OT: 2008 Elections

TRI · Post by **TRI** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 2:39 pm

It looks like it is going to be a very difficult year for the GOP. The changing demographics are very bad news for Republicans as single women are increasing are voting heavily for Democrats and increasing Latino vote which favors Democats by big margins. It looks like states such as Florida which are swing battle ground states will become Democratic leaning in the next ten years. Texas, which is solidly Republican could become more competitive. The future appears very grim for the GOP in future elections as the electorate continues to move left.

It appears that Obama with be the Democratic nominee because the super delegates are not going to divide the party base by giving the nomination to Hilliary Clinton.

My prediction is that Obama with win the nomination and the election and the GOP will lose even more seats in the US House of rep and the Senate.

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 3:17 pm

I would think Obama would be courting moderate Republicans and independents, but not Clinton. Obama has done far better among those groups in states with open primaries.

They were saying his only chance was in Philly and other big cities, whereas the rural part was going to be tough for him and for the Democratic nominee in the general.

Talk of spending up to $35 million each in PA alone.

JackB1 · Post by **JackB1** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 4:31 pm

looks like the Dems now have to figure out what to do about Michigan and FL,
since neither candidate will be able to get the minimum needed to win.
This is going to lead to a lot of controversy because it may decide the election. If Obama wins, then Hilary will claim she already won there, etc.
Howard Dean is pretty emphatic about sticking to the rules that the party laid out and FL and Michigan went ahead and broke. But it doesn't seem fair to penalize the people of those states for something they had nothing to do with.

Somehow they will have to come up with a solution, but one thing's for sure....everyone won't be happy with it.

Leebo33 · Post by **Leebo33** » Sat Mar 08, 2008 9:21 am

wco81 wrote:They were saying his only chance was in Philly and other big cities, whereas the rural part was going to be tough for him and for the Democratic nominee in the general.

Yeah, the rural counties PA counties have always been a problem for the dems. It's tough to push for gun control in areas with many guns and very little crime. It's hard when liberal democrats in the state have raised taxes and ignored these areas only to send the money to Philadelphia, a place that 95% of the rural Central PA residents will never see. I've lived in handful of places in PA and in the rural areas it seems like a good portion of the support for Democrats is from union members (school teachers, for example) or folks on some sort of government assistance. Then you have a place like Harrisburg that is a microcosm of the state with a liberal city and largely Republican suburbs.

Jackdog · Post by **Jackdog** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 4:37 am

I've brought this up before. But now the mainstream media has it.

http://www.abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story ... 788&page=1

Here are some of Wright's comments from his pulpit:

“The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing ‘God Bless America.’ No, no, no, God damn America, that’s in the Bible for killing innocent people,” he said in a 2003 sermon. “God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme.”

In addition to damning America, he told his congregation on the Sunday after Sept. 11, 2001 that the United States had brought on al Qaeda’s attacks because of its own terrorism.
“We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye,” Rev. Wright said in a sermon on Sept. 16, 2001.

“We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards. America’s chickens are coming home to roost,” he told his congregation.

In recorded sermons that may run afoul of IRS guidelines, sure to give the story legs - Wright compares Obama to Jesus, declares America a country controlled by “rich white people,” and claims Jesus was “a poor black man who lived in a country and who lived in a culture controlled by rich white people.” He goes on to claim that people are “hating” on Obama as he isn’t “white, privileged and rich,” as is Hillary Clinton. He closes by stating that, “Hillary ain’t never been called a nigger!”

During a Christmas sermon, Wright tried to compare Obama’s upbringing to Jesus at the hands of the Romans.

“Barack knows what it means living in a country and a culture that is controlled by rich white people,” Wright said. “Hillary would never know that.

“Hillary ain’t never been called a nigger. Hillary has never had a people defined as a non-person.”

In his Jan. 13 sermon, Wright said:

“Hillary is married to Bill, and Bill has been good to us. No he ain’t! Bill did us, just like he did Monica Lewinsky. He was riding dirty.”

“It’s pretty clear an indirect endorsement of Barack Obama - that’s not something you’re supposed to do according to the tax code,” said Andrew Walsh, a professor at Trinity College who specializes in religion in politics.

The tax code bans churches from participating in or intervening in a political campaign. Violations can result in the loss of a church’s tax exempt status.

Obama has a choice on where to be a member of a Church. This preacher of hate has been his minister for 20 years.He was married by this idiot and had both his daughters baptized by Wright. The simple, basic question is: Will he repudiate the hateful rhetoric of his preacher, and condemn his politics from the pulpit? Or, does he approve of his church’s message? He can’t condemn people on the one hand with racist charges, and follow a racist leader on the other. This is definitely a thorn in his side as Pennsylvania approaches. He needs to do something fast if he wants to survive, this has legs.

I am no fan of Hillary Clinton but since she had to repudiate Geraldine Ferraro for her clumsy and foolish identity-politics rhetoric, then Obama surely has to provide a better response to Wright than comparing him to a crazy uncle in the attic. Wright has a largely ceremonial position in the Obama campaign, but an obvious influence on Obama, as he named his book after a theme from Wright’s sermon.

What do you guys think would have happened if John McCain went to an all white church whose pastor spouted this kind of racist garbage? I believe it would be game over.

JackB1 · Post by **JackB1** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 2:48 pm

JackDog wrote:I've brought this up before. But now the mainstream media has it.

http://www.abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story ... 788&page=1

Obama has a choice on where to be a member of a Church. This preacher of hate has been his minister for 20 years.He was married by this idiot and had both his daughters baptized by Wright. The simple, basic question is: Will he repudiate the hateful rhetoric of his preacher, and condemn his politics from the pulpit? Or, does he approve of his church’s message? He can’t condemn people on the one hand with racist charges, and follow a racist leader on the other. This is definitely a thorn in his side as Pennsylvania approaches. He needs to do something fast if he wants to survive, this has legs.

I am no fan of Hillary Clinton but since she had to repudiate Geraldine Ferraro for her clumsy and foolish identity-politics rhetoric, then Obama surely has to provide a better response to Wright than comparing him to a crazy uncle in the attic. Wright has a largely ceremonial position in the Obama campaign, but an obvious influence on Obama, as he named his book after a theme from Wright’s sermon.

What do you guys think would have happened if John McCain went to an all white church whose pastor spouted this kind of racist garbage? I believe it would be game over.

I agree this is a problem Jack. I wouldn't let someone who's principles are so different from my own marry me and I certainly wouldn't continue to be a member of his church. If this story gets big, this will be a huge thorn in Obama's side and if he gets the nomination, I'm sure McCain will continue to bring this up.

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 3:26 pm

I heard Obama has distanced himself from this guy. But his bigger problem is, 13% of people surveyed in a poll thinks he's a Muslim.

And McCain has been linked with some guy named Hagge or something like that who's said some stuff.

TheHiddenTrack · Post by **TheHiddenTrack** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 3:40 pm

Who cares what his pastor says? That doesn't mean he agrees with everything he says. There are a lot of different reasons you can join a church. I don't think this should be an issue. And obviously McCain has the same issue with that other religious nut. Pastors and religious people often have crazy beliefs, most of what this guy says is probably fine.

And really his claims that you quoted are:
- White people are in power
- Institutional discrimination
- Americans care more about their own deaths than other countries deaths
- Obama and Clinton have different backgrounds

While I don't agree with the way he said everything I don't think what he said was over-the-top outrageous. And it's not Obama's responsibility.

JackB1 · Post by **JackB1** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 3:49 pm

wco81 wrote:I heard Obama has distanced himself from this guy. But his bigger problem is, 13% of people surveyed in a poll thinks he's a Muslim.

Probably those same people that think that Iraq was behind 9/11. You put something out there...repeat it enough times and people will start to believe it to be true.

Brando70 · Post by **Brando70** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 4:05 pm

JackDog wrote: Obama has a choice on where to be a member of a Church. This preacher of hate has been his minister for 20 years.He was married by this idiot and had both his daughters baptized by Wright. The simple, basic question is: Will he repudiate the hateful rhetoric of his preacher, and condemn his politics from the pulpit? Or, does he approve of his church’s message?

He already has said he didn't agree at all with Wright's message about 9/11. I agree he has to repudiate those comments, but he already has. And we don't exactly follow everything our pastors say. Mine told me to keep my power dry until I was married.

JackDog wrote:What do you guys think would have happened if John McCain went to an all white church whose pastor spouted this kind of racist garbage? I believe it would be game over.

Something similar did happen. McCain was endorsed by Rev. John Hagee, a pastor of a huge congregation who has said that we have to attack Iran to trigger The Rapture, that Hurricane Katrina was deliberately sent by God because New Orleans was full of sin, and Harry Potter indoctrinates children into the occult. What did McCain do? Gladly accepted his endorsement. Joe Lieberman compared the Rev. Hagee to Moses.

The point is all of us are associated with people who say s*** we disagree with but who we love and respect. My father and I don't see eye to eye at all politically, and he's said lots of stuff I couldn't disagree with more. But he's my dad and I love him. However, I've followed my own path and my actions show that. I feel the same way about these politicians. I don't think there's anything in Obama's record to show he hates white people or that he thinks we had it coming on 9/11. If he did, he wouldn't be a viable candidate.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 4:11 pm

A column on a possible Republican victory scenario during the general election campaign this summer:

http://www.newsweek.com/id/123248

I've shared this belief since Super Tuesday. The Democrats are committing fratricide.

I don't buy this, "What breaks them down makes them stronger" idea. Maybe within the party, but not with the perception of the general public, which is what matters most.

Take care,
PK

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 8:36 pm

A GOP victory is not farfetched at all.

Even if Clinton wasn't pulling all stops to try to win.

Either Obama or Clinton would have hard time winning the white male vote or at least getting close to even in a lot of key battleground states like OH.

That's been the problem with previous Democratic nominees and it certainly won't help that the nominee won't be a white male this time.

On top of that, a lot of the new voters Obama is getting in the primaries will be alienated and stay home if Clinton gets the nomination with fewer delegates and lower popular vote.

Naples39 · Post by **Naples39** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 10:30 pm

I think it is absolutely relevant what Obama's preacher says. Where a person chooses to go to church says a great deal about someone's beliefs and values. Obviously it doesn't mean Obama believes everything he says, but if the preacher repeatedly makes inflammatory, or even inappropriate remarks, and Obama chooses to go back for 20 years, well that says something to me.

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 10:51 pm

Whats lost in this is what the actual candidate says...

The c*** and her people have said all kinds of crazy s*** the last few weeks but what seems to be sticking is what Obama's preacher said years ago....

I know it matters but it just seems very out of proportion...

Where did these tapes all come from?...couldnt be the pig hereself could it?

Post by **Jared** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 12:51 am

Preacher of hate? Hardly...he holds views that Obama disagrees with, but that's a bit of an overstatement. And if you compare Wright's views (someone who has resigned from the campaign and who's comments Obama has condemned) to Hagee's (someone who's support McCain actively sought), there's no contest. He's said that Muslims have a mandate to kill Christians, that God wiped out New Orleans b/c of a gay pride parade, that Catholics are a cult, and he pushes for war against Iran in order to fulfill his interpretation of prophecy.

It seems like there's a big double standard here...Obama can condemn Wright's views and it's a big story, whereas McCain can court Hagee and it's nothing big.

FatPitcher · Post by **FatPitcher** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 2:04 am

Jared wrote:Preacher of hate? Hardly...he holds views that Obama disagrees with, but that's a bit of an overstatement. And if you compare Wright's views (someone who has resigned from the campaign and who's comments Obama has condemned) to Hagee's (someone who's support McCain actively sought), there's no contest. He's said that Muslims have a mandate to kill Christians, that God wiped out New Orleans b/c of a gay pride parade, that Catholics are a cult, and he pushes for war against Iran in order to fulfill his interpretation of prophecy.

It seems like there's a big double standard here...Obama can condemn Wright's views and it's a big story, whereas McCain can court Hagee and it's nothing big.

If McCain went to this guy's church for 20 years, you'd have a point. Or if he titled his autobiography after a sermon of Hagee's. Or if he'd appointed Hagee to his Caucasian American Religious Leadership Committee. But unfortunately the reality is the McCain didn't choose to go to a crazy racist church for 20 years and Obama did. Of course, I've heard my share of crazy things from pastors at various churches I attended in my youth, so I can't blame the guy too much.

Brando70 · Post by **Brando70** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 11:10 am

But did Wright deliver these kinds of sermons all the time? Or have the media pulled out a few select ones that sound nuts and hateful?

I'm not saying it's not relevant. I'm saying I don't think it's a make or break issue. Has Obama shown that he internalized any of this hateful rhetoric? I haven't seen it. That's more important to me.

Post by **Jared** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 11:11 am

Obama didn't entitled his autobiography "9/11, We Got What We Deserved"...he titled it based on an apolitical sermon that inspired him. Obama has repeatedly said that he doesn't agree with these sermons and some of Wright's opinions, and there's no evidence that Obama shares his pastor's provocative political views. However, Obama does agree with other important parts of his pastor's message (like the concept of the social Gospel, for example).

And there is a clear difference where Obama has clearly distanced himself from Wright's political views, whereas McCain is recruiting (and not repudiating) someone who's views are much more radical than Wright. It's a huge double standard.

Leebo33 · Post by **Leebo33** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 11:18 am

Naples39 wrote:I think it is absolutely relevant what Obama's preacher says. Where a person chooses to go to church says a great deal about someone's beliefs and values. Obviously it doesn't mean Obama believes everything he says, but if the preacher repeatedly makes inflammatory, or even inappropriate remarks, and Obama chooses to go back for 20 years, well that says something to me.

It says something to me too. If my preacher talked like that I'd never return and find a new place to go. Of course, if my preacher said God damn the United States he probably wouldn't make it through the rest of his "sermon" anyway.

Leebo33 · Post by **Leebo33** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 11:38 am

Brando70 wrote:I'm not saying it's not relevant. I'm saying I don't think it's a make or break issue. Has Obama shown that he internalized any of this hateful rhetoric? I haven't seen it. That's more important to me.

Obama needs white middle class voters in battleground states to vote for him if he has any chance. Many moderate Republicans, at least here in PA, were really sick of the influence of the religious right on the Republican party. I know I was sick of hearing debates on gay marriage. Not that it's fair, but I think moderates expect McCain to cater to the religious nuts of his party. This is an area where Obama had a chance to gain some ground. Now the best his supporters can say is "McCain has religious nuts as friends too or it is so unfair that there is a double standard." I think Obama has a chance to get our attention, but he's not going to win an election if it comes down to a lesser of two evils. He needs to distinguish himself as a better alternative.

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 5:49 pm

Brando70 wrote:But did Wright deliver these kinds of sermons all the time? Or have the media pulled out a few select ones that sound nuts and hateful?

I'm not saying it's not relevant. I'm saying I don't think it's a make or break issue. Has Obama shown that he internalized any of this hateful rhetoric? I haven't seen it. That's more important to me.

My question is where did the media get this stuff?

I smell the garbage clinton campain...its been trash from the get go. A pure reflection of the b*tch herself.

I agree with you ...he doesnt sound or come of at all like that doofus and that is what counts.

JackB1 · Post by **JackB1** » Sat Mar 15, 2008 11:24 pm

The problem with all this pastor stuff, is that we are hearing these quotes out of context. These things may be 1% of everything he says. Obama might like everything else about that church and he should stop going there because this guys spouts off some b.s. every now and then? I really don't think a candidates religious practices or beliefs should even be part of the campaign anyway. I dont like mixing church and state at all. I also gotta believe that Hillary's camp has been getting this stuff out there.

FatPitcher · Post by **FatPitcher** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 4:09 am

Jared wrote:Obama didn't entitled his autobiography "9/11, We Got What We Deserved"...he titled it based on an apolitical sermon that inspired him. Obama has repeatedly said that he doesn't agree with these sermons and some of Wright's opinions, and there's no evidence that Obama shares his pastor's provocative political views. However, Obama does agree with other important parts of his pastor's message (like the concept of the social Gospel, for example).

And there is a clear difference where Obama has clearly distanced himself from Wright's political views, whereas McCain is recruiting (and not repudiating) someone who's views are much more radical than Wright. It's a huge double standard.

Excuse me while I roll my eyes. There's no way you'd believe what you are saying if the party affiliations were different. Calling the pastor's views "provocative" is an absurd attempt at making it sound like there is some legitimacy to them or that they are worthy of rational consideration. They're repulsive and political at the core, with a thin veneer of Christianity (and a healthy dose of profanity, oddly enough)layered on top.

As far as the "social(ist) gospel" goes, show me where Jesus said to force other people to take care of the poor. If I recall correctly, he didn't tell the rich young ruler to equalize wealth distribution in his sphere of influence--he told him to sell his own possessions and give the money to the poor. He didn't even advocate any sort of political change at all; it was all about personal responsibility. But I guess that's a whole different discussion, and I really am not much of a theologian.

The problem is most certainly not quotes taken out of context, as JackB suggested The problem is that Obama apparently agrees with the pastor's insane ravings often enough that he stick with the church and puts the guy to work in his campaign. It was only once the crazy came out on the national stage and became a political liability that Obama stuffed him back in the closet. He can say all he wants to about how he disagrees or condemns this and that; actions are louder than words.

On a side note, I stayed in Hyde Park in Chicago for a few months several years ago. Rev. Wright and Farrakhan (who also lives there) are two different manifestations of the same ugly spirit that is prevalent there. They may exploit different religions to promote their racist views, but their aims are the same.

RobVarak · Post by **RobVarak** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 10:23 am

Jared wrote:Obama didn't entitled his autobiography "9/11, We Got What We Deserved"...he titled it based on an apolitical sermon that inspired him. Obama has repeatedly said that he doesn't agree with these sermons and some of Wright's opinions, and there's no evidence that Obama shares his pastor's provocative political views. However, Obama does agree with other important parts of his pastor's message (like the concept of the social Gospel, for example).

And there is a clear difference where Obama has clearly distanced himself from Wright's political views, whereas McCain is recruiting (and not repudiating) someone who's views are much more radical than Wright. It's a huge double standard.

The difference, and the problem from Obama's perspective, is that this clashes with the mythology of the candidacy in a way that McCain's courting of various evangelicals does not.

McCain is a politician doing the sausage making of politics. It's not his pastor. He hasn't personally embraced the man by having him officiate his marriage and attending his church for years. He's almost blatant in the cynical way that he holds his nose and courts the religious right. Some may see that as a bigger transgression in itself, and that's a legitimate conclusion.

Obama is the messianic leader who doesn't just advocate a new way, but "embodies" it as a "transformative" figure. He's supposed to wave his magic wand and help us rise above race and socio-economic divisiveness. Attaching himself for years to a race-baiting huckster who markets his product with anti-American rhetoric, anti-semitism and ash-binned Black Panther slogans does not fit the narrative. With the exception of sex, the press and public love nothing more than pouncing on hypocrisy, and the Obama-Wright relationship certainly puts blood in the water in this respect.

Moreover, this is the downside to being a young and inexperienced candidate. It's the same reason that the Rezko scandal sticks to him despite the presence of any smoking gun with respet to Obama. With so little record to run on and nothing more than well-intentioned policy papers and good wishes available to criticize, the public and media are going to look for something to fill in the blanks. Being a D.C. insider for decades has more than its share of downside as well, but there is certainly less impetus to scrutinize McCain in this way because he's more of a known quantity to the media.

I'm not saying that there isn't a technical double standard at play, but the world's full of them and they're not all that inappropriate.

TheGamer · Post by **TheGamer** » Sun Mar 16, 2008 10:28 am

Trinity is my wife's family's church. I've listened to Rev quite a few times. He's pretty consistent. But to say that Obama lives by Rev's tenents is to me ridiculous. Regardless that he's been there 20 years. What people forget is that Obama's African influence left the family when he was 2 years old. He was raised by his mom and her parents. All white people. It would seem to me that if he was "living" by Rev's "guidelines", it would smack in the face of the most important people in his life outside of his wife and kids.