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
Neil Lindholm
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 January 2005
Location: China
Posts: 4942
Posted: 20 March 2008 at 9:21pm | IP Logged | 1  

Or else he is following the rules set out before the election started? Unlike Clinton who kept her name on the ballot and campaigned, even though they promised not to do this?
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Steve Horton
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 3574
Posted: 20 March 2008 at 9:48pm | IP Logged | 2  

The re-votes wouldn't have gone off anyhow. It wasn't just the Obama campaign in the way.
Back to Top profile | search | www
 
Christopher Alan Miller
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 26 October 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 2787
Posted: 20 March 2008 at 10:05pm | IP Logged | 3  

He didn't oppose the revotes but he didn't get behind them either. Backing them h would've show he wasn't just another politician looking out for himself even if they never happened.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Jason Czeskleba
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 30 April 2004
Posts: 4638
Posted: 20 March 2008 at 10:31pm | IP Logged | 4  

Obama hasn't opposed re-votes.  That is a myth being spread by some Clinton supporters.  He expressed concern about mail-in voting, but I don't know that he even came out as absolutely opposing that idea.  As far as I know, the only thing he is on record as opposing is seating the delegates based on the existing flawed election results.

It's depressing to be a Democrat.  Obama needs to either win (or lose by a small margin) in PA and win some decisive victories in the other remaining primaries, and rebound in his poll numbers.  That's the only way the Dems will have a solid candidate to unambiguously unite around.  Otherwise, it will be bitter and contentious until the end, and the supporters of the candidate who doesn't get the nomination will feel disgruntled and angry at the candidate who does get it. 

I'm beginning to think we will have to wait until 2012 for a resurgent Democratic party. 
Back to Top profile | search
 
Jason Czeskleba
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 30 April 2004
Posts: 4638
Posted: 20 March 2008 at 10:32pm | IP Logged | 5  

Christopher, how did Obama "not get behind" the revotes?  He publicly expressed the belief that revotes should happen.  What should he have done that he didn't do?
Back to Top profile | search
 
Christopher Alan Miller
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 26 October 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 2787
Posted: 20 March 2008 at 11:09pm | IP Logged | 6  

He should've pushed for it. Brought it up whenever he could. His support was lukewarm at best. His people were complaining about private donations being used to pay for it. Even if he wins the nomination it will hurt in the general election. It may not be enough for McCain to win Michigan but Florida is another story.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Kevin Brown
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 31 May 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 9126
Posted: 21 March 2008 at 12:17am | IP Logged | 7  

Obama's "typical white person" remark isn't going to do him much good either. A couple weeks ago I would've given him a 95% chance of getting the nomination. Today I'd give him a 40% chance. I think there's a very good chance enough super-delegates will move toward Clinton to give it to her.

******************************

If the super delegates do that and literally hand her the nomination, I guarantee there will be an uproar and McCain wins handily.

I personally will write in Obama's name when I vote, too.

Back to Top profile | search
 
Knut Robert Knutsen
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 22 September 2006
Posts: 7369
Posted: 21 March 2008 at 2:42am | IP Logged | 8  

I don't see the problem with the "typical white woman" remark. He made it perfectly clear that he wasn't talking about racism or hatred. All he said was that people respond to differences, like racial differences, with hesitation and fear. Using his grandmother as an example, he's saying that familiarity and mutual understanding breaks down barriers. In his speech he also refers to a similar skepticism towards whites from blacks.
We all know that a lot of us have such reactions to people who seem "unfamiliar" (often along racial lines), and we don't see ourselves as racist for those fleeting emotional responses, and I don't think we should. Slightly Xenophobic perhaps, but there's a difference between that and racism or racial hatred.

To interpret that statement as "all white people are racist" requires us to completely disregard or even invert the context of it.

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

Joined: 22 September 2005
Posts: 1258
Posted: 21 March 2008 at 7:05am | IP Logged | 9  

Obama's "typical white person" remark isn't going to do him much good either. A couple weeks ago I would've given him a 95% chance of getting the nomination. Today I'd give him a 40% chance. I think there's a very good chance enough super-delegates will move toward Clinton to give it to her.

******************************

If the super delegates do that and literally hand her the nomination, I guarantee there will be an uproar and McCain wins handily.

I wouldnt' be so sure.  I only voted Republican years ago (Reagan) when I first could vote.  Since then I've voted Democrat every time.  If it's McCain vs. Clinton I'll vote for Clinton.  If it's McCain vs. Obama I'll vote for McCain.

Had someone told me a year ago I would even slightly entertain the idea of voting Repulican I would have told them they were crazy.

This "typical white person" wouldn't vote for Obama now even if was the only way to save my life.

Back to Top profile | search
 
William McCormick
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 26 February 2006
Posts: 3297
Posted: 21 March 2008 at 7:32am | IP Logged | 10  

He didn't oppose the revotes but he didn't get behind them either. Backing them h would've show he wasn't just another politician looking out for himself even if they never happened.

***********

Why should he support them? They broke the rules and were punished. Period.

 

Back to Top profile | search
 
Christopher Alan Miller
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 26 October 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 2787
Posted: 21 March 2008 at 7:51am | IP Logged | 11  

Why should he support them? They broke the rules and were punished. Period

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Politicians in those states broke the rules not the millions of voters. If they aren't represented at the democratic convention don't you think it may affect their vote in november?

Back to Top profile | search
 
Thom Price
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar
L’Homme Diabolique

Joined: 29 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 7592
Posted: 21 March 2008 at 8:10am | IP Logged | 12  

Exactly.  If the delegates in Michigan and Florida aren't seated at the convention, the Democrats might as well stick a bow on those two states and hand them to the Republicans.  Here's a slogan the Republicans can use:

"Oh, now the Democrats want your votes ..."


Back to Top profile | search | www 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