Who's Obama running against?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by CharlestonChad, Mar 19, 2008.

  1. CharlestonChad
    Offline

    CharlestonChad Baller Deluxe

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2006
    Messages:
    1,845
    Thanks Received:
    126
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Charleston, SC
    Ratings:
    +128
    I really can't tell anymore. All anyone is talking about is Obama. Not McCain or Clinton. It's interesting. I guess the race issue might actually be growing roots, because the woman issue with Clinton isn't being discussed, and McCain's pro-war issue isn't either. All anyone even talks about anymore is Obama as a racist.

    It's been pretty comical to read some of the posts on this forum. Everyone wants to talk about Wright and racism, yet I doubt too many on here actually thinks Obama is a racist. So the whole discussion is about a Rev. who may be racist, but obviously didn't instill racist values in Obama. I'm thinking that if the only dirt people have on Obama is that his Rev. was racist, and he has support from a few socialists, then he's in a good position to win the presidency. As with everything in political races, time heals wounds. The Obama smear tactics started wayyyyy too early and by November they will be irrelevant. Now if the Republicans could have waited until maybe July or August to start slinging mud, then they probably could have beaten him. Kerry was beat that way, with the swiftboat info.

    So thank you Republicans. Your misguided political "strategery", with the sole purpose of making sure Hillary gets the nomination, will afford America the leadership of Barack Obama as our president for at least the next 4 years.
     
  2. BrianH
    Offline

    BrianH Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2008
    Messages:
    3,520
    Thanks Received:
    238
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Texas
    Ratings:
    +238
    I'm not bashing you, but I have a serious question. And don't be smart-alec about it...I'm sure there are many smart-alec answers that can come from this question--but I want an honest answer.


    How can someone be a one party person.

    What makes them pick one side and stay there?

    (Not talking about this specific race)--How can someone vote strictly for their desired party, even if they hate the candidate?

    If you do a study on political parties, you'll see that they've almost completely flipped around since the Civil War. THe South were blue states, and the North were Red states. The Southern Democrats were in support of the confederacy. Robert E. Lee was a Democrat.

    I guess I'm just confused on how someone can be so caught up in their party. I see alot (from you) about Republican this, and republican that. I'll admit that my family and I are more conservative in values, but we vote for them man/woman. We voted for Clinton when he ran against Dole.

    How can strict party loyalty benefit the country?
     
  3. Shogun
    Offline

    Shogun Free: Mudholes Stomped

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2007
    Messages:
    30,495
    Thanks Received:
    2,224
    Trophy Points:
    1,043
    Ratings:
    +2,260
    (Not talking about this specific race)--How can someone vote strictly for their desired party, even if they hate the candidate?


    thats a great question.. Im curious to see if republican support for mccain reflects an answer in 08.
     
  4. Ravi
    Offline

    Ravi Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2008
    Messages:
    81,318
    Thanks Received:
    12,691
    Trophy Points:
    2,205
    Location:
    Hating Hatters
    Ratings:
    +29,752
    How can strict party loyalty benefit the country?

    If you believe one party's interests serve the country overall better than the other party's interests it is possible to convince yourself to vote along party lines.

    For instance, if civil rights is the most important issue, then it's easy to see why one would vote mainly for Democrats at this point in time.
     
  5. BrianH
    Offline

    BrianH Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2008
    Messages:
    3,520
    Thanks Received:
    238
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Texas
    Ratings:
    +238


    I agree with you on that. But how do people vote for "their" party no matter what. My great-grandpa was a staunch republican, and my great-great uncle was a staunch Democrat. I would hear them argue for hours on end about which was better, and who was doing the right thing. (Sound Familiar?)

    I can understand voting a certain way based on an issue that you support at that point in time. But what about those that support their party no matter what?

    Shogun,

    I agree with you, I'm debating voting for McCain myself. I'm more conservative, but I'm not loyal to one party. Especially if I don't agree with someone's policies. That's why I'm having trouble picking a candidate to vote for, because I find reasons why I don't care for any of them.
     
  6. Ravi
    Offline

    Ravi Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2008
    Messages:
    81,318
    Thanks Received:
    12,691
    Trophy Points:
    2,205
    Location:
    Hating Hatters
    Ratings:
    +29,752
    I can understand voting a certain way based on an issue that you support at that point in time. But what about those that support their party no matter what?

    My point in time comment was referring to the fact that Democrats are now more liberal than Republicans though it hasn't always been the case.

    Support their party no matter what - I can only repeat myself. If you see one party as being for nation building, for a hugely incompetent federal government, willing to legislate from the bible instead of the constitution...it's very hard to vote for a member of that party. Sure, there are some party politicians that don't toe the party line, but they are few and far between.

    I haven't voted for a Republican in about eight years because none of the ones I had the option to vote for had minds of their own that I could see. Though I'm having second thoughts about my gov.
     
  7. CharlestonChad
    Offline

    CharlestonChad Baller Deluxe

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2006
    Messages:
    1,845
    Thanks Received:
    126
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Charleston, SC
    Ratings:
    +128
    Fair question. I'm sure it appears I'm a straight ticket Democrat, but I'm actually not. I'm a strong supporter of Obama because I think he represents idealism and has the leadership skills to get the changes made that our country needs as we progress into the 21st century. I'm not a supporter of Clinton, and many other Democrats. I'm from SC and I like Mark Sanford.

    I agree that a devout devotion to one party is not beneficial. But, I think you might be drawing the conclusion that Obama is favorable to me and others just because he is a Democrat. I haven't seen much of that in the people that I've discussed politics with. This may be due to a small sample size, but I've found that the straight ticket Democrats actually like Clinton. This, if a true generalization, might be because she was married to Bill Clinton, who is considered to be a good Democrat president. I personally do not see the leadership qualities in her, and I don't think she has the qualities to be a great president. She seems to have the drive to be president, but I think her drive is more focused on her success and not the nation's success.

    If Clinton gets the nomination, although I don't like her all that much, I will likely end up voting for her. The War is the biggest issue to me, mostly because I feel like if we elect a pro-war/conflict president then I will continue to see my friends and maybe myself(if a draft comes back) being sent to die in wars that I can't justify.
     
  8. BrianH
    Offline

    BrianH Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2008
    Messages:
    3,520
    Thanks Received:
    238
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Texas
    Ratings:
    +238
    Fair enough...That's a good answer, the one I am looking for. Someone can only read so deep when it comes to message boards. I just wanted to get an answer regarding the way things "seem."

    Party politics have always "burned" me up...

    I've had people tell me down hear that they voted for Hillary, so that she would get the nomination and McCain would beat her. IMO that's voter fraud. (I know it doesn't mean anything legally, but it's still fraud in my eyes). If everyone voted for the person they wanted, we'd be better off, and if that candidate didn't make it, vote for the one you want second most.

    This topic really gets to me, also our entirely screwed up and unfair election system.
     
  9. CharlestonChad
    Offline

    CharlestonChad Baller Deluxe

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2006
    Messages:
    1,845
    Thanks Received:
    126
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Charleston, SC
    Ratings:
    +128

    I've mentioned that before on this messageboard, because I've heard the EXACT same thing, and most of the republicans tried to call my observations a conspiracy theory.

    Back in '04, I was hearing Savage and Limbaugh call for republicans to vote for Sharpton so that Bush could cruise to victory. I'm sure this isn't a new concept to either party, but it is very disenfranchising to hear that there are masses of voters out there who care more about making sure their vote goes to the winner, then they care about the management of our military and federal government.
     
  10. BrianH
    Offline

    BrianH Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2008
    Messages:
    3,520
    Thanks Received:
    238
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Texas
    Ratings:
    +238
    Yeah, I'm positive this isn't a one party practice, but it's wrong none the less.
    Now it is true that anyone can vote the way they choose. But this just shows the discrepancies in our election system.

    Here's some more questions.

    Is it fair for states (voting in a national election) to have different methods of dividing up votes? I know the states have that right, but is it fair? Ex. Some states are winner take all states-even if the candidate wins by only %45 percent, they get all the delegates. Now say a different candidate wins a more populated state, but that state divides up it's delegates- the loser still gets a significant amount of delegates. How is this fair? And super-delegates are a whole other matter.

    I understand that it's a state right. IMO I think it's fine on state elections, each state can do what they want, but when it's a national election, every state should be required to count their votes the same.
     

Share This Page