PDA

View Full Version : Heading Toward the Danger Zone



semi liberal girl
04-26-2008, 06:42 AM
Being a life long Democrat, it hurts me to see how low my party has fallen. It is looking like our choice to run for Presient will be an inexperienced rookie State Senator with more baggage then the cargo hold of an airplane

At least I am not the only one who can see it

Heading Toward the Danger Zone

BOB HERBERT

Barack Obama is winning, so why does it look like Hillary Clinton is having all the fun?

Senator Obama has been thrown completely off his game by a combination of political attacks (some fair, some foul), a toxic eruption (the volcanic Jeremiah Wright was a gift from the gods to the Clintons and the G.O.P.), and some pretty serious self-inflicted wounds.

You can almost feel the air seeping out of the Obama phenomenon. The candidate and his aides are brainstorming ways to counter the Clinton death-ray machine and regain the momentum. They need to generate some new excitement and enthusiasm, and they need to do it soon.

Despite all the new voters who have been brought into the process, Democrats are filled with anxiety about their prospects in November. A nervous operative told me on Friday: “If we lose this election, it would be like Johnson losing to Goldwater.”

One of the problems is that anger is growing like a cancer among Democrats. The Clintons have more than lived up to their polarizing reputations, slicing and dicing the electorate and then gleefully exploiting the myriad divisions.

Their message varies, depending on whether it’s in public or behind the scenes. But the mantra is roughly as follows: Obama won’t win! He can’t win whites. Jeremiah Wright! He can’t win women. He can’t win Hispanics. He’ll lose Jewish voters. Farrakhan! We’ll nuke Iran.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/26/opinion/26herbert.html?_r=1&ref=opinion&oref=slogin

Pale Rider
04-26-2008, 07:14 AM
Even though there is all this infighting among the dems, mccain can hand the Presidency to even a weak dem nominee if he keeps running his mouth, like what he said against the N.C. GOP add. I mean I'm not voting for the bastard now, and I "was" a registered republican. He can lose a lot more between now and November if he keeps running his liberal cake hole.

semi liberal girl
04-26-2008, 07:18 AM
Even though there is all this infighting among the dems, mccain can hand the Presidency to even a weak dem nominee if he keeps running his mouth, like what he said against the N.C. GOP add. I mean I'm not voting for the bastard now, and I "was" a registered republican. He can lose a lot more between now and November if he keeps running his liberal cake hole.

Pale, this year all we have to choose from is Moe, Larry, and Curley

And I do mean to insult the Three Stooges. I do love to watch them

Dilloduck
04-26-2008, 07:20 AM
Pale, this year all we have to choose from is Moe, Larry, and Curley

And I do mean to insult the Three Stooges. I do love to watch them

Agreed--sit back and see which loser gets elected. The two party system has screwed America again.

semi liberal girl
04-26-2008, 07:24 AM
Agreed--sit back and see which loser gets elected. The two party system has screwed America again.

No, the two party system has not screwed up America. We let it happen by not holding polticans accountable

Republicans did do a good job when they came took Congres in 1994. They did control spending and cut waste

But they allowed power to get to them and forgot why they were elected

My party excused disguasting behaviour by Bill Clinton so they could keep their poltical power. They have no kept any promises they made in 2006, and are drunk on power and Bush hate

No Dilloduck, we are to blame by relecting them

Dilloduck
04-26-2008, 07:27 AM
No, the two party system has not screwed up America. We let it happen by not holding polticans accountable

Republicans did do a good job when they came took Congres in 1994. They did control spending and cut waste

But they allowed power to get to them and forgot why they were elected

My party excused disguasting behaviour by Bill Clinton so they could keep their poltical power. They have no kept any promises they made in 2006, and are drunk on power and Bush hate

No Dilloduck, we are to blame by relecting them

Republicans and Democrats have allied to prevent third party candidates from becoming viable.

semi liberal girl
04-26-2008, 07:29 AM
Republicans and Democrats have allied to prevent third party candidates from becoming viable.

Oh please

2 years ago did anyone hear about Sen Obama? He came out of nowhere. The third parties do not have any GOOD candidates with anything new to offer

Look at Ron Paul. He got alot of air time, and coverage on the internet - but he was a bit of a kook he crashed and burned

Dilloduck
04-26-2008, 07:30 AM
Oh please

2 years ago did anyone hear about Sen Obama? He came out of nowhere. The third parties do not have any GOOD candidates with anything new to offer

Look at Ron Paul. He got alot of air time, and coverage on the internet - but he was a bit of a kook he crashed and burned

Ron Paul is a Republican---How many third party candidates did you see debate this year ?

semi liberal girl
04-26-2008, 07:32 AM
Ron Paul is a Republican---How many third party candidates did you see debate this year ?

They did not have enough support to get into the debates. If you allowed every Tom, Dick, and Harry into the debates you would have about 50 people on the stage, and never hear enough from any one candaidate to make a decision of who was the best person

Gaffer
04-26-2008, 07:38 AM
Agreed--sit back and see which loser gets elected. The two party system has screwed America again.

The biggest problem is the media will not give a third party candidate the exposure he would need to win an election.

semi liberal girl
04-26-2008, 07:46 AM
The biggest problem is the media will not give a third party candidate the exposure he would need to win an election.

I the right person came along they would. With the internet, the right candidate would catch on, and the media would have no choice

Dilloduck
04-26-2008, 07:47 AM
They did not have enough support to get into the debates. If you allowed every Tom, Dick, and Harry into the debates you would have about 50 people on the stage, and never hear enough from any one candaidate to make a decision of who was the best person

Why do they need tons of support to debate? Maybe if people had a chance to hear them they WOULD have a lot of support

semi liberal girl
04-26-2008, 07:54 AM
Why do they need tons of support to debate? Maybe if people had a chance to hear them they WOULD have a lot of support

How are you going to have a debate with that many people? You would have to have a day long debate to hear form all of them

You would never hold the attention of the people for that long

If they were that good, they would have the percentage neded to get into the debate

Dilloduck
04-26-2008, 07:55 AM
How are you going to have a debate with that many people? You would have to have a day long debate to hear form all of them

You would never hold the attention of the people for that long

If they were that good, they would have the percentage neded to get into the debate

It's not about being good----it's about having money

semi liberal girl
04-26-2008, 07:56 AM
It's not about being good----it's about having money

If you are good, the money will follow

Dilloduck
04-26-2008, 07:58 AM
If you are good, the money will follow

If you are obedient, the money will follow.

semi liberal girl
04-26-2008, 08:16 AM
If you are obedient, the money will follow.

If you have a ggod message, clear and logical ideas, and firm principals - the people and money will follow

Gaffer
04-26-2008, 08:28 AM
The media is only interested in the two parties. While the internet has opened things up it will be a while before it becomes powerful enough to really sway people. Most people still rely on the media. We have the choice we have now because that's what the media gave us.

I don't call what the media does now as debates. They are question and answer sessions with hand picked individuals doing the questioning. Even viewer questions are screened. It's all orchestrated.

The media has given us the three stooges, and no one but the moonbats are happy.

semi liberal girl
04-26-2008, 08:42 AM
The media is only interested in the two parties. While the internet has opened things up it will be a while before it becomes powerful enough to really sway people. Most people still rely on the media. We have the choice we have now because that's what the media gave us.

I don't call what the media does now as debates. They are question and answer sessions with hand picked individuals doing the questioning. Even viewer questions are screened. It's all orchestrated.

The media has given us the three stooges, and no one but the moonbats are happy.

The last debate showed how weak Obama is, proved he has poor judgement, and a total lack of knowledge of the economy and basic economics

Dilloduck
04-26-2008, 02:18 PM
If you have a ggod message, clear and logical ideas, and firm principals - the people and money will follow

If you have a good message , clear and logical ideas and firm principals you would be a fool to get into politics.

DragonStryk72
04-26-2008, 03:04 PM
Oh please

2 years ago did anyone hear about Sen Obama? He came out of nowhere. The third parties do not have any GOOD candidates with anything new to offer

Look at Ron Paul. He got alot of air time, and coverage on the internet - but he was a bit of a kook he crashed and burned

Actually, Wayne Allyn Root's doing a damned good job, and he's good in front of a camera. He is actually succeeding in pulling the Libertarian Party together, and is striving to make them a viable 3rd party. I've got his link in my sig line, look at his issues. Come over to the Libertarian side, we have cookies.

mundame
04-28-2008, 12:45 PM
Oh please

2 years ago did anyone hear about Sen Obama? He came out of nowhere. The third parties do not have any GOOD candidates with anything new to offer




Yeah.................when they come out of nowhere, that's not a good sign.

Think about Eugene McCarthy. We all loved him back in the day because he was against the war. But........he wasn't really viable as a candidate generally, he only had that one issue.

Perot: we loved him, but the guy was a flake. Look at him dropping out, talk about flakey!! If he hadn't done that, I do believe he'd have been president, the idiot.

Hillary and McCain, we really know them. Their lives are public property.

But who is this half-African Obama person???

No. The Dems are going to do it again: they are going to fall in love on first sight, and they are going to be sorry four days into the honeymoon.

This whole week a gazillion commentators said there was no use talking about it on and on, that Obama was going to be the nominee and that was that ----------------------

But I suspect they are wrong. If they were right, the superdelegates would have already made up their minds, and they are waiting........waiting to see if Obama self-destructs. They don't want another McGovern election.