<p>Sorry Kluge, I didn’t mean for my statement to be controversial. Which did you consider controversial?</p>
<p>I thought it was just a little discussion on the election. Where is there a personal agenda? Are you the person who chooses who gets accepted into the “popular group” in high school. I didn’t notice it in the TOS anywhere.</p>
<p>What I think is annoying, which tape Ducked pointed out, is that I am not arguing for only one candidate. That is because I haven’t decided yet.</p>
<p>My major concern is that the media deceives us, and we have to be very careful of that. So it is hard for me to decide. I came to a Dems thread, which I am.</p>
<p>I’ve heard arguments that Republicans would prefer that Hillary get the nomination because they think she’d be easier to beat, and that they would prefer Obama for the same reason. I don’t think Republicans will tell us which one they’d really prefer. Furthermore, I don’t think anybody really knows which one would be easier to beat in a general election by (presumably) McCain. At this point, I’m going to take the radical step in my state’s primary of voting for the one I think would make the best President.</p>
<p>1)there is a huge, to me, irrational hatred of HC among large parts of the country. I’m not a big fan, but I don’t get the hatred. It seems visceral and unchanging. OTOH, some people may like Obama less than others, but I think he engenders much less knee-jerk negativity.</p>
<p>2) She has a tendency to go brutal when things aren’t going her way–such as unleashing of Bill against Obama in SC. I don’t like that, and i think it turns off othrs, too.</p>
<p>3) Shadiness of things like the campaigning in FLA after agreements not to, and angling for the delegates also in opposition to the agreement. </p>
<p>4) Spotty anti-Iraq war record. Majority wants out; she’s too wishy washy about that, and has changed her stance too much.</p>
<p>Overall, Obama offers a much clearer alternative to McCain.</p>
<p>Actually, I don’t follow the polls on war sentiment that closely but I do think security remains a huge concern for a great many. I do think that in the privacy of the voting booth many will vote to keep terrorists off our soil. Sure, the liberal argument that the best way to do this is through diplomacy is all very good - but gut level emotions do come to play. People want to feel safe on a personal level. I think McCain will ideed be formidable.</p>
<p>Dowd’s article wasn’t really flattering to either candidate. About Obama, she says “But Obamas outrage makes him seem a little jejune.” (one def of “jejeune” is immature, juvenile) and, “Obama is the more emotionally delicate candidate, and the one who has the more feminine consensus management style, and the not-blinded-by-testosterone ability to object to a phony war.” That doesn’t sound like praise to me – calling him “emotionally delicate”. </p>
<p>But about Clinton, she also quotes,
"Well, I reached my hand out in friendship and unity and my hand is still reaching out, she [Clinton]said, lapsing back into the dissed-woman mode. And I look forward to shaking his hand sometime soon. </p>
<p>Somethings being stretched here, but its not her hand. She wasnt reaching out to him at all."</p>
<p>Neither of them comes off very well in this article.</p>
<p>This is only the primary… I doubt that Obama will be able to muster this same level of support in the general election (his support will still be extremely high), especially if McCain is the Republican nominee, as it seems he will be, because McCain will also draw on the same group that Obama gets a large portion of his support from - independents. Also, Obama is not the only candidate drawing crowds; Clinton and the Republicans are too… but, crowds are not a measure of historical significance</p>
<p>I think a large part of that anti-Hillary sentiment comes from the Republicans - which will hardly matter in the general election… People are saying that Republicans and Independents are switching to Obama, but that is only for the primaries; should McCain win the Rep nomination, most of the Reps and a large part of the independents will go back to McCain. They only switched to Obama when the McCain campaign crashed late last year. With McCain probably having the most momentum out of all of the candidates from both parties (winning three consecutive states), many will switch to him. Within the Democratic Party, both Clinton and Obama retain extremely high support and the winner will have a vast majority of the party behind them.</p>
<p>
Thought I already mentioned this… Clinton would set a timetable within 60 days and get troops out by 2009 - the Democratic candidates all want out of Iraq. She has changed her stance on this, but only because the situation changes - and she is definitely not the only one; a large part of the Democratic Party initally supported the invasion and many have changed their positions. The fact that she has changed her position is not an issue; the issue is how and when she will pull out, which she has made very clear (Obama has a clear plan, too).</p>
<p>And the shadiness and brutality of Hillary’s campaign (which does get a little out of hand sometimes) is a part of politics… it’s only starting; the general election will be a lot worse when the Reps fire up their political machine - and the Democratic nominee, whoever it is, will have to answer to it.</p>
<p>Hillary Clinton blew it with her medical insurance reforms actions when her husband was president- many people in health care will never forget that. She learned some lessons there, but…</p>
<p>Considerations about who to vote for in the primaries (from a resident of a state where crossover voting is the norm and being an independent is too)- think about two ways to do it: </p>
<p>Vote for the weak other party candidate so yours has a better chance, or
Vote for the best other party candidate so that if yours doesn’t get elected at least the next best one will.</p>
<p>Of course, one may want to vote within the party to get the best candidate, period.</p>
<p>I’m in a state where I need to wait to see what my choices will be after almost everyone else decides. It doesn’t pay for me to get my heart set on anyone until after super Tuesday…</p>
<p>I respect John McCain as a fine, principled man. I am so glad the Republicans seem to be turning toward him. He is the only Republican candidate with something I consider absolutely essential for our next President: an international perspective.</p>
<p>Not like GW Bush, who had never visited Europe until June of 2001. How did that not come out during the 2000 election?</p>
<p>Among the Democratic candidates there were a few who I felt had that international perspective. My H and I supported Richardson, but Biden, Clinton and Obama also have it. Biden and Clinton from extensive travel/experience, Obama from spending four years as a (one can imagine very different-looking) child in Indonesia. Some might disagree, but our family lived in Latin America when our kids were little and we have seen significant, permanent changes in them because of it.</p>
<p>I think McCain could beat Hillary. Just too many negatives for her, too many Democrats who strongly dislike her. Plus any dirt on Bill that might be brought up that would, I feel, be impossible to refute. </p>
<p>I think Obama could beat McCain today, but that could change if something happens again to jeopardize our national security. Certainly the sight of the two of them together on a debate stage would provide a striking contrast in terms of age/agedness.</p>
<p>Interestingly, I think that if we’re looking for a president to strike fear into the hearts of our enemies, McCain and Clinton would have it over Obama.</p>
<p>Aside from “international perspective,” my other big issue is health care, and I feel most confident in Hillary or Obama’s ability to solve this enormous problem and not at all confident in McCain.</p>
<p>“I’ve heard arguments that Republicans would prefer that Hillary get the nomination because they think she’d be easier to beat, and that they would prefer Obama for the same reason.”</p>
<p>Indeed, Republicans must be doing a little happy dance about now, feeling that they just dodged a major bullet. Edward’s pullout is the best news they’ve had in months.</p>
<p>“I think that if we’re looking for a president to strike fear into the hearts of our enemies, McCain and Clinton would have it over Obama.”</p>
<p>We’ve done enough to make the world see us as a tyrannical empire. Everybody’s scared of us already, and that’s a big part of the reason they’re angry at us. Appearing more scary is not the way to get people to do what we want them to.</p>
<p>We’re safest when people around the world admire us, when we are a role model for justice and human rights, when the world sees us putting our principles of equality into action. I don’t know whether our reputation can ever be repaired, but Obama’s the man to get started on that job.</p>
<p>“Indeed, Republicans must be doing a little happy dance about now, feeling that they just dodged a major bullet. Edward’s pullout is the best news they’ve had in months.”</p>
<p>Not really. It became very apparent very early that Edwards had no chance. I think his major attribute from a republican perspective was that he divided the “anybody-but-hillary” vote, thus giving Hillary a better chance at the nomination. Now that he is out, I think Obama will benefit and Obama will end up to be a far more difficult person to run against than Hillary.</p>
<p>“We’re safest when people around the world admire us, when we are a role model for justice and human rights, when the world sees us putting our principles of equality into action. I don’t know whether our reputation can ever be repaired, but Obama’s the man to get started on that job.”</p>
<p>What period of history are you referring to? The 90s when the plans for 9/11 were being laid? Having everyone “love” us really helped a lot.</p>
<p>Maureen Dowd was incredibly vicious to Monica Lewinsky - I’ve avoided reading her work ever since. I don’t find her brand of humour at all amusing.</p>