Discussion in 'Politics' started by Annie, Dec 4, 2003.
What do you call yourself? Informed? On what basis? Your definition of a liberal? Conservative?
Then you stand by a retarded statement. You're going to try and generalize a whole political party based on one persons personal thoughts?
I'll take it for what it's worth.
Aren't you the same guy that was going to decide who to vote for based on the amount he gets charged when making long distance phone calls from the airport? Excuse me if I don't take you or your voting criteria very seriously.
I try to stay informed.
As liberal vs. conservative, we both know that the usage of these terms changes over time. I believe in fiscal conservatism, states rights and moderation on social issues. But it is the social issues that generally seperates conservatives from liberals today. That is where my more liberal streak comes from and what seperate me from today's conservatives.
And should we assume anyone with a liberal streak will vote for the next president that will help lower rates of collect calls from airports?
See how stupid it is to generalize. Damn, Where's Isaac when you need him!
Is that a social issue??? Gee, I thought that was economic. How silly of me!
My ears are burning!
No I have to admitt, though and really I hate to say this cause i'm never going to hear the end of it, but killintime, I'm afraid you don't make much point. But then again, I know very little about US politics, and from what I can say... I'm glad I don't!
Geez Louise, thank you Issac, I thought I'd had one too many glasses of Zin tonight. I couldn't make sense of his post and was blaming the wine. (note, not whine)
I experienced my first real political heartbreak in 2002 when I worked on Jean Carnahan's Senate re-election bid and she lost narrowly to Jim Talent. I still can't stand Talent (a John Ashcroft disciple) who makes Missouri's other GOP Senator Kit Bond look like Ted Kennedy.
I think Dean can win the election, and I also think Wesley Clark can win the election. People are worried about Dean in the south, but when they find out the NRA likes him, and that he isn't as "liberal" as right-wing media outlets would like people to believe, he'll earn their votes. General Clark is also a viable candidate. I sincerely hope Joe Lieberman does not get the nomination. He is what I call a "Republicrat", and I want a real Democrat. Which ever candidate gets the nod it will be a very, very close race. Right down to the wire again.
The administration keeps touting the line that whoever is the democratic nominee, it will be a 'very close race'. I'm sorry, I just don't see that.
Dean is a candidate with NRA backing, geez whodda thunk coming from Vermont? That will not be enough to throw the libertarian, (quite educated, thank you). His take on taxes, abortion, Iraq, appeasement are too far too the left for GOP and most swings.
Clark, well what can one say? His fellow West Pointers are not cheering him. Clinton removed him. He has disavowed what he said previously.
Liberman could attract middle and swings, but far left has told him to hike.
Dean will get the nomination, unless something really untoward happens.
If economy, and truly at this point unemployment figures are not relevant, holds on, Bush in a landslide.
Separate names with a comma.