News   Aug 02, 2024
Forma's Forest of Rebar Approaches Grade
 2.5K     1 
News   Aug 02, 2024
27-Storey Tower With Above-Grade Parking Proposed in Downtown Burlington
 4.3K     3 
News   Aug 02, 2024
Out of Office Space: How Developers are Responding to Changes in Work Habits
 1.7K     4 

U.S. Elections 2008

Who will be the next US president?

  • John McCain

    Votes: 8 7.8%

  • Barack Obama

    Votes: 80 77.7%

  • Other

    Votes: 15 14.6%
  • Total voters
    103
Darkstar416 said:
I totally agree. I wasn't sure how he was going to handle that maelstrom, but he did so powerfully, eloquently and bluntly.

Still, I am not sure if Americans will remember his speech or the preachers more vividly.
Click to expand...


It won't win him any votes from Hillary's camp (less educated, white collar whites) but it will shore up his support base (educated whites).

It was a very unpolitical move, and that's probably why it was so refreshing.
 
Roy G Biv said:
It won't win him any votes from Hillary's camp (less educated, white collar whites) but it will shore up his support base (educated whites).

It was a very unpolitical move, and that's probably why it was so refreshing.
Click to expand...

I've been over this uneducated vs educated argument before, Hillary has significant support from educated voters. His support base isn't educated whites, its an unorthodox coalition of african americans, youth voters of all educational backgrounds, and some independents. Its true that on average Obama gets slightly more of the PH.D, MA, and BS/BA crowd in states he wins (he has been known to win 60% among educated people, whereas she wins by 50% margins in states she wins typically), but Hillary has pulled strongly in states like Texas, California, New York (and most the "big states") among the educated crowds and he hasn't won a signifcant majority there.

To reduce this primary to saying all Hillary's base is uneducated and Obama's support is educated is a bias that isn't true.

Personally I only have a college degree (diploma in Canada) and have 80 credit hours, and I actually hope to finish out a bachelors degree in Ontario eventually... But I consider myself among the better-educated crowd (I earned 60 of those hours in a university setting) and I have typically supported Hillary. But I also like Obama, and this primary and caucus season has drained my emotions. I dislike seeing two capable people tear EACH OTHER apart. Obama's team has been playing so many dirty tricks its not just the Hillary team that has fought hard. Its not the candidates themselves as much as its the campaign and/or supporters of each.

I wished the support teams from both campaigns would realize how similar these candidates are. I mean policy-wise they are nearly identical, the subtle differences in policy they argue over is a joke. The biggest differences I've noticed are foreign policy where Obama promises to meet with leaders in Iran or the like without really waiting.

Their pull-out strategy is the same, their health policy is almost identical and the changes Congress will make are bigger than the differences in the plans they propose. Their energy independence policy is similar, their stance on equality and civil rights is similar. Neither candidate supports gay marriage, but stakes a claim to make the debate more civil.

What this campaign has become is a fight over personality and generation.
 
Hillary's cornered those whose cultural cornerstone at one point or another's been this
FleetwoodMac_Rumours.jpg

Don't stop thinking about tomorrow...
 
Oh, the Rumours tour. Saw it at the CNE Stadium in the summer of '77. Christine McVie was in fine form. Loggins & Messina were on the bill too, if I recall.
 
In a society that has not yet achieved racial parity, some citizens will vote based on skin colour. To assert that a black politician benefits from this fact, while ignoring that white politicians have done so so for over 200 years, displays racial bias. It's also a sly way to irrittate bigoted voters. If dominant culture doesn't hesitate to define, label and stereotype people based on their appearence, why objectify to individuals in a position to reform corrupt and oppression-based gov'ts and policies, from doing so?
 
What Obama and Hillary should do is realize that they're tearing apart the Democrat's chances in the upcoming election. Obama should concede to Hillary, and then run as her VP for two terms. Then Obama can run again for Prez for another two terms. The result is sixteen years of Democratic rule in the White House.

The alternative is that Obama and Hillary fight on until April or May, with Obama winning in the end, but leaving Hillary supporters annoyed and sufficiently stubborn to either vote McCain or Nader or abstain entirely, resulting in a win for McCain.

The other unlikely alternative, that of Obama taking the Pres. and having Hillary as his VP will never occur, as Hillary won't take the number three seat in the White House, as she's already had the number two seat (First Lady, while unelected IMO, is more important than VP...did Dan Quayle do anything as VP????).

IMO, Obama will lose handily to McCain. We may think that the youth and coloured will rise up and vote for Obama, but those who vote in mass, the white babyboomers will be looking for a respectable Republican that they can support in their hopes to rebuild their party after Bush. It is these folks that will decide the election, and of the Dems it's Hillary that can appeal to them over Obama vs. McCain.
 
I'm not sure Obama can do that, at least not without a significant defeat in PA. He's already said that there are no two ways about it: he's not running for VP.
 
Admiral Beez said:
What Obama and Hillary should do is realize that they're tearing apart the Democrat's chances in the upcoming election. Obama should concede to Hillary, and then run as her VP for two terms. Then Obama can run again for Prez for another two terms. The result is sixteen years of Democratic rule in the White House.

The alternative is that Obama and Hillary fight on until April or May, with Obama winning in the end, but leaving Hillary supporters annoyed and sufficiently stubborn to either vote McCain or Nader or abstain entirely, resulting in a win for McCain.

IMO, Obama will lose handily to McCain. We may think that the youth and coloured will rise up and vote for Obama, but those who vote in mass, the white babyboomers will be looking for a respectable Republican that they can support in their hopes to rebuild their party after Bush. It is these folks that will decide the election, and of the Dems it's Hillary that can appeal to them over Obama vs. McCain.
Click to expand...

So you think that the contest between Clinton and Obama is tearing the Democrats apart? I think most people recognize that they are both running for the leadership of that political party and that in no way does this contest represent the tearing apart of that party. Besides, it would be insane for Obama to concede when he has a very real chance of winning.

Right now the political talk is about Clinton and Obama and the Democrats. They are in the news. They are what is happening. The issues important to them are being discussed - issues important to the Democrats. McCain is yesterdays news (and for so many reasons). He has to wait around for the election before coverage of him ramps up again. By that point he will have to discuss his plans to keep troops in Iraq for the lengthy period of time he has promised at a point where the American public will be even more tired of the war than they are now. He will have to account for how a Republican president that he has often supported has made such an immense shambles out of the economy that the Democrats did so much to repair - all at a time when the economy will be visibly tanking.

As for all the babyboomers running to McCain - I'll believe it when I see it. Babyboomers are no doubt looking at the multi-trillion dollar cost of an unpopular war, the trillions added on to the national debt, the questionable state of the housing market, the stock market, the banks, and of course the worrisome state of the boomers pension funds. Not all babyboomers are rolling in cash; some have worries about their future and may feel let down when considering the squandering of the possible by the Republicans under Bush. No, the only way McCain could possibly slide into office with any ease is by way of a council of fear. Fortunately for those who reject such a stance, the likes of Pearle, Cheney and Rumsfeld have been repudiated. McCain would have to find a new gang of global fear-mongers to project that threat.

Meanwhile, other people will want to get on and fix things.
 
Admiral Beez said:
IMO, Obama will lose handily to McCain. We may think that the youth and coloured will rise up and vote for Obama, but those who vote in mass, the white babyboomers will be looking for a respectable Republican that they can support in their hopes to rebuild their party after Bush. It is these folks that will decide the election, and of the Dems it's Hillary that can appeal to them over Obama vs. McCain.
Click to expand...

Maybe the youth and coloured of America didn't come out in droves before to vote because all there was to represent them and their social concrens was a bunch of old white geezers. Times change and so should the mentality that the only person fit to run the US is a white, aging, male. Upto this point I've had next to zero interest in politics but seeing how the system's finally warming upto these demographics, there really is no longer a basis for me to not care because someone who's like me is more likely to share the same life experiences and can relate to my social concerns. Baby-boomers and Gen-X aren't a majority of the population by any means; 18-49 is. Reflect our views and resolve our problems and come election day we'll put the youth voter apathy myth to rest once and for all ;)!
 
Admiral Beez said:
IMO, Obama will lose handily to McCain. We may think that the youth and coloured will rise up and vote for Obama, but those who vote in mass, the white babyboomers will be looking for a respectable Republican that they can support in their hopes to rebuild their party after Bush. It is these folks that will decide the election, and of the Dems it's Hillary that can appeal to them over Obama vs. McCain.
Click to expand...

Coloured?

The 1950s came and went a long time ago. I, for one, am disturbed by your continued usage of outdated (and in earlier cases, now considered racist) terms for minorities.

NAACP notwithstanding.
 
I think Obama's speech will seal the deal in the Democratic race. He has shown that when the press throw the worst they can find on TV 24 hours a day for a number of days Obama will rise to the challenge head on and win. He has shown himself as a great speaker who can grasp complex issues. Hillary looks fake on stage and isn't that great a speaker. I don't think Republicans will be able to hold on to things this time.

In 2000 a Democrat had been in power a number of years and Bush was running on a Bush legacy. In 2004 Bush only won because of 9/11 and Kerry put people to sleep. This election will have 8 years of bad history to deal with and a great speaker in Obama. McCain is definitely the one that could give Democrats their greatest challenge though. Huckabee and Romney would have gotten much less support at the polls.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top