Will an Obama Presidency be just as divisive between the right & left?

[oreo]

You know, no matter who wins this election--it's time to heal the differences between the right & the left--if we are going to advance to a better economy, energy independance, health care, etc. So this time, I would really like to see a President who chooses some on the opposite side of the isle to be in their cabinet. Let's face it--there are many democrats who have great ideas, & there are many republicans who have great ideas.

Many of these great ideas are blocked, simply because the person with the idea either has a D or R behind their name. One thing I have realised in all my years--is that democrats & republicans want to achieve the same goals in our country. 99% of the time we agree on goals for the economy, energy independance, enviroment, education, health care, taxes, etc. Our arguments typically centers on how to reach that goal.

Now if the President would do that--I would consider that REAL CHANGE from past partisan--one sided--politics that have split this country in two.

Now a question for all of you? Which candidate is more apt to do that? Whom is more willing to incorporate democrats & republicans within their cabinet & on appointed departments--(based on qualifications & not party?)

 

[jillian]

I think Obama would be better to do that. I'm not just saying that because I agree with him more than I agree with McCain, though. And had it just been McCain, I might have gone with him. (well, at least McCain 2K) The problem is that Palin's even more divisive than Bush/Cheney. She's unacceptable to a good chunk of the country and is even dividing your republican party. And the way McCain's run his campaign of late, I'm not even sure that it would be easy for HIM to act in a bi-partisan fashion anymore.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Ya the right is gonna forget all Obama's socialist ideas, his attempts to destroy what business we have left, his new entitlement programs and the new taxes he will create to pay for them. His dismantling of the Military, his selling out to other nations, despots and terrorists. All will be peaches and cream with Obama in the White House.

Ohh did I mention those of us on the right will forget the last 8 years of the left calling us ignorant monkeys and sheep?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

The Republicans really disrespected the presidency the 8 yrs clinton was in power.

Almost as much as bush did the following 8.

The gop will say obama is doing bad, even when he is doing good.

Just like they said bush was doing good when he was not.

They are liars. Hypocrites and frauds. And they project.

When the Civil War comes who wants to bet Sealy hides under his momma's bed?

 

[xsited1]

No. You don't become the most Liberal Senator by being bipartisan. McCain is obviously the better choice in this matter because he has a history of crossing the aisle. However, my hope is that the liberals in Congress will get voted out in 2010 and then Obama will have to cooperate with Conservatives. Obama is a great speaker, but he needs direction. A conservative Congress can provide that for him.

 

[sealybobo]

When the Civil War comes who wants to bet Sealy hides under his momma's bed?

Thank god i'm too old and my nephews are too young.

But I got survival skills and weapons and friends with resources. No doubt we'll make a very strong militia. You guys got shotguns and 6 shooters.

ps. You talk about socialism but how free was the 8 yrs of free trade? $10 billion a month in war spending and $700 billion bailout. All taxpayer, treasury spending. They raped us and you defended them every step of the way. You and mccain.

Your run is over son. We tried it your way.

 

[jillian]

No. You don't become the most Liberal Senator by being bipartisan. McCain is obviously the better choice in this matter because he has a history of crossing the aisle. However, my hope is that the liberals in Congress will get voted out in 2010 and then Obama will have to cooperate with Conservatives. Obama is a great speaker, but he needs direction. A conservative Congress can provide that for him.

Do you think McCain showed bi-partisanship with his choice of a radical religious right VP?

 

[Annie]

No. You don't become the most Liberal Senator by being bipartisan. McCain is obviously the better choice in this matter because he has a history of crossing the aisle. However, my hope is that the liberals in Congress will get voted out in 2010 and then Obama will have to cooperate with Conservatives. Obama is a great speaker, but he needs direction. A conservative Congress can provide that for him.

I hope so too. My guess today, Obama wins, less than a landslide. Senate is filibusterer proof. House Democratic. After 2 years, the electorate decides to go the long haul. 2 years later, Congress flips at least one house. That is it. Between what has passed during those years, including Fairness Doctrine, any opposition will not be heard. It's over, without a real confrontation.

 

[DavidS]

Ya the right is gonna forget all Obama's socialist ideas,

Sarge! Good to see you here again! I had no idea you studied socialism. Tell me. Which of Obama's ideas are in line with collective ownership of corporations and setting a social unit price of American products and completely doing away with supply and demand?

I look forward to your response. This may alter my vote!

his attempts to destroy what business we have left,

Again! Another new revelation! Which businesses has Obama stated he wishes to destory? Do you have a list? Any reasons?

his new entitlement programs

Please elaborate on this too, Sarge. I need to know what Obama's new entitlement programs are.

and the new taxes he will create to pay for them.

New taxes? Obama is creating taxes that we've never had before? Are you serious? Show me the new tax brackets Obama is creating that we've never had before.

 

[DavidS]

Do you think McCain showed bi-partisanship with his choice of a radical religious right VP?

No, but he did show bi-partisanship by voting against the Bush tax cuts because they benefitted the wealthy. Oops.

 

[dilloduck]

You know, no matter who wins this election--it's time to heal the differences between the right & the left--if we are going to advance to a better economy, energy independance, health care, etc. So this time, I would really like to see a President who chooses some on the opposite side of the isle to be in their cabinet. Let's face it--there are many democrats who have great ideas, & there are many republicans who have great ideas.

Many of these great ideas are blocked, simply because the person with the idea either has a D or R behind their name. One thing I have realised in all my years--is that democrats & republicans want to achieve the same goals in our country. 99% of the time we agree on goals for the economy, energy independance, enviroment, education, health care, taxes, etc. Our arguments typically centers on how to reach that goal.

Now if the President would do that--I would consider that REAL CHANGE from past partisan--one sided--politics that have split this country in two.

Now a question for all of you? Which candidate is more apt to do that? Whom is more willing to incorporate democrats & republicans within their cabinet & on appointed departments--(based on qualifications & not party?)

Are you kidding--The politics of hate is now an all-American sport. I pity the fool who tries to settle the bickering. This good stuff ,man !

 

[xsited1]

Do you think McCain showed bi-partisanship with his choice of a radical religious right VP?

Yes. McCain is already a moderate. He needed a conservative Christian to balance that, otherwise he would lose by default.

 

[Red Dawn]

You know, no matter who wins this election--it's time to heal the differences between the right & the left--if we are going to advance to a better economy, energy independance, health care, etc. So this time, I would really like to see a President who chooses some on the opposite side of the isle to be in their cabinet. Let's face it--there are many democrats who have great ideas, & there are many republicans who have great ideas.

Many of these great ideas are blocked, simply because the person with the idea either has a D or R behind their name. One thing I have realised in all my years--is that democrats & republicans want to achieve the same goals in our country. 99% of the time we agree on goals for the economy, energy independance, enviroment, education, health care, taxes, etc. Our arguments typically centers on how to reach that goal.

Now if the President would do that--I would consider that REAL CHANGE from past partisan--one sided--politics that have split this country in two.

Now a question for all of you? Which candidate is more apt to do that? Whom is more willing to incorporate democrats & republicans within their cabinet & on appointed departments--(based on qualifications & not party?)

Please. Clinton was about the best Democrat the republicans could ever have hoped for. A moderate southerner, who gave the GOP 60% of what they wanted, from welfare reform, to NAFTA, to deregulation.

And they still treated him like a communist and smeared him for 8 years.

 

[del]

Thank god i'm too old and my nephews are too young.

But I got survival skills and weapons and friends with resources. No doubt we'll make a very strong militia. You guys got shotguns and 6 shooters.

ps. You talk about socialism but how free was the 8 yrs of free trade? $10 billion a month in war spending and $700 billion bailout. All taxpayer, treasury spending. They raped us and you defended them every step of the way. You and mccain.

Your run is over son. We tried it your way.

so you'll be under the bed.
shocker.

 

[WillowTree]

Well it just goes to show you, if the posters on this and other forums across the internet are any indication of us coming together I'll eat my hat and yours. It ain't gonna happen.

 

[I Missthe North]

You know, no matter who wins this election--it's time to heal the differences between the right & the left--if we are going to advance to a better economy, energy independance, health care, etc. So this time, I would really like to see a President who chooses some on the opposite side of the isle to be in their cabinet. Let's face it--there are many democrats who have great ideas, & there are many republicans who have great ideas.

Many of these great ideas are blocked, simply because the person with the idea either has a D or R behind their name. One thing I have realised in all my years--is that democrats & republicans want to achieve the same goals in our country. 99% of the time we agree on goals for the economy, energy independance, enviroment, education, health care, taxes, etc. Our arguments typically centers on how to reach that goal.

Now if the President would do that--I would consider that REAL CHANGE from past partisan--one sided--politics that have split this country in two.

Now a question for all of you? Which candidate is more apt to do that? Whom is more willing to incorporate democrats & republicans within their cabinet & on appointed departments--(based on qualifications & not party?)

I personally believe that our president can only do so much in regards to bringing the parties together. Recently, the base of the two parties would rather make the other party look bad rather then help the country progress. Hopefully our president will be able to bring them all together, but I think the movement would need to start in congress. There has to be a complete shift in the way we view politics and working together. It also has something to do with the constituents these people represent. There are many people in America that are too stupid to do anything other then vote along party lines. In order to garner these votes, congressmen need to display their "loyalty" in order to get re-elected. I think the problem is much larger then the president, but I hope whoever gets elected can do something about it. That is the probably the biggest problem in America today and it needs to be addressed by everyone in a position of power.

 

[sealybobo]

Yes. McCain is already a moderate. He needed a conservative Christian to balance that, otherwise he would lose by default.

No. Mccain would have still been the lesser of two evils for the right and now he's picked a radical that couldn't possibly have our confidence. Moderates are turned off by the moral minority. Bush was radical enough and palin is worse. And mccain is 70 and has had malinoma 3 times. She is not an option.

Also, I love that ppl suggest obama is extremely liberal. Same thing they said about clinton. And they truly believe we would run a far left candidate. Wouldn't fly. But they repeat this lie over and over.

 

[DavidS]

so you'll be under the bed.
shocker.

del, which swing states do you think McCain will win?

 

[elvis]

Do you think McCain showed bi-partisanship with his choice of a radical religious right VP?

no he showed he wanted to try to keep the base from staying home.

 

[DavidS]

no he showed he wanted to try to keep the base from staying home.

So is that why North Carolina, Missouri and Georgia are all swing states now?