could he have for refusing that legislation? Although I don't personally place this as a top priority, for many gay people, for the gay political agenda, this is essential stuff and it's something that the Fed has to deal with because the States cannot. The Democratic candidate --if he wants gays to vote for him because he's a Democrat-- should have voted yes.

I think Obama said all he needs to about Judicial appointments by revealing he wanted to vote for Roberts and was only talked out of it because doing so would compromise his own ambition.

As for the other issues, I don't want Federal money going to sex education. I'd support Congress doing away with it altogether because I think that's something that should be determined and funded by local and state governments.

The Medicaid for low-income HIV+ Americans is a good idea but the legislation, IMO, was badly put together because it shouldn't be a "choice" for the state but a requirement -- if it's Federal money then I believe it should be equal access no matter where an HIV+ person lives. I'd have voted against it too. IMO that's not the way Federal legislation should be written.

The hate crimes law that the Senate voted on did not include gender identity, which meant even the Human Rights Campaign didn't support that legislation -- so giving that to Obama for voting for it is disingenuous. And aside from that, I'm not convinced that "hate crimes" as defined in that legislation ought to receive extra Federal funds or assistance. What makes beating up a gay man any more deserving of Federal assistance than beating up an old white heterosexual woman?

 

[RandomAccess]

and that's a good example of what frustrates me about Obama. It's not marriage, what possible reason could he have for refusing that legislation?

Um. . . political expedience? Obviously the legislation he's chosen for support over the years has been carefully vetted for "how it would look in the campaign." If he doesn't support it, he can't be attacked for it.

Nick, my friend, I know he's not ideal on all the issues, but he's a damned-sight better than McCain. "Small steps?" McCain just scares the ever-lovin' shit outta me!

 

[NickCole]

Um. . . political expedience? Obviously the legislation he's chosen for support over the years has been carefully vetted for "how it would look in the campaign." If he doesn't support it, he can't be attacked for it.

Fair enough.

But my point stands that it tarnishes citing Obama's strength as a candidate for gay rights.

Nick, my friend, I know he's not ideal on all the issues, but he's a damned-sight better than McCain. "Small steps?" McCain just scares the ever-lovin' shit outta me!

McCain doesn't scare me any more than Obama does.

My primary concern with McCain is Palin. Even if McCain lives through his Presidency, Palin could accumulate a lot of power during those years and would be positioned to run for POTUS. I don't want to hand her that power.

My friend, I am looking for reasons to vote for Obama but I'm not finding them from Obama or his supporters.

 

[naked gent]

yep

keep telling urself that

Obama is EXPERIENCED

try selling that one

Hey chance haven't you heard....you don't need to be experienced to be president......just ask John McCain.