Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login
The John Byrne Forum
Byrne Robotics > The John Byrne Forum << Prev Page of 1093 Next >>
Topic: US Presidential Election (Topic Closed Topic Closed) Post ReplyPost New Topic
Author
Message
Tom French
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 07 January 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 4154
Posted: 12 June 2008 at 6:07am | IP Logged | 1  

 From the side she could pass as a man with long hair in drag

Drag Queens take better care of themselves.

Back to Top profile | search
 
Scott Richards
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 22 September 2005
Posts: 1258
Posted: 12 June 2008 at 6:10am | IP Logged | 2  

I think a lot of Hillary supporters who are saying they won't vote for Obama will also come to realize this.  I know they wanted Hillary, but in the end, Obama is more in line with what they want for America than John McCain is. 

That's not true for everyone Mike.  Remember, not all Hillary supporters fell between Obama and Clinton with their views and desires.  Some of us fell between Clinton and McCain and that's why we would vote for McCain over Obama.  I'm a more conservative Democrat.  I was already close to choosing McCain over Clinton but didn't.

Now if the Republican candidate had been a lot more to the right than McCain, I would most likely have swung to Obama.

Back to Top profile | search
 
Scott Richards
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 22 September 2005
Posts: 1258
Posted: 12 June 2008 at 6:16am | IP Logged | 3  

I also read yesterday that the Evangelicals are abandoning McCain.  He's only got 55-60% support from them, meaning 35-40% are supporting Obama.  How freakin' weird is that???

I took it to mean that they would be supporting an independant candidate or not vote at all.  Though the more likely scenario is, in the end, they'll vote for McCain any way because the alternative would be President Obama, which they would probably hate even more than McCain.

Back to Top profile | search
 
Kevin Hagerman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 15 April 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 18104
Posted: 12 June 2008 at 7:07am | IP Logged | 4  

Nancy Reagan was the William Shatner of first ladies.  She was just able to get away with things other women would never even try, like The Gaze.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Donald Miller
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 03 February 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 3601
Posted: 12 June 2008 at 7:07am | IP Logged | 5  

Yes losing the evangelical vote certainly wont mean new votes for any Democratic candidate.  It simply means they wont be pounding the pulpit in the name of McCain.  Which really helped Bush.  It's a good sign that for America.


Don
Back to Top profile | search | www e-mail
 
Kevin Hagerman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 15 April 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 18104
Posted: 12 June 2008 at 7:14am | IP Logged | 6  

I agree with Donald.  Them evangelicals ain't gonna vote for no Muslim.  They'll just stay home.

Which is why you can expect a new spate of GOP-GOTV ballot initiatives like flag-burning, (anti-)gay marriage, and whether or not we can pierce a baby's ears in the womb.  You know.  Important stuff.

Back to Top profile | search
 
Tom French
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 07 January 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 4154
Posted: 12 June 2008 at 7:35am | IP Logged | 7  

Unless they go with Bob Barr -- the Libertarian Candidate. 

Oh... what a dream to see the conservative vote split.

Back to Top profile | search
 
Kevin Hagerman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 15 April 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 18104
Posted: 12 June 2008 at 7:40am | IP Logged | 8  

No - because then you get Bill Clinton's first term, and the tripe that he didn't belong there.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Geoff Gibson
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 21 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5741
Posted: 12 June 2008 at 8:21am | IP Logged | 9  

No - because then you get Bill Clinton's first term, and the tripe that he didn't belong there.

Pundits, Scmundits.  Abraham Lincoln didn't have a "mandate" in his first term!

Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Tom French
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 07 January 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 4154
Posted: 12 June 2008 at 8:28am | IP Logged | 10  

Abraham Lincoln didn't have a "mandate" in his first term!

That's actually one of my favorite Bush-bits.  When he won his first election (I mean, his re-election) in '04 by 2%, he claimed he had a mandate from the people. 

Oh, hysterical...

Back to Top profile | search
 
Jodi Moisan
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 19 February 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 6832
Posted: 12 June 2008 at 8:39am | IP Logged | 11  

I like the way you think, Jodi!

     Back at you Mike.

Isn't some of the 'Obama is an amazingly compelling speaker' stuff also derived from thesimple  fact that after so many speeches by  Bush(and Gore..and Kerry...and Hilary!) now there's finally a candidate whose voice people haven't gotten tired of hearing...yet?

       It's not how he says it, it is what he is saying. The man is amazing at making a speech. Try to look at all three Hillarys, McCains and Obama's speeches on the last primary, A republican "expert" was saying that if this election was based on speeches , and it was a horse race, Obama is Secretariat and McCain is a mule.

Jodie, that's Coulter?  From the side she could pass as a man with long hair in drag

    I couldn't believe how tall she was, I will use a phrase my mom would use "I didn't know they could stack shit that high"

Drag Queens take better care of themselves

       Agreed, Oh Tom I finally found you on the muscle site, very nice!!! your partner is very handsome, you both are Hot, Hot, Hot,. LOVE your artwork, that watercolor of your dog is wonderful. Looks like a great dog, way cool you adopted from a shelter. I am glad you found such a great guy, from what I have gathered on here you are deserving of a great guy.  You look like a very happy and beautiful family!

I'm a more conservative Democrat.  I was already close to choosing McCain over Clinton but didn't.

     I think we will pick up most of the independents and turned off to politics that never voted before, they are jazzed about Obama. Also we will get the  republicans that are just fed up with what Bush has done to their party voters. I think this will make up for the ones we lose.

Which is why you can expect a new spate of GOP-GOTV ballot initiatives like flag-burning, (anti-)gay marriage, and whether or not we can pierce a baby's ears in the womb.  You know.  Important stuff.

LOL

I thought this was funny , sorry R's

http://imvotingrepublican.com/

.  When he won his first election (I mean, his re-election) in '04 by 2%, he claimed he had a mandate from the people. 

I laughed too, for all those wonderful Bushism's, I will miss that.

Updated:   Oh and I am taking my son to Sylvan in a minute , so I will be gone, don't say anything important....................kidding, see ya! 

 



Edited by Jodi Moisan on 12 June 2008 at 8:45am
Back to Top profile | search | www
 
Geoff Gibson
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 21 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5741
Posted: 12 June 2008 at 9:17am | IP Logged | 12  

I think Obama can get some Republicans if doesn't bash them for being Republican.  Dismissing someone's views simply because they're a different party doesn't win you general elections it just makes you look like an unthoughtful boob (see Ann Coulter).  One of my big issues with both parites is this ridiculous notion that conflicting views make people bad.  People like Hannity, O'Reilly, Olbermann and Dean fuel this thinking.  Not suprisingly, I think they do so to serve their own selfish interests.

One of things I think Obama has done well -- dating back to 2004 at the Democratic convention -- is that he tries to articulate a "purple" or "gray" view -- understanding that most folks just want better lives for themselves and their kids, just that there are different ways to get to the same end.  I think for the most part where he has he has taken specific partisan stands he has articulated his position effectively,* without diminishing or villafying the other point of view. 

I think he has also -- when necessary -- taken responsibility for his words.  I think he did a good job of explaining what he meant by the "bitter" comments, but in defending himself I didn't feel that he was diminishing the feelings of those he unintentionally offended.  The political drawback of his admirable conduct is he has set a high bar for himself.  Its why I was disappointed in his playing the "100 Year War" card on McCain.  Obama knew what McCain really meant, but he went for the cheap shot.  I can give Obama a pass because we all sometimes fall prey to it (McCain has as well) and I don't think it will be a pattern.  

*Professionally speaking I imagine Obama is brilliant lawyer.  I think he does an exceptional job of picking the best argument to push his position, and he seems to favor the reasons that don't involve "conspiracy theories" or partisan talking points.

Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 

<< Prev Page of 1093 Next >>
  Post ReplyPost New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login