OT: 2008 Elections

[F308GTB]

Yes, history will be made. Fear has stricken my wife, a longtime Republican. She plans to vote for Hilary in the Texas primaries. Obama scares the pee out of her (lack of foreign policy experience being first and foremost). The whole "I didn't vote to go into Iraq" thing is hogwash in her opinion, and I share it. Hindsight is 20/20, so of course his decision looks good now. But based on the data provided by the executive branch, which we know now was bogus, how could you not vote for going in. And this whole "change" thing? Give me a break.

[pk500]

So, James, what are Hillary's extensive foreign policy credentials other than serving as the den leader of the White House Explorer post during her husband's presidency, sitting in on eight years of field trips in the Oval Office?

I just find any trumpeting of Hillary's "experience" to be hilarious, proof that P.T. Barnum was right.

And her record on economic issues? Just look at my post on the previous page regarding her broken promises to upstate New Yorkers during her first seven years as junior senator from this state.

Hillary also did a bang-up job with that national healthcare program in 1994, too.

This shouldn't be perceived as a backhanded endorsement of Obama. But Hillary? It's been a long time since I've seen a candidate run on a platform of experience and effectiveness who in reality has so little of either.

Let's face it: This woman never would have become a national political figure if not for her husband. The same accusations about family ties can be made for the current occupant of the Oval Office. See the connection about their ineffectiveness as national leaders?

I do.

Take care,
PK

[F308GTB]

Don't discount being a First Lady. I imagine there's quite a bit of "pillow talk" that goes on between Presidents and their wives. Do you ask your wife for advice at times? Bounce things off her? I expect Bill did that, but with some pretty sensitive data. Sure it's not firsthand experience, but being surrounded by that environment for 8 years in the White House and then additional time as a Senator means something.

Broken promises? Come on, everyone should know by now not to trust the promises politicians make. Watching some of the Democratic debates this year has been comical. Both candidates are promising pie-in-the-sky programs. They may have good intentions, but the realists out there know promises are only fulfilled if other players involved endorse them. That darn majority of votes thing. Both candidates are jokes in my book.

[pk500]

Pillow talk is relevant political experience? Man, maybe anyone can run for this job. You never know: Laura Bush might become the junior senator from Texas and run in 2016. She's had eight years of pillow talk with GW and has achieved as many successful policy initiatives as Hillary while occupying 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. -- zero.

It's one thing to claim experience. It's another to show results. Clinton has few tangible results on her resume. Obama's resume isn't bursting at the seams, either.

But he's not the candidate running on the notion of being ready for day one, the candidate of experience.

It doesn't really matter, anyways. Even if Hillary pulls out a miracle run for the nomination, McCain will eat her alive in debates any time the topic of experience is raised. He'll also kill her over her flip-flop regarding Iraq.

Take care,
PK

[Naples39]

I've always found the talk of first lady as experience pretty implausible. Would you buy stock in a company who just named a new CEO whose executive 'experience' was based on her being married to a CEO of a large, successful company? I know I certainly wouldn't.

[JRod]

Here's how I feel...

To play devil's advocate for a minute. Let's say if America had already elected an African American and a Women as president and we weren't batting 1.000 on white males presidents.

Would America be so smitten with Obama and would women flock to Hillary? I think these two wouldn't have made it past Iowa and Edwards, Richardson or Biden would be the Dem frontrunners.

[pk500]

You're probably right, John.

Another scenario: Let's say Bush was an effective, popular president, and change wasn't a campaign mantra almost demanded by the American public. Then who would be the nominees in both parties?

Take care,
PK

[JRod]

You're probably right, John.

Another scenario: Let's say Bush was an effective, popular president, and change wasn't a campaign mantra almost demanded by the American public. Then who would be the nominees in both parties?

Take care,
PK

If Bush was effective, it would have swayed the tide over to a mostly conservative christian nation. I think Huckabee would be the R nominee.

As for the Dem, really tough to say. Maybe Richardson because the experience factor would be much more of an issue. Bush being competent would knock out Obama, Hillary, Edwards and Biden. I think you would have see seen really conservative D's run. Maybe Evan Bayh from Indiana or even Lieberman.

I think Richardson would be in the pack but I don't think anyone out of the Democratic pack would have stood a chance. It probably would have to be a war-hawk, conservative, and very religious to win the nomination on the D side. Or it would be a western candidate, say the Governor of Montana or the Senator from that as well.

[greggsand]

You're probably right, John.

Another scenario: Let's say Bush was an effective, popular president, and change wasn't a campaign mantra almost demanded by the American public. Then who would be the nominees in both parties?

Take care,
PK

Republican: Jeb Bush (oy)
Dems: Edwards (oy)

[pk500]

I agree, Gregg. What Yiddish for vomit?

By the way, did you know John Edwards is the son of a mill worker?

Take care,
PK

[wco81]

Hilary did have policy initiative successes, like the Children's Health Insurance Program.

But yeah, her claims about foreign policy are dubious, as are every candidate's claims. Being in the Senate 20 years like McCain doesn't really relate to being in the executive branch, working with the State and Defense departments to make policy.

If Hilary was the nominee, the GOP will basically play up the notion of a female commander-in-chief and kill her right there.

Oh and Obama did express at the time, even though he wasn't in the Senate, opposition to the war. He was probably in the Illinois state legislature but there weren't many politicians being vocally against the war back then.

Hey if Hilary admitted the vote was wrong, then she might be doing better in the primaries. But she wants to be more hawkish to compensate for possible biases against her gender and so she made that bed.

White males will never support her. They probably ultimately won't support Obama either, compared to McCain.

There's speculation that this subprime problem and now the credit crisis roiling the financial system will ultimately have to be bailed out by the feds.

And estimates are that it may cost as much as $1 trillion.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1aa2daea-e48d ... fd2ac.html

There will be no new programs if that is the case.

[TheHiddenTrack]

Here's how I feel...

To play devil's advocate for a minute. Let's say if America had already elected an African American and a Women as president and we weren't batting 1.000 on white males presidents.

Would America be so smitten with Obama and would women flock to Hillary? I think these two wouldn't have made it past Iowa and Edwards, Richardson or Biden would be the Dem frontrunners.

Obama is the front runner because he's the first inspiring politician to run for president since Bill. Clinton is there because of her name (like GW was) and people connect her to good era in the 90's, and she's a good politician that has connections that help raise money. In my opinion, race and gender have helped get a few more people out to vote than would otherwise, but they aren't where they are because of it, the rest of the democratic field was mediocre and they would be where they are now, out of the race.

[TheHiddenTrack]

You're probably right, John.

Another scenario: Let's say Bush was an effective, popular president, and change wasn't a campaign mantra almost demanded by the American public. Then who would be the nominees in both parties?

Take care,
PK

I think that's had a significant effect on the dynamic of this election, but that's a really tough hypothetical question. That would change so many things, Iraq by itself would change the complexion of this election.

[TheHiddenTrack]

Yes, history will be made. Fear has stricken my wife, a longtime Republican. She plans to vote for Hilary in the Texas primaries. Obama scares the pee out of her (lack of foreign policy experience being first and foremost). The whole "I didn't vote to go into Iraq" thing is hogwash in her opinion, and I share it. Hindsight is 20/20, so of course his decision looks good now. But based on the data provided by the executive branch, which we know now was bogus, how could you not vote for going in. And this whole "change" thing? Give me a break.

"Hindsight is 20/20, so of course his decision looks good now"

What does that mean? He was right, and he was right for obvious reasons that he gave in his speech. I'm not saying he's an amazing candidate with overwhelming credentials.

To quote George Carlin, (in reference to our politicians) "This is the best we can do, garbage in, garbage out." http://youtube.com/watch?v=0u6lCBnRoHQ

Who was the last candidate that impressed you, and why?

[XXXIV]

Obama is the front runner because he's the first inspiring politician to run for president since Bill.

OR maybe he is the only one running in either party with anything to add and people see her for the c*** she is....just a thought....

[TheHiddenTrack]

double post.

[TheHiddenTrack]

Obama is the front runner because he's the first inspiring politician to run for president since Bill.

OR maybe he is the only one running in either party with anything to add and people see her for the c*** she is....just a thought....

Great analysis. And maybe you're an idiot.

[F308GTB]

Who was the last candidate that impressed you, and why?

George Bush (daddy Bush, not the idiot son). Wonderful service to the nation from being a WWII veteran, ambassador to UN, CIA, VP, ... A true patriot with an established resume.

Who was the last president to impress me? Clinton. A balanced budget goes a long way in my book.

[TheHiddenTrack]

Who was the last candidate that impressed you, and why?

George Bush (daddy Bush, not the idiot son). Wonderful service to the nation from being a WWII veteran, ambassador to UN, CIA, VP, ... A true patriot with an established resume.

Who was the last president to impress me? Clinton. A balanced budget goes a long way in my book.

Did Clinton impress you before he became president?

[F308GTB]

Who was the last candidate that impressed you, and why?

George Bush (daddy Bush, not the idiot son). Wonderful service to the nation from being a WWII veteran, ambassador to UN, CIA, VP, ... A true patriot with an established resume.

Who was the last president to impress me? Clinton. A balanced budget goes a long way in my book.

Did Clinton impress you before he became president?

Nope.

[XXXIV]

Obama is the front runner because he's the first inspiring politician to run for president since Bill.

OR maybe he is the only one running in either party with anything to add and people see her for the c*** she is....just a thought....

Great analysis. And maybe you're an idiot.

Ofcourse Im an idiot I dont see the greatness that is your godess...

[wco81]

Who was the last candidate that impressed you, and why?

George Bush (daddy Bush, not the idiot son). Wonderful service to the nation from being a WWII veteran, ambassador to UN, CIA, VP, ... A true patriot with an established resume.

He had a great resume but didn't he flip-flop (they probably didn't use the term back then) on abortion and what he used to call voodoo economics?

He thought the Gulf War alone would carry him to re-election and then there is that clip of him checking his watch during a debate.

So he wasn't that great a campaigner but he had a weak opponent the first time (plus he was the heir to Reagan) and Perot stabbed him in the back.

[TheHiddenTrack]

OR maybe he is the only one running in either party with anything to add and people see her for the c*** she is....just a thought....

Great analysis. And maybe you're an idiot.

Ofcourse Im an idiot I dont see the greatness that is your godess...

What are you talking about? Did you even read what I wrote? I'm not a huge fan of any of the candidates, but I'm voting for Obama.

[XXXIV]

Great analysis. And maybe you're an idiot.

Ofcourse Im an idiot I dont see the greatness that is your godess...

What are you talking about? Did you even read what I wrote? I'm not a huge fan of any of the candidates, but I'm voting for Obama.

I have no idea what Im talking about ...afterall Im an idiot....

[TheHiddenTrack]

Ofcourse Im an idiot I dont see the greatness that is your godess...

What are you talking about? Did you even read what I wrote? I'm not a huge fan of any of the candidates, but I'm voting for Obama.

I have no idea what Im talking about ...afterall Im an idiot....

Oh just go have another beer, it will be okay, even if a woman gets elected.