Loki
All-Conference
Posts: 3,501
|
Post by Loki on May 30, 2008 6:18:24 GMT -5
...not becoming President could be a very bad thing for this country in the form or race riots and whatever else you'd like to imagine pertaining to race. These clown excuses for priests and other religious figures are spewing out crap to these people, talking about black and white and all this stuff, riling the inner city people up. Now some Pfleger guy is priesting to a church similar to Rev. Wright, saying Hillary felt she deserved her nomination because she's white and strictly because she's white. I really doubt she's sitting there going, "How is this coon beating me?!"
The problem is that these people are getting excited in the church and the only thing he's doing is turning blacks against whites worse than we already are. Maybe I'm looking to deep into this but seriously, is it irrational to think that if Obama doesn't win the Democratic nomination or even president, that we're looking at some pretty bad riots/violence following closely after?
|
|
|
|
Post by Freak93 on May 30, 2008 10:59:43 GMT -5
If people haven't gone into riots over the other crazy shenanigans that have gone on in the past few years, I seriously doubt Obama not winning would incite riots. Would people be pissed? Of course. However, I think people are rational enough to understand that Obama isn't a perfect candidate. If he doesn't win, it can be based on real issues.
Now if the election was to be messed up in some way, much like Gore/Bush in 2000, then I think things would start to get stirred up. If Obama ends up on the short end of the stick in an odd situation, it is obvious that people would question the results due to his race. However, if the election is fair and appears fair, nothing bad will happen. Obama, if he loses, will guide his followers away from violent action.
It would have to be a large racial injustice to see riots. Losing an election on fair terms really won't see large-scale riots. A few followers in these types of churches may attempt to get something going, but it is hard to imagine something serious coming about. Even then, I think we are more likely to see peaceful protest than full blown riots. Look what came of the Sean Bell situation or the whole debacle with the Philadelphia police. If riots didn't come from that, I doubt they will come from Obama losing a fair election.
|
|
Keeper
All-Conference
MONTANA TIME!
Posts: 3,913
|
Post by Keeper on May 30, 2008 15:48:42 GMT -5
If Obama is not the nominee, there will be a huge outrage. If electioneering gives the election to McCain, there will be serious problems.
However it won't be the case because the electoral math is so overwhelmingly in his favor right now that I would be shocked to see the Democrats screw this one up.
|
|
|
|
Post by JacktheRipper on May 30, 2008 17:16:48 GMT -5
Did you just call Obama a coon?  We don't even use that term down here, you know in the south. |
|
Loki
All-Conference
Posts: 3,501
|
Post by Loki on May 30, 2008 17:27:17 GMT -5
lol bama I was joking, speaking as this priest was interpreting the way Hillary was acting. So it was supposed to be Hillary talking like she's disappointed that a black man is beating her...because you know, Pfleger seems to think so. I figured since that would be the white trash thing to do, coon would be a funny word to see there.
I've heard coon around here, sad but I have, kinda strange that it's not spoken in the South...
|
|
|
|
Post by JacktheRipper on May 30, 2008 17:28:34 GMT -5
lol bama I was joking, speaking as this priest was interpreting the way Hillary was acting. So it was supposed to be Hillary talking like she's disappointed that a black man is beating her...because you know, Pfleger seems to think so. I figured since that would be the white trash thing to do, coon would be a funny word to see there. I've heard coon around here, sad but I have, kinda strange that it's not spoken in the South... Don't get me wrong, you can hear it if you go to the right places. It's just really racist and all... |
|
Keeper
All-Conference
MONTANA TIME!
Posts: 3,913
|
Post by Keeper on May 30, 2008 17:38:27 GMT -5
Also I will be shocked if Mark Warner is not Obama's VP
|
|
|
|
Post by JacktheRipper on May 30, 2008 17:46:07 GMT -5
Also I will be shocked if Mark Warner is not Obama's VP Keeper, I'm going to be honest, Obama's just not getting me exicted about anything. I'm just asking your opinion, as an Obama supporter, what makes you think he'll be the best POTUS? You seem smart enough where I may actually care what you think. |
|
Keeper
All-Conference
MONTANA TIME!
Posts: 3,913
|
Post by Keeper on May 30, 2008 18:41:31 GMT -5
Also I will be shocked if Mark Warner is not Obama's VP Keeper, I'm going to be honest, Obama's just not getting me exicted about anything. I'm just asking your opinion, as an Obama supporter, what makes you think he'll be the best POTUS? You seem smart enough where I may actually care what you think. There are certainly no guarantees as to the quality of an Obama presidency, but with the ridiculous amount of time I've spent in this campaign, whether it was watching from afar initially, or having dove right into the middle of the fray, I am 100% confident that when I started to back Barack for the White House last summer, I made the right decision. This country is trending so Democratic right now. We're going to have a very Democratic house, and enough Senate seats to kick Joe (I-Tel Aviv) to the curb. I am very interested in seeing what can be accomplished when one party has control of the Presidency, Senate, and House. It leaves a lot of room for possibility, and while they may flub and end up not having the answer to our countries problems, the potential the political climate has to bring about real change in this country is exciting, to say the least. Head to head, Obama is better than McCain on every issue aside from political experience. Pre-presidential campaign John McCain... then you have a race. But since starting his bid for the presidency, McCain has exposed himself as a very weak potential candidate. His foreign policy positions are incredibly near-sighted, and over the course of the campaign, has yet to impress me with any answers over the War in Iraq. I got to go to an event of his in New Hampshire, and during the questioning session, when asked about the war, he repeated rather vague talking points that I found to fully lack the depth of knowledge a president should possess on one of the biggest issues facing this country right now. Anyone who follows what Bush has to say on the war could've said the same things he did, and he failed to substantiate any of it with evidence. I think his recent gaffe over troop levels is really indicitive of the McCain I have come to observe throughout this campaign - his foreign policy credentials are touted based upon his military experience rather than substantive logic. When the economy is the largest problem in the country, I am not too keen on a President that has said he doesn't understand economics well. Granted, I do not believe a political solution (unless we're talking like an economic revolution) is going to really be the answer to our current problems, the stimulus packages both parties proposed were an absolute joke. However, NAFTA has been a disaster to this countries economy, and we cannot continue to afford shipping every other job overseas in this country. My father's division at IBM has moved all but two - his and his boss' - jobs to India in the past five years, losing about sixty jobs over here. The Bush Tax Cuts were terrible policy, and thankfully both Senators McCain and Obama voted against them... until McCain changed his mind and decided to toe the party line. I do not want a president offering another four years of the Bush economic policy. McCain has become a shadow of the man he was when he ran for the presidency in 2000. Sure, he had his problems back then, but you got McCain as a senator who was truly standing up for what he believes is best. Throughout this campaign, McCain has abandoned the ideology that made him such an attractive senator, so that he could try to get this office in his last legitimate chance at the Presidency. Obama has stood by his positions throughout, and if people want to attribute that to him being a better wordsmith giving him convenient exit plans for every gaffe, so be it. But I got a chance to watch eight open Q&A sessions with Obama, and never once did I see him deflect a question, or give an answer that contradicted his previous opinion. I cannot say the same for Clinton, McCain, Romney, and Edwards (his whole "class warfare" rhetoric really disappears in the nicer parts of town). Obama has shown throughout his campaign that he is capable of motivating and mobilizing Americans, perhaps like no other candidate has previously done. In a nation where the two main parties are not that far apart from each other on a global political scale, a man who is having a hard time getting anyone excited about his candidacy shouldn't stand a chance against a man who I've seen instill the faith in average Americans that we might actually get a government that can work for us for once. It is lofty and idealistic, but it is the kind of potential we rarely see from officials at the highest levels. Since the Iowa Caucus, Clinton and the GOP have looked for everything to try and destroy Obama's credibility. The best they have been able to do is attack people he has associated with in the past, and as a strategy it has utterly failed. The fact is, under the enormous stress of a historic campaign met with attacks from all angles, Obama has yet to crack. Sure, he experienced a lull where it undoubtedly got to him, but nothing changed for Barack, he just had to regain his footing. I wouldn't have told you this eight months ago, but I believe Obama is going to run circles around McCain on the debate floor, because he is simply offering more of the same, and running on an image of himself that is now outdated. We cannot afford to lay out the same strategies we have tried for the past eight years for another four. |
|
|
|
Post by JacktheRipper on May 30, 2008 19:37:23 GMT -5
Long post, but solid one. Let me try to pick this apart a little and get your opinion on a thing or two.
First off, I'll go into my politics a bit, if you are willing to humor me. My biggest issues are the Economy, our failed drug policy, and middle eastern policy. The first and last are huge issues, so I think they need a good look and good explanation from both. I'm not going to debate you on the economy, we're on two different sides that will get nothing done. Iraq/Middle East is something I want to know a lot more about from both of them.
For my view, I do not support an immediate pullout from Iraq. So Obama on this worries me to no end. It sounds good but wll cause as many problems as staying there will, and maybe more. The real answer is defend our homefront. Things like better intel, a secure border, and terrorist specific training for all law enforcement and mility based in the USA. Those things will do a better job than us being in war over there. You can't defeat terrorism, because it's based on an idea. You don't kill an idea by killing the people, you kill an idea by changing people's minds. Easy? Not a chance, but it's what will have to be done or we just live with terroism over our heads.
Anyway, I also worry becaue I don't see Obama as the type to stand up to a nation like Iran or take a tough stance with the Saudis. It's perception. I have nothing to back that up but personal feeling, I admit. That being said, I can't shake that opinion and that will effect me when I step in the voting booth. Obama has to show me (and America) that he is the type of leader who will not take a light approach to these crazy middle eastern nations.
All that being said, Obama is starting to become a democratic Reagan type figure to me. It's a different message, to a different set of people, but he's got the charisma to pull it off. People want change, and he's painted himself as a man of change. Hell, it's made me look at a guy who I disagree with on almost every economic issue. The economy is the most important issue in my eyes, and I still like his message. Shows me he's a strong canidate, and if he gets elected could be seen as the Democrats as the GOP sees Reagan today. If so, it'll be a great thing for America.
Also the spin coming out of Faux right now is mind-blowing. These preachers and what not, they are doing their best to paint Obama as a racist. The GOP and Fox are playing on white fear and it makes me sick. This stuff works. Obama has zero chance of winning the south and the mid-west with this shit coming out. None. My parents are scared of him, thinking he wants to take over power for black america. My mom and dad are smart people, this spin doesn't just work on idiots. Play to a fear, and you make the smartest man irrational.
This will be what could drag Obama down IMO. This election at the end of the day will come down to race. White fear vs Black hope. A message of change against the same old stuff. Very interesting election and very important for what direction America ends up going in for the next twenty years or so. Elect change, and we'll see change. The change is probably socailism, but I'll be alble to mask the pain of living in socialism by buying my legal weed. Good and bad.
Oh and for the record, as a staunch capitalist, a Democratic congress scares the hell out of me.
I'm not sure I hit on everything, but pick and choose what you want to talk about Keeper. I'm starting to actually do a little research, so anyone who worked for their campaign is a fantastic resource. Thanks bud.
|
|
Keeper
All-Conference
MONTANA TIME!
Posts: 3,913
|
Post by Keeper on May 30, 2008 20:59:56 GMT -5
For my view, I do not support an immediate pullout from Iraq. So Obama on this worries me to no end. It sounds good but will cause as many problems as staying there will, and maybe more. The real answer is defend our homefront. Things like better intel, a secure border, and terrorist specific training for all law enforcement and military based in the USA. Those things will do a better job than us being in war over there. You can't defeat terrorism, because it's based on an idea. You don't kill an idea by killing the people, you kill an idea by changing people's minds. Easy? Not a chance, but it's what will have to be done or we just live with terrorism over our heads. I believe that anything we do in Iraq is going to be a disaster. We can leave, and it's going to descend into civil war, and we can stay there another 4, 8, however many years, and our intervention will never quell the differences between the different ethnic groups of the region. So long as we remain a legitimate military force in Iraq, the violence will continue to occur. In the interests of the Iraqis, I think we have to leave now, and while it's probably going to lead to a slightly violence spike and little stability, without us there to try and bend the process our way, the nation will be able to sort itself out. It won't be perfect, but nothing good is going to come from what we are currently doing. That being said, Obama's not going to pull all troops, we're going to have bases in Iraq, there just won't be troops on combat missions. He'll get shit for it from the liberals, but it's the only realistic solution. Anyway, I also worry becaue I don't see Obama as the type to stand up to a nation like Iran or take a tough stance with the Saudis. It's perception. I have nothing to back that up but personal feeling, I admit. That being said, I can't shake that opinion and that will effect me when I step in the voting booth. Obama has to show me (and America) that he is the type of leader who will not take a light approach to these crazy middle eastern nations.  Little I can do on that one. I can only hope that when we get to see a real foreign policy debate, that you will see what I have seen in terms of how I believe he is suited to handle conflict in the Middle East. All that being said, Obama is starting to become a democratic Reagan type figure to me. It's a different message, to a different set of people, but he's got the charisma to pull it off. People want change, and he's painted himself as a man of change. Hell, it's made me look at a guy who I disagree with on almost every economic issue. The economy is the most important issue in my eyes, and I still like his message. Shows me he's a strong candidate, and if he gets elected could be seen as the Democrats as the GOP sees Reagan today. If so, it'll be a great thing for America. Agreed. Also the spin coming out of Faux right now is mind-blowing. These preachers and what not, they are doing their best to paint Obama as a racist. The GOP and Fox are playing on white fear and it makes me sick. This stuff works. Obama has zero chance of winning the south and the mid-west with this shit coming out. None. My parents are scared of him, thinking he wants to take over power for black america. My mom and dad are smart people, this spin doesn't just work on idiots. Play to a fear, and you make the smartest man irrational. FOX disgusts me, and Rupert Murdoch's statement about potentially endorsing Obama made me sick. We've descended into a time where our "news" hardly resembles it, and every talking head can dictate fact and fiction. My electoral maps don't have Obama winning anything in the South... unless Barr continues to get the kind of media coverage he has seen over the past three weeks, then I could see Georgia becoming close. Florida is a toss-up, but Obama has decent paths to the nomination that don't need it. This will be what could drag Obama down IMO. This election at the end of the day will come down to race. White fear vs Black hope. A message of change against the same old stuff. Very interesting election and very important for what direction America ends up going in for the next twenty years or so. Elect change, and we'll see change. The change is probably socailism, but I'll be alble to mask the pain of living in socialism by buying my legal weed. Good and bad. There is hardly an election comparable to the dramatic difference we will have at the polls this November, at least none I have come across. Oh and for the record, as a staunch capitalist, a Democratic congress scares the hell out of me. Don't worry, the Democrats will pussy out of doing anything too dramatic; it's why our Progressive Party is so successful up here in Vermont. Always happy to talk elections. EDIT: Remind me to post what I think about terrorism, I've just got to get a bunch of sleep before my New England Qualifier tomorrow, and skimmed over that one. |
|
Loki
All-Conference
Posts: 3,501
|
Post by Loki on May 30, 2008 21:25:51 GMT -5
lol bama I was joking, speaking as this priest was interpreting the way Hillary was acting. So it was supposed to be Hillary talking like she's disappointed that a black man is beating her...because you know, Pfleger seems to think so. I figured since that would be the white trash thing to do, coon would be a funny word to see there. I've heard coon around here, sad but I have, kinda strange that it's not spoken in the South... Don't get me wrong, you can hear it if you go to the right places. It's just really racist and all... Exactly why I used it because that's Pfleger's implication, that Hillary's this huge racist bigot who is offended that she's losing to a black man. |
|
|
|
Post by JacktheRipper on May 30, 2008 21:57:37 GMT -5
Not a bad solution to be honest. Ride a middle ground, I can actually accept that. The conservatives and libs will be pissed, but they're always pissed about something. So it'll be a push.
I am also interested to your points on terrorism.
I'm trying to think of one that comes close, but I really can't think of anything. I would say the Lincoln election in 1860, but really Abe wasn't drawing on this big emotion of change to get into office. In recent years I guess I could connect it to the 1960 election with JFK and Nixon. Still not the same at all.
This is such an facinating dynamic. McCain is old Washington. Much of the same, he's safe. He's an old white man, what America is use to. Then you have this young black guy talking about change, a message that hits home with many Americans. They don't even feel the need to question what kind of change, they just want something different. Powerful dynamic to work against. You also have a look on how race relations are in America. Will enough white people be able to shake their fear of having a black guy in office and pull that lever, no matter how liberal they are on the outside. It also points us in a different direction in where the economy will go. Honestly, I see this as the first real election where it's socialism vs free market thinking. I do realize Obama's not a true socialist, but it will be a big step towards that if he gets elected. It's a referendum on everything. I fear because we need change in many areas, we'll get too much change. Not everything is broken, and that to me means not everything needs a fix. I do feel, change is too strong of a buzzword to go against.
This is certainly going to be a very interesting election, no matter the outcome. It will say so much about what average Americans are thinking. You know if the media doesn't spin everything to get McCain elected or Obama elected. It's bad that the only news I trust is NPR, because I can wade through the bullshit and still get a good representation of both sides. The conservatives buy the bible by Faux News and Rush, and the common dem gets their shit from NBC and the always fair NYT. Though to be honest, I do feel the so called MSM is more "fair and balanced" than Fox News.
|
|
Maize
All-Conference
"Living vicariously through myself."
Posts: 2,067
|
Post by Maize on May 30, 2008 22:34:10 GMT -5
This might just be the most articulate talk of politics I've seen on a forum in a while. Bama, I agree with the old/new Washington being a theme of this election. And if I were to compare it, something quickly comes to mind:
Harold Ford is an african-american who in 2006 ran for the Senate seat in Tennessee. This is a state that had not elected a black governor or senator, but Ford was the Democratic nominee and stood for a motion of change taking over Bill Frist's old seat. So the Dems. were licking their chops on picking up the seat. He was running against an experienced U.S. Congressman Bob Corker.
Corker first said he was a change, then came to center around more conservative principles, and challenged Ford's experience. Just as polls showed Ford ahead of Corker, they "swift-boated" Ford with horrible Roavian attack ads. Corker ended up winning a closely contested race, by I believe less than 5%, but I see this one going differently.
The race for the President of the United States is different from any senatorial election. The media will have a great impact on this election because the average "independent" American will have the final say. Sadly it will come down to a few key swing states, but Obama has put states in play that would have never been close in the past. I think he can get past the attack ads, and I hope the American people do too.
Plus, the Democratic party if more expectant of it this time. I expect to see an ad about "scary black men," like the one against Dukakis. I expect the talk of experience and possibly the hail mary of swift-voting Barack into someone who can't be trusted in a position of power.
As for Mark Warner as Veep, he is running for Senate in what should be a closely contested seat, so I see going with another Virginian politician, Jim Webb. If not Webb, I want Hagel - Tim Strickland could be another possibility, but that would really be for the mid-west vote, which could be critical with Michigan swinging red, Ohio being a battle ground, Iowa being close (just like '04) and Wisconsin a swing state.
Oh and continue to trust NPR!
|
|
Chief Bstn
All-Conference
I'm a whore for Silver
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by Chief Bstn on May 31, 2008 10:27:25 GMT -5
i lost track of this thread after the topic name
|
|
Little I can do on that one. I can only hope that when we get to see a real foreign policy debate, that you will see what I have seen in terms of how I believe he is suited to handle conflict in the Middle East. 
