Obama's youth and color are going to prevent him from doing that to a great extent.
Wrong and Wronger. Barack's liberal political agenda is what will make it difficult for him to blow McCain out in November.
You're correct that this is more important than his skin color, but the majority of McCain supporters I've talked to are concerned about his age, primarily. I think you underestimate how big this is with older, poorer, less well-educated, more "family values"-oriented voters.
I do agree that a 10-pt win like Clinton is probable.
I guess my recent discussions with the older, poorer, less well-educated, more "family values"-oriented voters has really open my eyes to how charismatic Obama is and how little they like McCain. I work in the real estate/construction business. Most of my colleagues are very conservative.
You live in Oregon right?
Just saying, there's a different kind of conservative out there, such as my father-in-law in Nevada or my grandmother in Florida who are not going to vote for a 46 year old Black man with 3 years in the Senate. Simple as that.
I should add, both people considered democratic candidates (Biden and Clinton, respectively).
There has never been a serious Black Presidential candidate in this country.
Depends on your perspective.
Jesse Jackson ran a very competitive, credible campaign in '84, I think it was.
Serious as in has a chance to win/get more than 12% of the vote.
My point was that he wasn't a fringe candidate. He got 21% of the popular vote in a three-way primary, which is actually not that shabby. He did a lot better than John Edwards or Mitt Romney this year, for instance. Looking back at 1988, he did even better than in 1984.
"He captured 6.9 million votes and won 11 contests; seven primaries (Alabama, the District of Columbia, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, Puerto Rico and Virginia) and four caucuses (Delaware, Michigan, South Carolina and Vermont).[15]. Jackson also scored March victories in Alaska's caucuses and Texas's local conventions, despite losing the Texas primary.[1] [2] Some news accounts credit him with 13 wins. [3] Briefly, after he won 55% of the vote in the Michigan Democratic caucus, he was considered the frontrunner for the nomination, as he surpassed all the other candidates in total number of pledged delegates."
Obama's youth and color are going to prevent him from doing that to a great extent.
Wrong and Wronger. Barack's liberal political agenda is what will make it difficult for him to blow McCain out in November.
You're correct that this is more important than his skin color, but the majority of McCain supporters I've talked to are concerned about his age, primarily. I think you underestimate how big this is with older, poorer, less well-educated, more "family values"-oriented voters.
I do agree that a 10-pt win like Clinton is probable.
I guess my recent discussions with the older, poorer, less well-educated, more "family values"-oriented voters has really open my eyes to how charismatic Obama is and how little they like McCain. I work in the real estate/construction business. Most of my colleagues are very conservative.
You live in Oregon right?
Just saying, there's a different kind of conservative out there, such as my father-in-law in Nevada or my grandmother in Florida who are not going to vote for a 46 year old Black man with 3 years in the Senate. Simple as that.
I wouldn't give these guys too much credit for being "Western" Conservatives. They are bible beaters like many southerners. Plus, the west and Oregon in particular had very nasty black exclusion laws, etc. What is clearly outstanding about Barack's appeal is that people who have no business supporting him (ala Rockadelic Rand) are convinced he's something other than a liberal. Like the Geto Boys said, "My mind's playing tricks on me".
There has never been a serious Black Presidential candidate in this country.
Depends on your perspective.
Jesse Jackson ran a very competitive, credible campaign in '84, I think it was.
Serious as in has a chance to win/get more than 12% of the vote.
My point was that he wasn't a fringe candidate. He got 21% of the popular vote in a three-way primary, which is actually not that shabby. He did a lot better than John Edwards or Mitt Romney this year, for instance. Looking back at 1988, he did even better than in 1984.
"He captured 6.9 million votes and won 11 contests; seven primaries (Alabama, the District of Columbia, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, Puerto Rico and Virginia) and four caucuses (Delaware, Michigan, South Carolina and Vermont).[15]. Jackson also scored March victories in Alaska's caucuses and Texas's local conventions, despite losing the Texas primary.[1] [2] Some news accounts credit him with 13 wins. [3] Briefly, after he won 55% of the vote in the Michigan Democratic caucus, he was considered the frontrunner for the nomination, as he surpassed all the other candidates in total number of pledged delegates."
I agree....my point is this looks like it will be the first time a black candidate will actually be on the November ballot, where folks other than registered Dems can vote for or against.
Obama's youth and color are going to prevent him from doing that to a great extent.
Wrong and Wronger. Barack's liberal political agenda is what will make it difficult for him to blow McCain out in November.
You're correct that this is more important than his skin color, but the majority of McCain supporters I've talked to are concerned about his age, primarily. I think you underestimate how big this is with older, poorer, less well-educated, more "family values"-oriented voters.
I do agree that a 10-pt win like Clinton is probable.
I guess my recent discussions with the older, poorer, less well-educated, more "family values"-oriented voters has really open my eyes to how charismatic Obama is and how little they like McCain. I work in the real estate/construction business. Most of my colleagues are very conservative.
You live in Oregon right?
Just saying, there's a different kind of conservative out there, such as my father-in-law in Nevada or my grandmother in Florida who are not going to vote for a 46 year old Black man with 3 years in the Senate. Simple as that.
I wouldn't give these guys too much credit for being "Western" Conservatives. They are bible beaters like many southerners. Plus, the west and Oregon in particular had very nasty black exclusion laws, etc. What is clearly outstanding about Barack's appeal is that people who have no business supporting him (ala Rockadelic Rand) are convinced he's something other than a liberal. Like the Geto Boys said, "My mind's playing tricks on me".
I'm totally fooled....maybe I better rethink this.
Obama's youth and color are going to prevent him from doing that to a great extent.
Wrong and Wronger. Barack's liberal political agenda is what will make it difficult for him to blow McCain out in November.
You're correct that this is more important than his skin color, but the majority of McCain supporters I've talked to are concerned about his age, primarily. I think you underestimate how big this is with older, poorer, less well-educated, more "family values"-oriented voters.
I do agree that a 10-pt win like Clinton is probable.
I guess my recent discussions with the older, poorer, less well-educated, more "family values"-oriented voters has really open my eyes to how charismatic Obama is and how little they like McCain. I work in the real estate/construction business. Most of my colleagues are very conservative. McCain largely appeals to dudes and reporters. Things have changed. Gone are the days of 2000 when he was pimping campaign finance reform and other "liberal" agendas while threatening Iraq and N. Korea. The kind of "I'm my own guy" fence walking which gave guys like Rockadelic a woody when he spoke. Dude is gonna run as a conservative (which is what he really is except in a few cases) and lose his base (who question his social views) and lot of independents who despise the war. McCain is a terrible candidate for these guys and that's why the establishment tried to stop him.
So which is for you 10pt win or squeaker at the wire?
I'm disturbed that you think you know what gives me a woody.
Or were you just stereotyping??
Rich you are an open book. I would bet a million dollars that you supported McCain in 2000 (unless you tried to pull that old nugget "I wouldn't vote for any of them"). Tell us who you voted for.
Obama's youth and color are going to prevent him from doing that to a great extent.
Wrong and Wronger. Barack's liberal political agenda is what will make it difficult for him to blow McCain out in November.
You're correct that this is more important than his skin color, but the majority of McCain supporters I've talked to are concerned about his age, primarily. I think you underestimate how big this is with older, poorer, less well-educated, more "family values"-oriented voters.
I do agree that a 10-pt win like Clinton is probable.
I guess my recent discussions with the older, poorer, less well-educated, more "family values"-oriented voters has really open my eyes to how charismatic Obama is and how little they like McCain. I work in the real estate/construction business. Most of my colleagues are very conservative.
You live in Oregon right?
Just saying, there's a different kind of conservative out there, such as my father-in-law in Nevada or my grandmother in Florida who are not going to vote for a 46 year old Black man with 3 years in the Senate. Simple as that.
I wouldn't give these guys too much credit for being "Western" Conservatives. They are bible beaters like many southerners. ".
Woah, hey man my grandma is very religious but my father-in-law isn't that kind of person at all. Go easy with the stereotyping.
Obama's youth and color are going to prevent him from doing that to a great extent.
Wrong and Wronger. Barack's liberal political agenda is what will make it difficult for him to blow McCain out in November.
You're correct that this is more important than his skin color, but the majority of McCain supporters I've talked to are concerned about his age, primarily. I think you underestimate how big this is with older, poorer, less well-educated, more "family values"-oriented voters.
I do agree that a 10-pt win like Clinton is probable.
I guess my recent discussions with the older, poorer, less well-educated, more "family values"-oriented voters has really open my eyes to how charismatic Obama is and how little they like McCain. I work in the real estate/construction business. Most of my colleagues are very conservative.
You live in Oregon right?
Just saying, there's a different kind of conservative out there, such as my father-in-law in Nevada or my grandmother in Florida who are not going to vote for a 46 year old Black man with 3 years in the Senate. Simple as that.
I wouldn't give these guys too much credit for being "Western" Conservatives. They are bible beaters like many southerners. ".
Woah, hey man my grandma is very religious but my father-in-law isn't that kind of person at all. Go easy with the stereotyping.
I wasn't referring to your family at all but rather trying to disabuse you of the idea that our rednecks are any more tolerant than anywhere else.
Nader didn't matter in 2004 and he's going to matter even less in 2008.
Seriously. I don't see Nader siphoning shit (no milkshake for him!). Anyone left to center- especially the most fervent Obama riders - haven't forgotten 2000 and best believe the media won't let anyone forget either. If it ends up Clinton/McCain then Nader MIGHT (and even this is a stretch) take a tiny handful of votes from her. But Nader pretty much burned up all the good will he had left with people in 2004. Him running in 2008 is a bad joke.
what an asshole, he had a part in handing over G.W.B. the presidency once and now he might even hand it to mccain. I think Ralph needs to sit this one out...
Nader didn't matter in 2004 and he's going to matter even less in 2008.
Seriously. I don't see Nader siphoning shit (no milkshake for him!). Anyone left to center- especially the most fervent Obama riders - haven't forgotten 2000 and best believe the media won't let anyone forget either. If it ends up Clinton/McCain then Nader MIGHT (and even this is a stretch) take a tiny handful of votes from her. But Nader pretty much burned up all the good will he had left with people in 2004. Him running in 2008 is a bad joke.
Nader looks more and more like the kind of disheveled bureaucrat everybody is running away from. His policies and rhetoric are almost as threadbare as his wardrobe. I can't even imagine my friends who in 2000 voted for Nader going for this. Obama looks so fresh minted in comparison, and has a hell of a plan compared to Nader, who is running on being, uhm, anti big-business??
"After careful consideration I have determined that I have nothing better to do in 2008 and so I announce my candidacy for President of the United States of America."
But Nader's not looking for Valentines from the Democrats.
Frankly, he's not even all that interested in popular approval.
The public-interest crusader worries far less about poll numbers and even vote totals than about saying what he feels needs to be said -- and using the forum of the electoral process to say it. And he is certainly not the first progressive -- inside the Democratic Party or out -- to suggest that Obama needs to be prodded on issues ranging from labor law to corporate regulation to single-payer health care and Middle East policy.
Nader's greatest value in any race is -- like Socialist Norman Thomas in his races against Democratic Franklin Roosevelt -- as a source of pressure on the Democratic nominee to address fundamental questions and perhaps to take more progressive stands on a few issues. As in 2000 and 2004, Nader's appeal will be determined in large part by the extent to which the Democratic candidate is willing to be bold.
Obama seems to understands this. Unlike Gore or Kerry, who never quite "got" the point of Nader's runs in 2000 and 2004, the Illinois senator appears to recognize that it is pointless to grumble about Ralph Nader as a "spoiler." Rather, the point is to be more appealing to progressive voters who might consider voting Green or independent.
Rich you are an open book. I would bet a million dollars that you supported McCain in 2000 (unless you tried to pull that old nugget "I wouldn't vote for any of them"). Tell us who you voted for.
If I'm such an open book you should know who I voted for in all eight of the Presidential elections I've participated in.....that and the fact that I posted who I voted for in 2000 here a couple of weeks ago.
You have me and the November election all figured out.
I don't even know why they are gonna bother having an election....they should just ask you who'll win now and be over with it.
And Al Gore fighting for himself with big fuzzy mittens on while the Republicans were out there with zip guns and razor blades.
shit was so off the hook shameful
And us, or me anyway, for watching the whole thing like it was a sporting event. Any other country's people would have been out in the street demanding that all votes were counted.
The only time a politician wins in a landslide is when they effectively court people from the opposite side of the spectrum - Reagan being the best example.
Obama's youth and color are going to prevent him from doing that to a great extent.
obama is going to win by a landslide. what statistics are showing you that obama's youth and color are going to prevent him from blowing out mccain? go take a look at the difference between the # of primary voters for the dems and the numbers for the gop. its not even close. mccain will get his ass handed to him. i don't know what you consider a blowout, but i'll bet that he wins the popular by over 10 %.
its not necessarily about "courting people from the other side". your forgetting that only 50% of the population votes. its more about getting people to the polls. the evangelicals came out in huge numbers in 04, that's not happening in '08. on the other hand, the youth vote is going to be insane. no puff daddy campaigns needed this time. kerry needs the mtv hype, obama's already a rock star.
Rich you are an open book. I would bet a million dollars that you supported McCain in 2000 (unless you tried to pull that old nugget "I wouldn't vote for any of them"). Tell us who you voted for.
If I'm such an open book you should know who I voted for in all eight of the Presidential elections I've participated in.....that and the fact that I posted who I voted for in 2000 here a couple of weeks ago.
You have me and the November election all figured out.
I don't even know why they are gonna bother having an election....they should just ask you who'll win now and be over with it.
So you are admitting then that you voted for McCain or were pissed that they tanked his candidacy in S. Carolina so you never got a chance in Tejas. Just tell us who you rode for in 2000 and this conversation will be over. Otherwise, I am sticking to my guns. Obama boy.
Rich you are an open book. I would bet a million dollars that you supported McCain in 2000 (unless you tried to pull that old nugget "I wouldn't vote for any of them"). Tell us who you voted for.
If I'm such an open book you should know who I voted for in all eight of the Presidential elections I've participated in.....that and the fact that I posted who I voted for in 2000 here a couple of weeks ago.
You have me and the November election all figured out.
I don't even know why they are gonna bother having an election....they should just ask you who'll win now and be over with it.
I didn't see your 2000 vote so please to inform me.
Here's my guesses for you votes since 1976.
Carter Reagan Reagan Abstain Perot Perot Bush Did not vote/Fringy Type
i hope i am wrong but..... dems will take it in the ass in november on some "shady tactics" shit. and as always... they will do nothing about it but whine about how their bung hurts. dems need to loc up. that ghandi shit is tired.
URGH. I cant stand when libs self congratulatingly chalk up their lossess to their supposed excess of virtue. Lets be real, you do not lose because you refuse to play as dirty. You lose because your policies are gay and youre sucky whiners.
Comments
I should add, both people considered democratic candidates (Biden and Clinton, respectively).
Serious as in has a chance to win/get more than 21% of the Demcratic vote.
My point was that he wasn't a fringe candidate. He got 21% of the popular vote in a three-way primary, which is actually not that shabby. He did a lot better than John Edwards or Mitt Romney this year, for instance. Looking back at 1988, he did even better than in 1984.
"He captured 6.9 million votes and won 11 contests; seven primaries (Alabama, the District of Columbia, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, Puerto Rico and Virginia) and four caucuses (Delaware, Michigan, South Carolina and Vermont).[15]. Jackson also scored March victories in Alaska's caucuses and Texas's local conventions, despite losing the Texas primary.[1] [2] Some news accounts credit him with 13 wins. [3] Briefly, after he won 55% of the vote in the Michigan Democratic caucus, he was considered the frontrunner for the nomination, as he surpassed all the other candidates in total number of pledged delegates."
I wouldn't give these guys too much credit for being "Western" Conservatives. They are bible beaters like many southerners. Plus, the west and Oregon in particular had very nasty black exclusion laws, etc. What is clearly outstanding about Barack's appeal is that people who have no business supporting him (ala Rockadelic Rand) are convinced he's something other than a liberal. Like the Geto Boys said, "My mind's playing tricks on me".
I agree....my point is this looks like it will be the first time a black candidate will actually be on the November ballot, where folks other than registered Dems can vote for or against.
And how THAT turns out can not be predicted imo.
I'm totally fooled....maybe I better rethink this.
Rich you are an open book. I would bet a million dollars that you supported McCain in 2000 (unless you tried to pull that old nugget "I wouldn't vote for any of them"). Tell us who you voted for.
Woah, hey man my grandma is very religious but my father-in-law isn't that kind of person at all. Go easy with the stereotyping.
I wasn't referring to your family at all but rather trying to disabuse you of the idea that our rednecks are any more tolerant than anywhere else.
I always thought of Oregon rednecks as being more of the unibomber, libertarian variety!
That would be Alaska.
Seriously. I don't see Nader siphoning shit (no milkshake for him!). Anyone left to center- especially the most fervent Obama riders - haven't forgotten 2000 and best believe the media won't let anyone forget either. If it ends up Clinton/McCain then Nader MIGHT (and even this is a stretch) take a tiny handful of votes from her. But Nader pretty much burned up all the good will he had left with people in 2004. Him running in 2008 is a bad joke.
Well, it wasn't Nader's intention but he siphoned tens of thousands of votes away from Gore in Florida, costing him the state.
Never once did Nader step up and tell his people to go vote for Gore.
And Al Gore fighting for himself with big fuzzy mittens on while the Republicans were out there with zip guns and razor blades.
Nader looks more and more like the kind of disheveled bureaucrat everybody is running away from. His policies and rhetoric are almost as threadbare as his wardrobe. I can't even imagine my friends who in 2000 voted for Nader going for this. Obama looks so fresh minted in comparison, and has a hell of a plan compared to Nader, who is running on being, uhm, anti big-business??
shit was so off the hook shameful
http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20080224/cm_thenation/1289744
If I'm such an open book you should know who I voted for in all eight of the Presidential elections I've participated in.....that and the fact that I posted who I voted for in 2000 here a couple of weeks ago.
You have me and the November election all figured out.
I don't even know why they are gonna bother having an election....they should just ask you who'll win now and be over with it.
the same thing happened in '04, and it's already starting this year with the "unpatriotic" bullshit.
And us, or me anyway, for watching the whole thing like it was a sporting event. Any other country's people would have been out in the street demanding that all votes were counted.
obama is going to win by a landslide. what statistics are showing you that obama's youth and color are going to prevent him from blowing out mccain? go take a look at the difference between the # of primary voters for the dems and the numbers for the gop. its not even close. mccain will get his ass handed to him. i don't know what you consider a blowout, but i'll bet that he wins the popular by over 10 %.
its not necessarily about "courting people from the other side". your forgetting that only 50% of the population votes. its more about getting people to the polls. the evangelicals came out in huge numbers in 04, that's not happening in '08. on the other hand, the youth vote is going to be insane. no puff daddy campaigns needed this time. kerry needs the mtv hype, obama's already a rock star.
So you are admitting then that you voted for McCain or were pissed that they tanked his candidacy in S. Carolina so you never got a chance in Tejas. Just tell us who you rode for in 2000 and this conversation will be over. Otherwise, I am sticking to my guns. Obama boy.
I know Rich can be obnoxious himself, but I'm just saying.
Anonymity in voting is a pretty serious right.
I didn't see your 2000 vote so please to inform me.
Here's my guesses for you votes since 1976.
Carter
Reagan
Reagan
Abstain
Perot
Perot
Bush
Did not vote/Fringy Type