Jump to content

Election '08: Primaries


JDC

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 1.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
This statement from Hickabee is a death blow to his canidacy

"And that's what we need to do -- to amend the Constitution so it's in God's standards rather than try to change God's standards so it lines up with some contemporary view."

I actually heard this from his mouth on youtube where he was speaking in front of a crowd

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess, if he were president and could accomplish this, that in addition to abolishing abortion as a first step, the next ones to make sure we conform to biblical teachings: no one could get divorced any longer, we'd stone prostitutes to death, women can go back to staying home and taking care of the house, and the price of goats would rise to an all time high as we'd all have to sacrifice them from time to time.

So, at what limit would Mr. Huckabee set for what parts of God's word we are to follow as constitutional law and which ones will we exclude...

I saw this the other day -- glad to get the truth out now. This would apall even the most religious of my friends and family.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This statement from Hickabee is a death blow to his canidacy

"And that's what we need to do -- to amend the Constitution so it's in God's standards rather than try to change God's standards so it lines up with some contemporary view."

I actually heard this from his mouth on youtube where he was speaking in front of a crowd

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gusterfell, I would have disagree with you on that. Just because somebody is First Lady doesn't mean a thing in the experience category. There is a lot more that goes on in the decision-making process that the First Lady would never have any part in unless the sitting president were to appoint his spouse to an actual cabinet position. Because if we were to use that notion then, Nancy Regan (b/c most knew that she was the one wore the pants in that marriage) and Laura Bush are "experienced" also. IMO, that "experienced" hype surrounding Hillary Clinton is a crock that most including myself aren't buying.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heh, I consider Nancy Reagan to be an inconsequential First Lady in terms of making any difference at all during the Reagan Administration. She was generally viewed as being frivolous, uneducated, and very difficult to work with. She had a spiritual adviser that can by and predicted the future for her. She certainly was not of the same caliber as her peers of the day, namely Raisa Gorbechev and Margret Thatcher. Revisionists have tried to re-write this past but that is how it was.

However, though I am no fan of hers, it was Hillary Clinton that did fundamentally change the role of the first lady by actively seeking changes in legislation which no first lady had really taken on before. I give her credit for that.

In any case, first ladies have always had this position and role in the government and certainly Lady Bird Johnson, Elinor Roosevelt, and Betty Ford were great first ladies that actually used their position to use great good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hillary Clinton has been named the winner of the Nevada caucus. I am thinking this means she is going to be the nominee for the democratic ticket this fall. This win was pretty decisive over Obama.

Edwards' vote tally was non-existant. So I am also thinking that he is going to be a no show from here on out.

The next big one for the Democrats will be SC next Saturday.

Meanwhile Romney was the winner in Nevada but that was really an uncontested race. The big news today for the GOP will be what happens in SC later today when the polls close. I am expecting that Thompson will be out. It's up in the air between McCain & Huckabee. One of them will be knocked out too I think by the results of this race.

No one is noticing that Romney is leading in delegates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, there's still the SC Democratic primary a week from now, and I think Obama's got a good chance of winning that one, especially since he's been garnering more of the Black vote overall lately. If he wins it, that would put Clinton and Obama at 2-2 and would make Super Tuesday pretty interesting. But if Clinton gets SC, then I would definitely say that she'll be the nominee for the Democratic party.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Conventional wisdom has Obama beating Clinton in SC due to the high African American population in the state. This race has had so many topsy turvy turns that I would not bank on it. Bill Clinton is going to be walking neighborhoods to assuage concerns about Hillary's MLK comments. Bill can be very persuasive. I am heartened by Huckabee's loss yesterday. It shows that he is another Pat Robertson. An extremist that only appealed to Iowa's far right religious fundamentalists and then went nowhere. I understand why people are beguiled by his folksy manner but his ideas are fringe and scary. I am proud of my last home state for seeing behind Huckabee's friendly smile and rejecting the zealous christian theocrat that he is really is. McCain won the more socially moderate coastal counties and made some inroads among Huckabee's natural evangelical base in the Upstate. I won't be voting for McCain but if we are to have another Republican in the White House I would rather it be somewhat authentic and that's McCain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The internationally renown, Emmy award winning, many time Golden Globe winner, and Oscar winning actor Chuck Norris was campainging for Gov. Hucklebury today. He said John McCain is too old to be president.

Trust me, I'm no John McCain supporter. But Chuck Norris's comment was just downright nasty. It almost sounds like a statement of desperation.

John McCain is 71. Chuck Norris is 67. If that's not the pot calling the kettle beige!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CNN had an interview of Obama complaining about Hillary and her husband being overly critical of him and his campaign and supposedly using false claims to make him look bad. Supposedly, several high profile Democrats have also complained to the Clintons and elsewhere that it Bill, as a former President, should not be making derogatory statements and should instead take the moral high road.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CNN had an interview of Obama complaining about Hillary and her husband being overly critical of him and his campaign and supposedly using false claims to make him look bad. Supposedly, several high profile Democrats have also complained to the Clintons and elsewhere that it Bill, as a former President, should not be making derogatory statements and should instead take the moral high road.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

im watching the debate now...If Hillary and Obama dont stop the tasteless sqabbling, John Edwards is going to benefit from that. John Edwards is already winning the debate so far because he is staying on point with the issues. Hillary and Obama are resorting to personal attacks. Hillary got so nasty, most everyone in the audience bood her.

quote from CNN

Schneider: "Hillary Clinton just drew the first boos of the night. She said Barack Obama doesn't take responsibility for his votes, and took issue with his 'present' voting in the Illinois Senate.

It's evidence the nastiness between the two is beginning to backfire"

Schneider: This could put Edwards back on the map

"This could be a debate where John Edwards gets back in the game. He's effectively making his points, while Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are in silly squabbles. Voters have too many concerns to care about Obama and Clinton's political potshots."

amazingly I looked at the CNN Blogs and all of a sudden everyone is saying Edwards is the man for president when before he got no attention. This debate will likely backfire on both Clinton and Obama. One person on the blog said Edwards will win this debate just by trying to answer the questions!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CNN Debate was priceless. Hillary Clinton and her surrogate's rhetoric was put on blast by both Obama and Edwards. It is interesting how Clinton couldn't back up her rhetoric other than come up with more accusations, and she got the only boo from the audience. However, Obama should have been more through on the debate on connecting the ballot as voting for the Clintons rather just Hillary Clinton. He also could have done a better job on showing how Hillary is incapable of pulling the majority of a state's vote instead of just urban areas like Edwards did, but Obama's strong point was pointing out her weaknesses on national security, lobbyist, and being unable to compete with somebody like John McCain in the General Election. I agree with Edwards how this squabbling is not going to solving any problems, and he will be likely gain very much from this. Edwards is far from being through.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.