Obama WILL be the next president

What do you think about the world?
Post Reply
User avatar
Kwonryu DragonFist
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5382
Joined: July 12, 2002, 6:48 am

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Kwonryu DragonFist »

Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton adressing the people

http://fataculture.wordpress.com/2008/0 ... g-clinton/

User avatar
Forthe
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1719
Joined: July 3, 2002, 4:15 pm
XBL Gamertag: Brutus709
Location: The Political Newf

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Forthe »

Just wondering if I'm on Kilmoll's ignore list...
All posts are personal opinion.
My opinion may == || != my guild's.
"All spelling mistakes were not on purpose as I dont know shit ." - Torrkir

User avatar
Kilmoll the Sexy
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5291
Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:31 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: bunkeru2k
Location: Ohio
Contact:

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Kilmoll the Sexy »

Nope. But I would REALLY like to put Kwon on it. This no ignore for admins is retarded.

User avatar
Kilmoll the Sexy
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5291
Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:31 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: bunkeru2k
Location: Ohio
Contact:

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Kilmoll the Sexy »

Fairweather Pure wrote:I knew from day one that the Republicans would turn on Palin like rabid dogs if/when they lost. Bush should be happy he was merely abandoned by his supporters. This is only the beginning.
What I can't understand is, WHY DID THEY PICK THIS WOMAN? I know they wanted something for a shot in the arm, but I really think that picking a moderate or even picking a Dem as the VP would have given him the election. Sure they would have lost some ultra right wing crispy votes, but they would have pulled a shit ton of the middle leaning liberals. Tons of people I heard from said they probably would have voted McCain if it was not for that hot piece of tail he stuck on his card.

User avatar
Kluden
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1826
Joined: November 13, 2002, 7:12 pm
Location: D.C.

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Kluden »

I'm sure the pick of Palin had something to do with where Obama was losing the votes in the primary. Hillary Clinton carried like 85% of the blue collar town and city vote in the dem primaries. So they figured they would have a shot at the female vote and the half of the dems that didn't like Obama. They apparently underestimated the power of the last name Clinton in that thought process.

User avatar
noel
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 10003
Joined: August 22, 2002, 1:34 am
Gender: Male
Location: Calabasas, CA

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by noel »

I was only leaning toward Obama until the point where McCain selected Palin as his running mate, and I had a chance to start researching her views. McCain quite old for a president-- I believe he would have been the oldest-- and there was no way in hell I would have wanted to see her take over in the event something happened to him.

I really don't understand how people can rally around her as a beacon for the future. During the campaign she proved time and again that she was uninformed, extremely-right-wing, and not terribly intelligent. The fact that during the debates she referred to US men as 'Joe Six Pack' was downright insulting. I'd take my own life before I ever became 'Joe Six Pack'.
Oh, my God; I care so little, I almost passed out.

User avatar
Kilmoll the Sexy
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5291
Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:31 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: bunkeru2k
Location: Ohio
Contact:

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Kilmoll the Sexy »

you mean instead of Joe Kegger amirite?


The woman has to be fairly bright and fairly competent to have gotten where she is, but this was just the wrong pick at the wrong time and pretty much any competent advisor on the planet could have come up with someone better. The problem there being that the hard line party retards whined and cried because McCain wanted to take someone who had been a Dem (Lieberman) as his running mate.

I think part of the radical change that needs to be made should start with Pres candidates being forced to pick a running mate from the opposing party. Bipartisan policies need to start and they need to start at the top and set the example there.

User avatar
Sylvus
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 7032
Joined: July 10, 2002, 11:10 am
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: mp72
Location: A², MI
Contact:

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Sylvus »

Eh, they've got between 2 and 3 years to start grooming her to be a viable candidate, it could happen.

I doubt it will, my gut says that she screwed up enough that the RNC will try to distance themselves from her, but you never know.
"It's like these guys take pride in being ignorant." - Barack Obama

Go Blue!

User avatar
Aslanna
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 12039
Joined: July 3, 2002, 12:57 pm

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Aslanna »

Palin launched her attack on Obama's association with William Ayers, the former Weather Underground bomber, before the campaign had finalized a plan to raise the issue. McCain's advisers were working on a strategy that they hoped to unveil the following week, but McCain had not signed off on it, and top adviser Mark Salter was resisting.
Yeah. Real bright and competent there.... Just go do your own thing.
Have You Hugged An Iksar Today?

--

User avatar
Mak
Almost 1337
Almost 1337
Posts: 834
Joined: August 5, 2002, 4:13 pm
Location: Tucson, AZ
Contact:

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Mak »

Left or right, it is essential that we all come together and support this president to the extent that we can. Let's forget about the Palin controversies, what McCain did wrong or right, or whatever. We have things to do in this country, so let's worry about that. McCain/Palin did nothing criminal, so let it go and let's move forward.

I'll say again that I did not vote for Obama, but he's going to be my president, so I will give him the benefit of the doubt as much as I can and hope that the pundits that are saying he's going to be more centrist than leftist are correct. If not, well, that's why we don't elect a king, we elect a president, and will do so again in 4 years.
Makora

Too often it seems it is the peaceful and innocent who are slaughtered. In this a lesson may be found that it may not be prudential to be either too peaceful or too innocent. One does not survive with wolves by becoming a sheep.

User avatar
Aslanna
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 12039
Joined: July 3, 2002, 12:57 pm

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Aslanna »

Mak wrote:Left or right, it is essential that we all come together and support this president to the extent that we can. Let's forget about the Palin controversies, what McCain did wrong or right, or whatever. We have things to do in this country, so let's worry about that. McCain/Palin did nothing criminal, so let it go and let's move forward.
I'd rather not. Besides he wont even be sworn in until January. So until then we're still stuck with lame duck Bush. So what else is there to talk about.
Have You Hugged An Iksar Today?

--

User avatar
Kilmoll the Sexy
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5291
Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:31 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: bunkeru2k
Location: Ohio
Contact:

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Kilmoll the Sexy »

Like other VP candidates that screwed the pooch, she will completely disappear from the political landscape. Running her would be political suicide now. I will say this again....Swarzenegger is the best electable candidate the GOP has. I seriously doubt that Congress is going to make any changes under a Dem control that will allow him to run anytime soon. Only way it will happen is if/when Obama fucks up enough that you get the huge turnover back to GOP control. My guess is that you will see a change that direction in 2010 although it probably will not be enough to run that change through.

Outside of that, my next best pick for a GOP candidate at this point is Boehner.

User avatar
Siji
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 4039
Joined: November 11, 2002, 5:58 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: mAcK 624
PSN ID: mAcK_624
Wii Friend Code: 7304853446448491
Location: Tampa Bay, FL
Contact:

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Siji »

He said boner.. huh.. huh huh huh. boner.. boner boner!

Beavis/Butthead in 2012!

User avatar
Xyun
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 2566
Joined: July 3, 2002, 8:03 pm
Location: Treasure Island

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Xyun »

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:Like other VP candidates that screwed the pooch, she will completely disappear from the political landscape. Running her would be political suicide now. I will say this again....Swarzenegger is the best electable candidate the GOP has. I seriously doubt that Congress is going to make any changes under a Dem control that will allow him to run anytime soon. Only way it will happen is if/when Obama fucks up enough that you get the huge turnover back to GOP control. My guess is that you will see a change that direction in 2010 although it probably will not be enough to run that change through.

Outside of that, my next best pick for a GOP candidate at this point is Boehner.
Swarzenegger wasn't born in the United States. According to the constitution, you gotta be born in the United States to be president. There is no way an amendment will go through to change that.
I tell it like a true mackadelic.
Founder of Ixtlan - the SCUM of Veeshan.

User avatar
Boogahz
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 9425
Joined: July 6, 2002, 2:00 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: corin12
PSN ID: boog144
Location: Austin, TX
Contact:

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Boogahz »

Xyun wrote:
Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:Like other VP candidates that screwed the pooch, she will completely disappear from the political landscape. Running her would be political suicide now. I will say this again....Swarzenegger is the best electable candidate the GOP has. I seriously doubt that Congress is going to make any changes under a Dem control that will allow him to run anytime soon. Only way it will happen is if/when Obama fucks up enough that you get the huge turnover back to GOP control. My guess is that you will see a change that direction in 2010 although it probably will not be enough to run that change through.

Outside of that, my next best pick for a GOP candidate at this point is Boehner.
Swarzenegger wasn't born in the United States. According to the constitution, you gotta be born in the United States to be president. There is no way an amendment will go through to change that.
Did you stop reading his post when you saw the name?

User avatar
noel
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 10003
Joined: August 22, 2002, 1:34 am
Gender: Male
Location: Calabasas, CA

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by noel »

People outside of California that don't follow our state politics probably don't know this, but Arnold has been an AWESOME governor.
Oh, my God; I care so little, I almost passed out.

User avatar
Kilmoll the Sexy
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5291
Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:31 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: bunkeru2k
Location: Ohio
Contact:

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Kilmoll the Sexy »

Yeah...he has been pretty popular from everything I have seen. Which really is a big reason I think he would be a pretty good candidate. Can you imagine a GOP candidate that could actually pull CA in an election?

User avatar
noel
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 10003
Joined: August 22, 2002, 1:34 am
Gender: Male
Location: Calabasas, CA

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by noel »

He's done an awesome job of pissing people off on both sides of the aisle and forcing them to... work.
Oh, my God; I care so little, I almost passed out.

User avatar
Kilmoll the Sexy
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5291
Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:31 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: bunkeru2k
Location: Ohio
Contact:

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Kilmoll the Sexy »


User avatar
Spang
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 4755
Joined: September 23, 2003, 10:34 am
Gender: Male
Location: Tennessee

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Spang »

Image
VOTING SHIFTS
The NY Times breakdown of how the country voted compared with 2004. The redder the area, the more people shifted towards republicans. The bluer the area, the more people shifted toward the Democrats.
Make love, fuck war, peace will save us.

User avatar
Spang
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 4755
Joined: September 23, 2003, 10:34 am
Gender: Male
Location: Tennessee

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Spang »

noel wrote:People outside of California that don't follow our state politics probably don't know this, but Arnold has been an AWESOME governor.
I met Arnold in Kuwait when he was an actor, shook his hand. He was a lot shorter than I thought he would be, but a genuinely nice guy. Also, he had very nice shoes.
Make love, fuck war, peace will save us.

Fairweather Pure
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 8504
Joined: July 3, 2002, 1:06 pm
XBL Gamertag: SillyEskimo

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Fairweather Pure »

That's pretty cool. That picture really drives home how few right wingers there are in this country. It's great to see us all come together under blue again :)

Btw, I just heard that NC went to Obama as well. I think that completes the landslide.

Sueven
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 3200
Joined: July 22, 2002, 12:36 pm

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Sueven »

So what did we learn?

1. Culture Wars

Some liberals think that this election heralds a fundamental shift in the culture wars, a shift in which the left is now victorious. As someone who's firmly on the left in the culture wars, I think that this is overly optimistic. While the election did result in many positive cultural outcomes, the outcomes are not uniformly positive, and I don't think that a fundamental victory over hearts and minds is the correct explanation for the progress that did occur.

On the positive side, every anti-abortion ballot initiative failed (in a relatively diverse set of states-- Colorado, California, South Dakota). This is not entirely a surprise-- while many Americans have qualms about abortion, in the broadest terms we remain a pro-choice nation. Two anti-drug war initiatives also passed-- marijuana decriminalization in Massachusetts, medical marijuana in Michigan.

On the negative side, gay marriage initiatives failed everywhere, even California. Gay adoption was banned in Arkansas, which I find particularly depressing. I believe in gay marriage as a fundamental civil rights issue (so long as straight folks are allowed to marry, at least) but it's not one that I see as overly consequential. Gay marriage is an important symbolic victory, but I won't lose too much sleep over civil unions or another framework to create equal rights without use of the term 'marriage.' Gay adoption, on the other hand, is an incredibly important issue to me. The family is important, and the family is a building block of society. Preventing gay Americans from participating in this institution is egregiously wrong and is an issue that is far more important to me than a symbolic issue like marriage. Protection of gay rights is a key civil rights battle of our time. Those who oppose such rights are on the wrong side of history and will, without a doubt, eventually lose their battle. While it's depressing to see setbacks, it's still encouraging to see how far gay rights have come in the past several decades.

And then there's the race issue. I was interested, although not surprised, to see the uproar about race coming from the right upon Obama's election. After a two-year campaign that contained only one moment of frank discussion about race (Obama's post-Jeremiah Wright speech), it's amazing to see that conservative pundits suddenly wanted to talk about nothing else. Obama's election is used as evidence that we are now a post-racial, colorblind society; that race preferences are no longer necessary; that the ugly specter of racism has been expunged from our history; and, generally, that race is simply an issue that we should never speak of again in any context. This seems to be the value that the conservative punditry seeks to extract from their defeat-- "fine, we may have lost, but you can never again make arguments on racial grounds." This is ridiculous. Obama winning is obviously a huge moment in the history of American race relations, but to pretend that it is the end of race issues is absurd. The conservatives crowing about what a big moment this is for race relations in this country and so forth did not vote for Obama. They did not support Obama. Many of them participated in race-baiting regarding Obama. The fact that they ended up in the minority demonstrates that we've come far enough that implicit race-baiting is no longer a guaranteed method of winning an election, which is certainly a positive, but it does not demonstrate that racism is dead or that race is no longer an issue. I'm not going to write further about this here, but, while fully acknowledging that Obama's win is a huge step forward for race relations, anyone who thinks that race is finished as an issue in America knows nothing about the nature of race in this country.

I'm skeptical that the cultural progress that was made in this election-- especially the general failure of race-baiting or gay-baiting or god-baiting tactics-- is due to the triumph of progressive cultural ideals. If this election were run in a political environment that did not involve economic crisis and serious foreign policy challenges, I think that cultural issues would have had more salience. It's a lot easier to ignore the economy and focus on cultural issues when the economy isn't tanking, and I think that if it weren't for the specter of an economic collapse and costly foreign military adventures, substantially more voters would have voted along cultural lines.

Finally, think to yourself "what parts of the United States would I expect to be the most racist," and then look at the map which Spang posted. Pretty close fit, isn't it? Now, simply claiming that counties which moved right this year did so because they are full of racists is overly simplistic and almost certainly an incomplete story, but it's obviously got something to do with it. Anyone care to take a stab at articulating an explanation for why the bible belt and appalachia were the only areas in the country to move significantly right that doesn't involve race?

2. Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, Rashid Khalidi, etc.

The Republicans really blew it with this one. I do think that Obama's 'associations' are meaningful and could have turned into a salient political issue if used properly. The Republicans did not use them properly. The Republicans used these associations to stir shadowy fear that Obama was un-American, a muslim, a terrorist or a terrorist sympathizer. This is patently ridiculous-- the associations prove no such thing, and Americans aren't stupid enough to think that they do. What they do show, however, is that Obama is familiar with radical leftist ideas, persons, and arguments (this is a positive in my book, but probably not in the eyes of America generally). If the GOP had advanced the narrative that Obama is deeply engaged in a radical leftist academic ivory-tower culture, they may have gained some traction. The GOP should have argued that these associations indicate that Obama is sympathetic to figures like Ward Churchill instead of arguing that Obama is sympathetic to figures like Osama Bin Laden. That would have been a centrist narrative-- "we represent the center and Obama is uncomfortably close to the radical left." Instead, they drove a narrative that Obama pals around with terrorists, which is a hard-right narrative-- "Obama has spoken to radical liberals and is therefore a TERRORIST."

Obama has what I would call a critical consciousness, which is to say that he's familiar with the arguments advanced by critical scholarship, which is traditionally hard-left. There's no evidence that Obama embraces a critical worldview (I personally think that he's a moderate who is familiar with and appreciative of varying viewpoints, from criticism to free-market ideology), but the mere fact that he understands the critical worldview-- that he accepts that there is something valuable to critical consciousness, that he does not believe that critical arguments are lunatic academic liberal nonsense-- is something that may have actually troubled some moderate voters. The line of attack that the republicans chose to pursue regarding Obama's 'associations' manifestly did not accomplish this end, and discredited any attempt to raise serious questions along these lines.

3. The GOP

The GOP is in the process of digging itself into an even deeper hole than it's already in. Look, the GOP's plight is not difficult to explain. There are two major reasons for it.

First, incompetence. The GOP had control over the Presidency for 8 years, and held complete control of Congress for the majority of this time, and it accomplished nothing. Our Republican government operated with virtually no regard for conservative political principles, and did so in a staggeringly incompetent fashion. Republicans are now largely (and partially rightly) blamed for fucking over the economy and bungling not just the Iraq war but our foreign policy generally. Democrats used to have a reputation as pie-in-the-sky idealists, while Republicans were hardened efficient leaders who could actually get things done. Now that's been reversed-- the Democratic party is the home for moderates concerned with efficient governance, and the GOP is home only to partisan ideologues.

Second, the rapid disappearance of the 'big tent.' The GOP has lost voters as its agenda has moved closer and closer to the agenda of its base. The GOP has suffered from events like the Terri Schiavo fiasco and an unrelenting obsession with maintaining hard-right positions on issues like immigration, abortion, sex education, stem cells and so forth. Meanwhile, the Democrats have gained power by running pro-gun candidates, pro-life candidates, fiscally conservative candidates. The Democrats are rapidly becoming a welcoming party in which issues of legitimate dispute can be argued about sanely and reasonably, while the Republicans are becoming a party who will tolerate no deviations from a strict dogma which appeals to only a minority of the country.

Fortunately for me, the self-delusion continues. The fact that lots of conservatives think that Sarah Palin is their next standard-bearer is proof enough of the complete lack of self-understanding demonstrated by the GOP. Several conservative activists (the Michelle Malkin crowd) has already begun identifying those elements in the McCain campaign that were "anti-Palin," with the aim of opposing any candidate for whom they might work and more or less excommunicating them from the Republican party. Great! The more that the GOP gives reasonable, moderate republicans the boot, the more it will marginalize itself. The notion that Republicans would have been triumphant this year if they only hadn't been so moderate and if only they had played to the base more is complete lunacy.

Playing into this problem, many of the Republicans who lost their seats in Congress this year are moderate sorts. The Congressional GOP is more conservative now than it was last week. This does not bode well for the GOP's chances of broadening their tent, moderating their staunchly conservatives positions, and welcoming more middle-of-the-road voters back to the fold.

Ramesh Ponnuru, usually one of the more sensible conservatives out there, recently posted an email from a reader which contained some (self-deluding) analysis as to why the GOP is faltering. It included these observations:
The youth vote: It was marginally more important this year; and 18-29 year olds are solidly Democratic. This is a major branding problem for the Republican Party. I think millenials, in general, have a lot of conservative tendencies. They believe in the private sector. They aren't cynical. They believe in the family, community, service, and social responsibility; but I think that Republicans are losing them based largely on outreach and perceived problems with tolerance and diversity.
This shows certain fundamental misunderstandings of the millenial generation and of what the Democratic and Republican parties currently look like.

First: Yes, young voters believe 'in the private sector.' However, we've been given no reason to believe that the Democrats do not share this belief. Young voters do not believe in an absolutist version of free-market ideology that would allow Republicans to appeal to us by simply being more free-market than the Democrats. Free-market and private sector talk will only appeal to youth if it's clear that the Democrats are far to the left of where the youth is, which is not clear at all. For this appeal to be successful, Republicans will also need to demonstrate that their views on the private sector and free markets are similar to those of youth. Considering that recent Republican discussion of free markets has revolved around an unlicensed plumber railing against the entire notion of progressive taxation, and recent Republican action regarding free markets has involved nationalizing the financial sector, there's a long way to go.

Second: No, we're not cynical. And you'll note that Obama was the guy calling for hope and change, while McCain was busy raising fears regarding socialism and terrorism. Which message do you think better resonates with youthful voters? What makes anyone think that the Democrats are the party of cynicism?

Third: Yes, we do believe in family, community, service, and social responsibility. In what way do Republican positions better reflect these ideals than Democratic positions? Contrary to what appears to be the position of the conservative punditocracy, young voters do not believe that abortion bans, strictly circumscribed access to birth control, abstinence only education, bans on stem cell research, bans on gay marriage and support-the-troops rhetoric constitutes the entirety of "family, community, service, and social responsibility." In fact, much of the youth thinks that these positions directly CONFLICT with some of those ideals (no gay marriage is an anti-family position, restricting birth control and banning abortion has troubling implications for the family, no stem cell research runs counter to ideals of social responsibility and community, etc etc etc). Many young people-- even many smart young people-- think that the Democratic party is the pro-family, pro-community, pro-service, pro-social responsibility party. Republicans are going to need to stop simply ASSERTING that they are the party of family and community and responsibility and start ARGUING AND DEMONSTRATING that they are the party of these ideals. They will need to broaden their notions of what it means to be pro-family and pro-community and pro-service. And there's little evidence that Republicans have any idea how to go about doing so.

Finally: PERCEIVED problems of tolerance and diversity? PERCEIVED? Let's tackle tolerance first: Gay marriage. Gay adoption. Gays generally. Shameful demagoguery on immigration. Race-baiting. OK, now what about diversity? Did anyone see the Republican National Convention? Has anyone seen the diversity of the Republican Congressional delegation compared to the Democratic Congressional delegation? See a whole lot of black people or hispanic people or muslim people or gay people in those crowds? If Republicans want to make inroads on tolerance and diversity grounds, they will need to start actually BEING tolerant and diverse (and I bet that the latter would follow the former quite naturally).
Minority votes: There are scary trends in this election. Obama won 96% of the African-American vote (the Dems weren't far behind) and more than two-thirds of the Hispanic vote, concentrated largely among younger Hispanic voters. Perception matters, and I think it's important for the Republicans to make an effort to talk to these groups. I fundamentally believe our ideas about free markets, individual liberty, etc. could be enormously appealing to these folks, but we aren't seeking to engage these broad communities as much as we should.
The problems with this pretty much overlap with the problems with 'perceived problems of tolerance and diversity.' If the Republicans start LISTENING to what minority voters say they care about instead of TELLING minority voters what the Republican party says they should care about, maybe they'd have better luck. Incidentally, TELLING minority voters that Obama's election proves that we are now a post-racial nation is not a good way to start, as it's not true and doesn't comport with the lived reality of minority Americans.

Oh yeah, and ceasing to demonize hispanics and finding a few black Republicans might help too.

It looks like Sarah Palin will come out of this election with a real power base among the conservative movement, which is great news for liberals like myself. Making Palin the new face of the Republican party is the best idea that the Republicans could have if they're looking to generate even more enthusiastic support among an even smaller base. Fortunately, shrinking the party is not going to lead to electoral victories. Republicans need to look for new faces and new ideas, because what they've got isn't going to cut it. If Sarah Palin and Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich are the new voices of the Republican party, they're in trouble. If Bobby Jindal and Arnold Schwarzenegger are out in front, maybe the GOP can get somewhere.

The Democratic party, with an influx of new congressmen and governors over the last few election cycles, is not going to be hurting for fresh stars, especially with guys like Brian Schweitzer already waiting in the wings. The GOP had better find some counterparts from within its own ranks if it wants to stay relevant.

I don't doubt that the GOP eventually will reinvent itself and experience a revival in fortunes. But it better hurry up and get on with it, because every additional year of liberal domination will have substantial permanent effects on the political culture of the United States.

User avatar
Spang
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 4755
Joined: September 23, 2003, 10:34 am
Gender: Male
Location: Tennessee

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Spang »

If you wrote a book, I would buy it.
Make love, fuck war, peace will save us.

User avatar
Xyun
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 2566
Joined: July 3, 2002, 8:03 pm
Location: Treasure Island

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Xyun »

Boogahz wrote:
Xyun wrote:
Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:Like other VP candidates that screwed the pooch, she will completely disappear from the political landscape. Running her would be political suicide now. I will say this again....Swarzenegger is the best electable candidate the GOP has. I seriously doubt that Congress is going to make any changes under a Dem control that will allow him to run anytime soon. Only way it will happen is if/when Obama fucks up enough that you get the huge turnover back to GOP control. My guess is that you will see a change that direction in 2010 although it probably will not be enough to run that change through.

Outside of that, my next best pick for a GOP candidate at this point is Boehner.
Swarzenegger wasn't born in the United States. According to the constitution, you gotta be born in the United States to be president. There is no way an amendment will go through to change that.
Did you stop reading his post when you saw the name?
Nope, I understood his post pretty fucking clearly. However, it is not up to congress whether or not they allow him to run regardless of who has control. I was trying to point that out, but apparently neither of you paid attention in your 8th grade political science class and don't understand what it fucking takes to amend the constitution. It is my fault for not realizing exactly how ignorant people here are regarding how our government works. From now on I promise to spell things out as if I'm talking to junior high school kids so you could understand more clearly.

Article V of the Constitution of the United States
I tell it like a true mackadelic.
Founder of Ixtlan - the SCUM of Veeshan.

User avatar
Kilmoll the Sexy
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5291
Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:31 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: bunkeru2k
Location: Ohio
Contact:

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Kilmoll the Sexy »

What makes you think it was specifically race that made those states go more red? The entire area you are talking about (and yes I had to unblock that post) is in the bible belt and also is a very high concentration of hunters and gun rights people. Obama is THE anti-christ for everyone that centers on those two foundations. Race might have played an extremely small factor in it, but I can guarantee you it did not play as much of a factor as the reverse where it motivated the black vote heavily.

User avatar
Niffoni
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1318
Joined: February 18, 2003, 12:53 pm
Gender: Mangina
Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Niffoni »

Fantastic post, Sueven.

If anyone's been poking around the more pro-Palin of the right-wing blogs, perhaps you've realized, as I have, that if she becomes the face of the Republicans as an effort to energize (agitate?) the "base", then I have this awful feeling that the party would shrink, and morph into something more closely resembling a "militia". Scary, scary stuff.
Let's think the unthinkable, let's do the undoable, let's prepare to grapple with the ineffable itself, and see if we may not eff it after all. - Douglas Adams

*~*stragi*~*
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 3866
Joined: July 3, 2002, 1:59 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: kimj0ngil
Location: Ahwatukee, Arizona
Contact:

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by *~*stragi*~* »

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:Like other VP candidates that screwed the pooch, she will completely disappear from the political landscape. Running her would be political suicide now. I will say this again....Swarzenegger is the best electable candidate the GOP has. I seriously doubt that Congress is going to make any changes under a Dem control that will allow him to run anytime soon. Only way it will happen is if/when Obama fucks up enough that you get the huge turnover back to GOP control. My guess is that you will see a change that direction in 2010 although it probably will not be enough to run that change through.

Outside of that, my next best pick for a GOP candidate at this point is Boehner.
if that happens, you have my vote sir.

User avatar
Aslanna
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 12039
Joined: July 3, 2002, 12:57 pm

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Aslanna »

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:The entire area you are talking about (and yes I had to unblock that post) is in the bible belt and also is a very high concentration of hunters and gun rights people
Yes. We get it. You have people on ignore. STFU about it already.

I don't think gun-rights had hardly anything to do with it since most intelligent people know those (reasonable) rights wont be impacted by an Obama presidency. Other than the fearmongers. And yes you can save this post to throw back at me when Obama outlaws all guns in the US. Well, you could if you were able to read it. Don't forget to post a response telling me I'm on ignore because we all give a shit.

In regards to Niffoni's post... Here's a tidbit from Newsweek:
The Obama campaign was provided with reports from the Secret Service showing a sharp and disturbing increase in threats to Obama in September and early October, at the same time that many crowds at Palin rallies became more frenzied. Michelle Obama was shaken by the vituperative crowds and the hot rhetoric from the GOP candidates. "Why would they try to make people hate us?" Michelle asked a top campaign aide.
Palin was good at nothing but stirring up hate. Maybe that's just because she had no clue about anything else. So instead of going over what her and McCain would do if they were in the White House she spent all her time attacking Obama trying to paint him as basically a terrorist. I wish I could dismiss her as easy as some people have but I definitely have a feeling we will be seeing her again. If you listen to a lot of the analysts they point out McCains polling numbers rising after the Palin pick. The thing that basically lost him the election, at least according to most of them, was how he handled the economic crisis. Oh and George Bush of course.
Have You Hugged An Iksar Today?

--

User avatar
Nick
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5711
Joined: July 4, 2002, 3:45 pm

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Nick »

That was a really great post Sueven. I'm impressed!

I agree with pretty much everything you just said. I was going to make a post giving my own views on the election, but they would merely be about the shift in global perception of the USA (positive) in the last few days. Really though I think you have completely nailed a lot of the problems the GOP are now facing. You made some very salient points :lol:

User avatar
Kilmoll the Sexy
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5291
Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:31 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: bunkeru2k
Location: Ohio
Contact:

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Kilmoll the Sexy »

Xyun wrote:
Boogahz wrote:
Xyun wrote:
Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:Like other VP candidates that screwed the pooch, she will completely disappear from the political landscape. Running her would be political suicide now. I will say this again....Swarzenegger is the best electable candidate the GOP has. I seriously doubt that Congress is going to make any changes under a Dem control that will allow him to run anytime soon. Only way it will happen is if/when Obama fucks up enough that you get the huge turnover back to GOP control. My guess is that you will see a change that direction in 2010 although it probably will not be enough to run that change through.

Outside of that, my next best pick for a GOP candidate at this point is Boehner.
Swarzenegger wasn't born in the United States. According to the constitution, you gotta be born in the United States to be president. There is no way an amendment will go through to change that.
Did you stop reading his post when you saw the name?
Nope, I understood his post pretty fucking clearly. However, it is not up to congress whether or not they allow him to run regardless of who has control. I was trying to point that out, but apparently neither of you paid attention in your 8th grade political science class and don't understand what it fucking takes to amend the constitution. It is my fault for not realizing exactly how ignorant people here are regarding how our government works. From now on I promise to spell things out as if I'm talking to junior high school kids so you could understand more clearly.

Article V of the Constitution of the United States
If you are going to call me ignorant, you should at least read and understand the exact process that you actually took the time to post but not process.

Let me help you out a touch here.
Proposal
Whenever they "deem it necessary," two-thirds of both houses of Congress may propose an amendment.
So indeed Congress IS responsible for step fucking ONE of the process. Unless you think the states can get a national convention working which I highly doubt.
Ratification
After being officially proposed, a constitutional amendment must then be ratified by the legislatures of, or by conventions in, at least three-fourths of the states.
Step 2 is the states ratifying said proposal.

Blah blah blah balh filler words filler words you dipshit filler words filler words go back to understanding plain english you retard.

Sueven
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 3200
Joined: July 22, 2002, 12:36 pm

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Sueven »

A few things that I forgot on the "perceived tolerance" point:

This is where I should discuss the rampant sexism that the right directed at Hillary Clinton, which quickly morphed into "we liked her all along" when she lost, and then turned into painfully transparent pseudo-feminist gender baiting upon Sarah Palin's nomination. Not a winning strategy.

This would also be the place to discuss real Virginia vs fake Virginia, the "pro-America" parts of the country, the American President Americans Have Been Waiting For, Michelle Bachmann's ridiculous demand that the media conduct an investigation on which Congressmen are pro-America and which are not, and so forth.
Kilmoll wrote:What makes you think it was specifically race that made those states go more red? The entire area you are talking about (and yes I had to unblock that post) is in the bible belt and also is a very high concentration of hunters and gun rights people. Obama is THE anti-christ for everyone that centers on those two foundations.
This is an explanation that I considered, but I don't think it holds up. The Bible Belt and Appalachia are places with lots of hunters and gun rights, but so is Ohio, so is Pennsylvania, so is Maine, so is Wyoming and Montana and Idaho, and all of those places moved to the left during this election (with the exception of the southwestern portions of Pennsylvania and southeastern portions of Ohio, which are more or less in Appalachia). Every part of the country with lots of gun owners and hunters moved toward Obama except for the bible belt and appalachia. Why?

On the bible belt issue? Yes, they're not disposed to like Obama in the bible belt, but he's certainly an improvement over Kerry from a religious perspective. Evangelicals actually shifted toward Obama compared to Kerry (along with every religious group except for "other," oddly).

User avatar
Xyun
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 2566
Joined: July 3, 2002, 8:03 pm
Location: Treasure Island

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Xyun »

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:
Xyun wrote:
Boogahz wrote:
Xyun wrote:
Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:Like other VP candidates that screwed the pooch, she will completely disappear from the political landscape. Running her would be political suicide now. I will say this again....Swarzenegger is the best electable candidate the GOP has. I seriously doubt that Congress is going to make any changes under a Dem control that will allow him to run anytime soon. Only way it will happen is if/when Obama fucks up enough that you get the huge turnover back to GOP control. My guess is that you will see a change that direction in 2010 although it probably will not be enough to run that change through.

Outside of that, my next best pick for a GOP candidate at this point is Boehner.
Swarzenegger wasn't born in the United States. According to the constitution, you gotta be born in the United States to be president. There is no way an amendment will go through to change that.
Did you stop reading his post when you saw the name?
Nope, I understood his post pretty fucking clearly. However, it is not up to congress whether or not they allow him to run regardless of who has control. I was trying to point that out, but apparently neither of you paid attention in your 8th grade political science class and don't understand what it fucking takes to amend the constitution. It is my fault for not realizing exactly how ignorant people here are regarding how our government works. From now on I promise to spell things out as if I'm talking to junior high school kids so you could understand more clearly.

Article V of the Constitution of the United States
If you are going to call me ignorant, you should at least read and understand the exact process that you actually took the time to post but not process.

Let me help you out a touch here.
Proposal
Whenever they "deem it necessary," two-thirds of both houses of Congress may propose an amendment.
So indeed Congress IS responsible for step fucking ONE of the process. Unless you think the states can get a national convention working which I highly doubt.
Ratification
After being officially proposed, a constitutional amendment must then be ratified by the legislatures of, or by conventions in, at least three-fourths of the states.
Step 2 is the states ratifying said proposal.

Blah blah blah balh filler words filler words you dipshit filler words filler words go back to understanding plain english you retard.
I reread your post. You specifically say that it is remotely possible that the GOP would (take steps to) allow foreign born citizens to become president. That statement, no matter how you meant to say it, is ignorant on so many levels that I can't believe I have to take the time to retort, not once, not twice, but now three times. Again, I tried to clarify that it is not just infinitely improbable but IMPOSSIBLE for them to do this. I can tell you with supreme confidence that there will never ever be a president of the US that was not born on American soil, it is impossible. So you can continue to defend a ridiculously ignorant and moronic notion or you can put that pipe dream to rest. Won't make a bit of difference to me, and it won't change the fact that I'm right and you're indisputably wrong.
I tell it like a true mackadelic.
Founder of Ixtlan - the SCUM of Veeshan.

User avatar
Nick
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5711
Joined: July 4, 2002, 3:45 pm

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Nick »

Xyun wrote:I can tell you with supreme confidence that there will never ever be a president of the US that was not born on American soil, it is impossible. So you can continue to defend a ridiculously ignorant and moronic notion or you can put that pipe dream to rest. Won't make a bit of difference to me, and it won't change the fact that I'm right and you're indisputably wrong.
That's about the most retarded thing I've seen on the internet all day. What a dumb statement for any Obama supporter to come off with, on this of all days, least of all you, an Iranian immigrant who has participated with an admirable and extraordinary zeal in the 2008 American democratic process. :roll:

User avatar
Xyun
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 2566
Joined: July 3, 2002, 8:03 pm
Location: Treasure Island

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Xyun »

Nick wrote:
Xyun wrote:I can tell you with supreme confidence that there will never ever be a president of the US that was not born on American soil, it is impossible. So you can continue to defend a ridiculously ignorant and moronic notion or you can put that pipe dream to rest. Won't make a bit of difference to me, and it won't change the fact that I'm right and you're indisputably wrong.
That's about the most retarded thing I've seen on the internet all day. What a dumb statement for any Obama supporter to come off with, on this of all days, least of all you, an Iranian immigrant who has participated with an admirable and extraordinary zeal in the 2008 American democratic process. :roll:
Your lack of understanding of the American constitution and the American political process is obscene. But just for fun, I would love to hear exactly why you think my statement is retarded.
I tell it like a true mackadelic.
Founder of Ixtlan - the SCUM of Veeshan.

User avatar
Xatrei
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 2104
Joined: July 22, 2002, 4:28 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Boringham, AL

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Xatrei »

Nick wrote:That's about the most retarded thing I've seen on the internet all day. What a dumb statement for any Obama supporter to come off with, on this of all days, least of all you, an Iranian immigrant who has participated with an admirable and extraordinary zeal in the 2008 American democratic process. :roll:
The issue is that foreign-born citizens are prevented by our constitution from becoming President. To change this would require an amendment, which is no trivial task. It requires not just getting essentially super majorities of both houses of Congress to agree to propose the amendment, but also having to get the proposed amendment ratified by 3/4 of the states. Because of the complexities of both of these steps, it would be virtually impossible to get a constitutional amendment passed over something that is, for most people a non issue.
"When I was a kid, my father told me, 'Never hit anyone in anger, unless you're absolutely sure you can get away with it.'" - Russel Ziskey

User avatar
Xyun
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 2566
Joined: July 3, 2002, 8:03 pm
Location: Treasure Island

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Xyun »

Let's not forget that the founding fathers purposefully included that provision in the constitution as one of only 2 requirements to be elected president, that there was a blatant reason for including that provision, that no part of the actual constitution has ever been repealed, only one amendment has ever been repealed, and repealing that specific part of the constitution is not only patently absurd, but is a slap in the face of the founding fathers and every American who has died for his country since. But hey, I'm the retarded one, and Nick is just so smart, who am I to argue?
I tell it like a true mackadelic.
Founder of Ixtlan - the SCUM of Veeshan.

User avatar
masteen
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 8196
Joined: July 3, 2002, 12:40 pm
Gender: Mangina
Location: Florida
Contact:

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by masteen »

Sueven wrote:A few things that I forgot on the "perceived tolerance" point:

This is where I should discuss the rampant sexism that the right directed at Hillary Clinton, which quickly morphed into "we liked her all along" when she lost, and then turned into painfully transparent pseudo-feminist gender baiting upon Sarah Palin's nomination. Not a winning strategy.

This would also be the place to discuss real Virginia vs fake Virginia, the "pro-America" parts of the country, the American President Americans Have Been Waiting For, Michelle Bachmann's ridiculous demand that the media conduct an investigation on which Congressmen are pro-America and which are not, and so forth.
Kilmoll wrote:What makes you think it was specifically race that made those states go more red? The entire area you are talking about (and yes I had to unblock that post) is in the bible belt and also is a very high concentration of hunters and gun rights people. Obama is THE anti-christ for everyone that centers on those two foundations.
This is an explanation that I considered, but I don't think it holds up. The Bible Belt and Appalachia are places with lots of hunters and gun rights, but so is Ohio, so is Pennsylvania, so is Maine, so is Wyoming and Montana and Idaho, and all of those places moved to the left during this election (with the exception of the southwestern portions of Pennsylvania and southeastern portions of Ohio, which are more or less in Appalachia). Every part of the country with lots of gun owners and hunters moved toward Obama except for the bible belt and appalachia. Why?

On the bible belt issue? Yes, they're not disposed to like Obama in the bible belt, but he's certainly an improvement over Kerry from a religious perspective. Evangelicals actually shifted toward Obama compared to Kerry (along with every religious group except for "other," oddly).
We also like our guns here in Florida, and most of the hispanics here are so light, you'd have trouble telling them from whitey. My sister has red hair and freckles, and is 100% cubanichi. So it doesn't seem like it was either gun control or brown people voting for a brown man.

McCain failed to carry a Republican state that's had almost 2 decades of awesome Republican governors (and I mean that, JEB did a good job, and Christ has impressed me as well), with the exception of the portions of the panhandle we refer to as South Jawja and South Bama, and it's not because they like to hunt.
"There is at least as much need to curb the cruel greed and arrogance of part of the world of capital, to curb the cruel greed and violence of part of the world of labor, as to check a cruel and unhealthy militarism in international relationships." -Theodore Roosevelt

User avatar
Nick
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5711
Joined: July 4, 2002, 3:45 pm

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Nick »

The level of needlessly defensive pomposity in the reply was astounding but not a surprise.

My point was effectively: you don't know what the future holds. Try telling a man 10 years ago that in 10 years time a black man would be President and you would get similiar replies to the sort of thing Xyun is saying here now. I'm not actually trying to start a fight, I just found your post staggeringly short sighted. Be snooty all you like, it doesn't actually change the absurdity of your prediction as one that is not quite as gospel as you appear to think.

I didn't say it would easy, or doable in the near future. I just find it silly to think that it would "never ever happen". This is apparently outrageous to you? Really? .........really? I find that hard to believe.

There is every possibility that somewhere down the line a non-US born candidate could become President. It could be 100 years. it could be 200 years. It will probably happen eventually. Flat out saying it will never happen, without the aid of a crystal ball is quite frankly ridiculous.

It's not exactly rocket science to acknowledge that the future isn't set in stone.

Edit: Xatrei, I totally see your point, and admit I was ignorant to the finer details (then again, I never claimed to be an expert on the ins and outs - so you can win that dumbass argument if you wish Xyun?). I just think that saying its "impossible" when its actually not is pretty ignorant, especially when the will of the people can change dramatically over the course of say, a century.
Last edited by Nick on November 7, 2008, 12:14 am, edited 7 times in total.

User avatar
Siji
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 4039
Joined: November 11, 2002, 5:58 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: mAcK 624
PSN ID: mAcK_624
Wii Friend Code: 7304853446448491
Location: Tampa Bay, FL
Contact:

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Siji »

I think the difference Nick, is that the absurdity of thinking a black man could be president wasn't due to legal/constitutional issues.. electing a non-US native as president is. I'm not saying that will never ever ever be overturned or changed, but for quite awhile it's a safe bet to say there's no chance of it happening. Arnold may be good, but he can't be that good.

User avatar
Nick
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5711
Joined: July 4, 2002, 3:45 pm

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Nick »

Of course it won't happen to Arnie. I wasn't defending Kilmoll's position, god forbid! What kind of commie potato eating socialist would I be if I started doing that?!


I didn't say it would happen tomorrow. Of course it wont. Or even in ten years. It's not a concern now. But it may become one some day.

I just said ruling it out as something that will "Never ever" happen is obviously ridiculous. The future isn't set in stone. And no one can actually say it is, even if they want to be a dick on a message board about it, as if that somehow validates their prediction.

Especially considering the week we happen to be living through. As you yourself said Siji, you wouldn't rule it out.

What I'm saying isn't in the least bit outrageous by any rational standard Xyun. How in fucks name is that hard for an intelligent man like yourself to understand? If you want to discuss how difficult it may be to change the law so it becomes a reality somewhere down the road, I can fully appreciate that and thats fine.......but somehow I don't think that's what you're going to want to discuss. (?)

Edit: I absolutely and fundamentally disagree with the assertion that just because the founding fathers made the constitution in the way they did that changing that particular part of it is somehow a slap in the face to everyone who has ever fought and died for the USA.

Xyun, I didn't say you were retarded. I said that particular statement you came off with was retarded. (and hey, I'd know a thing or two about that eh? :P but its ok right? I do actually respect you. I respect your passion, worldview and reasoning. I just happen to disagree with this point. Why you gotta hate a brother? :P)
Last edited by Nick on November 7, 2008, 12:33 am, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
Siji
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 4039
Joined: November 11, 2002, 5:58 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: mAcK 624
PSN ID: mAcK_624
Wii Friend Code: 7304853446448491
Location: Tampa Bay, FL
Contact:

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Siji »

What we need is more cowbell. Since we don't have any, this will have to do..

I'd like to build a world a home
and furnish it with love.
Grow apple trees and honey bees
and snow white turtle doves.

I'd like to teach the world to sing
in perfect harmony.
I'd like to hold it in my arms,
and keep it company

I'd like to see the world for once
all standing hand in hand.
And hear them echo through the hills
for peace throughout the land.

It's the real thing
what the world wants today,
That's the way it'll stay
with the real thing.

I'd like to teach the world to sing
in perfect harmony.
A song of peace that echoes on
and never goes away.

Put your hand in my hand
let's begin today,
With your hand in my hand
help me find a way.

I'd like to see the world for once
all standing hand in hand.
And hear them echo through the hills
for peace throughout the land.

I'd like to teach the world to sing,
in perfect harmony.
A song of peace that echos on,
and never goes away.

User avatar
Kilmoll the Sexy
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5291
Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:31 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: bunkeru2k
Location: Ohio
Contact:

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Kilmoll the Sexy »

Sueven wrote:A few things that I forgot on the "perceived tolerance" point:

This is where I should discuss the rampant sexism that the right directed at Hillary Clinton, which quickly morphed into "we liked her all along" when she lost, and then turned into painfully transparent pseudo-feminist gender baiting upon Sarah Palin's nomination. Not a winning strategy.

This would also be the place to discuss real Virginia vs fake Virginia, the "pro-America" parts of the country, the American President Americans Have Been Waiting For, Michelle Bachmann's ridiculous demand that the media conduct an investigation on which Congressmen are pro-America and which are not, and so forth.
Kilmoll wrote:What makes you think it was specifically race that made those states go more red? The entire area you are talking about (and yes I had to unblock that post) is in the bible belt and also is a very high concentration of hunters and gun rights people. Obama is THE anti-christ for everyone that centers on those two foundations.
This is an explanation that I considered, but I don't think it holds up. The Bible Belt and Appalachia are places with lots of hunters and gun rights, but so is Ohio, so is Pennsylvania, so is Maine, so is Wyoming and Montana and Idaho, and all of those places moved to the left during this election (with the exception of the southwestern portions of Pennsylvania and southeastern portions of Ohio, which are more or less in Appalachia). Every part of the country with lots of gun owners and hunters moved toward Obama except for the bible belt and appalachia. Why?

On the bible belt issue? Yes, they're not disposed to like Obama in the bible belt, but he's certainly an improvement over Kerry from a religious perspective. Evangelicals actually shifted toward Obama compared to Kerry (along with every religious group except for "other," oddly).
The areas on that map are just plain GOP strongholds. All it takes to redden them is for a higher turnout than previous in that area.....or even a lower turnout in the area where the Dems did not bother to vote knowing their vote literally meant nothing. It is the same reasons you see some of the already Dem strongholds showing bluer than before. I mean Michigan is always blue....but went bluer this year. Why? Higher turnout for the base.

I think the most interesting thing about the map is that the swing states are the ones showing the most white on their mao and for the most part a fairly even and predictable distrubution of blue vs red. Knowing those were the key states in 2004 as well, it shows that the voter bases in those states did not have a large change in numbers.

User avatar
Kaldaur
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1849
Joined: July 25, 2002, 2:26 am
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: Kaldaur
Location: Illinois

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Kaldaur »

I believe the white areas are the Great Lakes.

Can I be blocked too?

User avatar
Xyun
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 2566
Joined: July 3, 2002, 8:03 pm
Location: Treasure Island

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Xyun »

What I'm saying isn't in the least bit outrageous by any rational standard Xyun. How in fucks name is that hard for an intelligent man like yourself to understand? If you want to discuss how difficult it may be to change the law so it becomes a reality somewhere down the road, I can fully appreciate that and thats fine.......but somehow I don't think that's what you're going to want to discuss. (?)
No because it is not a realistic notion and it will never be. The constitution itself or the country itself will cease to exist before that provision is changed. Or put more simply, if that provision is changed, it will no longer be the United States of America, therefore it is impossible. It has to do with why it was included in the first place. Changing that provision is equal to destroying it. If you can't see how it is impossible to destroy that part of the constitution without destroying the entire document, I don't think I can explain it.
I tell it like a true mackadelic.
Founder of Ixtlan - the SCUM of Veeshan.

User avatar
Aslanna
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 12039
Joined: July 3, 2002, 12:57 pm

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Aslanna »

Kaldaur wrote:I believe the white areas are the Great Lakes.

Can I be blocked too?
Just start quoting me all the time and it wont take long.
Have You Hugged An Iksar Today?

--

User avatar
Spang
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 4755
Joined: September 23, 2003, 10:34 am
Gender: Male
Location: Tennessee

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Spang »

Aslanna wrote:
Kaldaur wrote:I believe the white areas are the Great Lakes.

Can I be blocked too?
Just start quoting me all the time and it wont take long.
What does he see when I quote you?
Make love, fuck war, peace will save us.

User avatar
Kilmoll the Sexy
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5291
Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:31 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: bunkeru2k
Location: Ohio
Contact:

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Kilmoll the Sexy »

I cannot believe your dumb ass is going to argue semantics because I did not list step by step in my original post the exact process by which that could occur. I also did not say that Congress was solely responsible counselor.....so take your petty argument and stuff it up your ass. I refuse to acknowledge any further discussion of that with you on this thread.


As to whether it would ever happen here, I am not so sure it would not. It certainly would take some motivation on the part of an awful lot of people, but then this administration is all about change right? Right? If it were to happen this is the type of person it would happen for is my point. An extremely popular governor of the most liberal state in the union. A GOP member that is married to one of the most famous democrat families in history. Very well know and liked actor....definitely well funded and has been a very long term citizen. Hell, the guy is a better American than most of the candidates we have run through in the last 20 years. Lets also not forget they already have had some preliminary hearings and a bill proposed on this in Congress.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c108:S.J.Res.15:

User avatar
Kilmoll the Sexy
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5291
Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:31 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: bunkeru2k
Location: Ohio
Contact:

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by Kilmoll the Sexy »

Note that I am not trying to make this a complete pissing match over something that is complete conjecture and certainly would not be done within the next 4-5 years at minimum. To discount it entirely is purely inane seeing some of the things that have happened over the last decade. Some of the research I did on looking this bill up actually showed that the Democrats were more in favor of it than the GOP. That surpirsed me a bit knowing that the one glaring person out there that would benefit would be their rival party...albeit a much more moderate GOP member.

User avatar
noel
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 10003
Joined: August 22, 2002, 1:34 am
Gender: Male
Location: Calabasas, CA

Re: Obama WILL be the next president

Post by noel »

Fantastic posts Sueven.
Oh, my God; I care so little, I almost passed out.

Post Reply