<p>Venkat - maybe 6 months ago when people saw Hillary as a polorizing figure, especially Republicans. Since then, Republicans have come to hate Obama A LOT more than they hate Hillary. I seriously doubt there are very many Republicans who don’t mind Obama but hate Hillary. Obama is THE most liberal candidate since McGovern.</p>
<p>Let’s all just stop attacking “The One” - okay?</p>
<p>Look at this Ad, this is what his supporters want us to think about him:</p>
<p>[Breitbart.tv</a> ‘Praise The One’: New McCain Ad Attacks The ‘Divine’ Obama](<a href=“http://www.breitbart.tv/html/143513.html]Breitbart.tv”>http://www.breitbart.tv/html/143513.html)</p>
<p>He’s going to save us all! The sky will open! The light will come down! I see the light! I MUST VOTE FOR OBAMA!</p>
<p>Oh wait. I do think McCain will win; afterall, there are too many dumb Americans who vote for dumb candidates. If I am correct, one of the previous governors of Montana was two-time boxing champion who had absolutely no expertise in politics or current affairs. We’ll see whether Americans will vote for the same idiotic candidate similar to Bush. (lol @ IQ 90)</p>
<p>And yes, as an outsider, Obama gives me hope, hope that the U.S. will wake up and not live in its we-are-the-most-powerful-nation-in-the-world dream and realize that the world is moving even faster. Detroit automobile industry is a warning. I recommend the book “The World is Flat.” It just shows how idiotic the Republicans are. Decreasing research spending (while other nations increase research spending dramatically), making working visa more difficult to get are just two tiny examples of what Republicans/Bush have done. Wake up America.</p>
<p>Obama wakes me up (and I am not even an American.)</p>
<p>^ I know Republicans are stupid- and I disagree with most of McCain’s policys…but it’s only 4 years. Then we can get a real president.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The number of people that would come out to vote against Hillary would be insignificant compared to the number that would come out to vote for her. And many Hillary supporters still won’t vote for Obama - they resent him for winning the nomination. Adding her to the ticket would be a great way to get the votes of the 18+ million people who came out to vote for her in the primaries.</p>
<p>“They resent him for winning the nomination.”</p>
<p>No…I resent him for cheating and stealing the nomination - just as he did to win his other elections.</p>
<p>How did he cheat? (I’m genuinely curious)</p>
<p>Whatever sexist wrongs were committed against Hillary, I think you need to let it go. It’s politics. It’s dirty on all sides. I just think there’s bigger problems than the bickering of a campaign and Obama has the charisma and the intelligence to lay a foundation to get us back on track with the rest of the world and make the investments in alternative energy and infrastructure that are needed right now to shift our economy away from oil and crumbling bridges.</p>
<p>Sometimes you need a conservative to tame a wild government (like Reagan did after the 60s-70s). Sometimes you need a liberal to make important investments.</p>
<p>^ Look, it’s pointless - everytime I inform people of how he cheated the Obamabots start their crap “Oh suuure he did!” because they just can’t imagine their messiah EVER doing anything wrong.</p>
<p>But for your information - he had bus loads of college students drive around during Caucuses and vote at more than 1 caucus site. I have heard eye witness account of how in small towns (in Iowa), they would be half way through caucusing and a group of 20-30 people would all come in at once, and all go caucus for Obama, giving Obama the lead in that town. These were towns where everyone knew everyone, and no one knew who these people were. </p>
<p>Also in caucuses, the Obama people would sometimes steal sign-in sheets, or go sign in early and then leave, so they can hit more caucus sites, not ACTUALLY caucusing. </p>
<p>In Texas, the Obama people got there early and locked the doors at one caucus sites, blocking people from entering. The police had to be called to open the door - and yes it DID happen. It was on local Texas news - but the national media would never play a story against Obama. </p>
<p>This is why Obama did so well in caucuses compared to primaries. Hillary won maybe 1 caucus. It was WAY too easy for Obama to cheat in the caucuses. Considering that Obama’s ENTIRE delegate lead came from caucus states, that’s how he easily cheated his way to the nomination.</p>
<p>Don’t give me that crap about Hillary’s people “too old” or “can’t get off from work” to go caucus for her. This was a very emotional election and her supporters were very determined. No one is going to not caucus because they’re too old. That’s an ignorant line the media fed to people so they wouldn’t get suspicious about Obama’s 30+ percentage point caucus wins. Compare the Washington primary to the Washington Caucus. Compare Texas primary to Caucus. Check out Nebraska’s caucus vs. primary. Obama cheated, we have proof, but no one cares. The only thing we can do if no one will listen to us is to take Obama down. If we have to use McCain to do it - so be it.</p>
<p>I was done with this thread until the crap said below.</p>
<p>s.dot said:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Please enough with the baseless accusations. Please F__CKING QUOTE ME! Please quote what I say to support your point that I’m ignorant not simply disagreeing with your far leftist rhetoric and racial politics. For example, here’s a statement buttressed by your own words, which I’ve quoted prodigiously in other posts: You love Obama and liberal ideology because you, like Michelle Obama (not Barack), could never attend an Ivy League university without affirmative action. </p>
<p>applejack said: </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Oh man more musings about Obama that couldn’t be farther from the truth. First off, I’ve driven plenty of times through inner city Baltimore and the only people that are in fear are those passing through. Secondly, Obama had two “major” (using that word liberally) achievements as a community agitator. He got people to sign up to vote! And he got a little asbestos removed! Wow, real great experience for the leader of the free world.</p>
<p>You made a lot more points in your post and I don’t feel like responding to each one individually. The overarching theme of your post is that capitalism is to blame for the problems of the ghetto. Really, so a personal morality, a ghetto street code, has nothing to do with it? Basically, you state income disparities, or poverty, creates violence. This is garbage. Look at the violence that occurred after Hurricane Katrina. Now look at the violence (or more appropriately lack of violence) after the recent flooding in Iowa, amongst a similar income bracket, but this time with predominantly white working class individuals. I’m not saying being black causes violent behavior but rather the culture predominant in the black ghettos. Personal responsibility isn’t present because handouts from the government are simply expected. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>To prove my point, here’s a thought experiment to dispel the notion of poverty always begetting more poverty. Think of the Jews. Back in the 20’s and 30’s, they were amongst the poorest ethnic groups in the country and locked out of many universities (most famously, as detailed in The Chosen, Harvard, Princeton, and Yale). Yet, now they’re amongst the richest and dominate the Ivy League populations. </p>
<p>I’m also not downplaying these struggles, but the government has spent trillions of dollars in social programs since the 1970’s and they aren’t working. So guess we’ll just funnel more money!</p>
<p>More edit to above post: (right below Ivy League populations in second to last paragraph)</p>
<p>Or take the Chinese. Many of them are descended from prison workers who were brought here to build American railroads. Furthermore, it’s still socially acceptable to discriminate against Asians. Now they’re similiar to Jews. But darn that meritocracy, something must be discriminatory about it!!!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>While I don’t know if your accusations that Obama cheated are true soccer guy, it’s obvious that he out-campaigned Clinton. She thought she was a sure bet for the nomination going into primary season, and she completely ignored the caucus states (where Obama racked up the delegates) until it was too late. She also ignored little states, spending lots of time and money on NY, CA, MA, NJ, and other big states (all of which she won). The problem lies in the fact that she didn’t win in large enough margins to compensate for Obama’s massive leads in smaller states that she discounted. </p>
<p>Look, I was a huge Clinton supporter, and I was very upset that she lost the nomination. I still think she would be an amazing president, and I hope she runs in 4 or 8 years (although it’s unlikely). But the truth is, her campaign made fatal mistakes.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>When it comes to ethical stances (i.e. abortion, teaching evolution in schools, stem-cell research etc.), I definitely feel that the Republican party is lagging, but this doesn’t give us a right to call them stupid. </p>
<p>I think they are head and neck above the Democratic party in terms of economics policies (don’t cite Bush here, he’s not a true Republican). Many economic programs that Democratic lawmakers endorse such as rent control, minimum wage, and universal healthcare, make no sense whatsoever if you have taken a simple, basic, economics 101 course.</p>
<p>Universal healthcare isn’t so much an economic program as an attempt to offer medical services to millions who don’t have it. It would have economic consequences, though. One thing it would do is lower the astronomical costs of healthcare in America. When you go to the hospital, your bill is inflated to pay for expenses of those without insurance. </p>
<p>Universal healthcare has worked very nicely for other countries.</p>
<p>I think our country should look towards various European countries in terms of their healthcare/social infrastructures. Their systems of Reformed Capitalism (as opposed to American pure capitalism) seem to work very well. The social systems in countries like Sweden, Switzerland, the Netherlands, etc. seem to take care of their people in a way the American system simply does not.
And though they pay extremely high taxes, their educations are free.
There are many amazing things about the US, but our social system is not one I’m proud of. It excludes too many citizens.</p>
<p>^ I think you should look at Taiwanese health care. Many people ignore the success experienced by Taiwanese health care because many don’t consider it a nation.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>In what sense has UH worked well for other countries? Do you understand how inefficient UH is? This is a simple case study in econ 101; you are trading efficiency for equity here. In order to get an appointment with a public doctor at some socialist countries, you need to wait three months. How is this working well? It just increases the amount of time you need to receive treatment since everyone receives free healthcare. Arguably, our system is more efficient.</p>
<p>Brown Man, you don’t understand universal healthcare as the Democrats want to institute it. Healthcare won’t be free for everyone - it would be the same for people who already have care, and it would require people who don’t to get it (at much cheaper rates if they can’t afford it).</p>
<p>Brown man, I never said UNIVERSAL healthcare has worked very nicely. I’m wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too ignorant about economics to make a statement like that. I’m merely saying that reformed capitalist social systems work well. And don’t call them socialist, because they’re not. Pure socialism does NOT work. And, arguably, neither does PURE capitalism.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I disagree with you here. How do these countries take care of their citizens better than America does? This all comes back to the efficiency versus equity argument in economics. I feel like our system is definitely more efficient than theirs, but theirs seems to be more equitable. Why would anybody work hard when they know that 70% of their money goes to the government, and they will not be rewarded for their hard work?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>coolman did.</p>