Here are 2 clips from the debates:
[youtubetp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9r6My21Ehg[/youtube[youtubetp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZMg9hAYbyo[/youtube:820a7]
Printable View
Here are 2 clips from the debates:
[youtubetp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9r6My21Ehg[/youtube[youtubetp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZMg9hAYbyo[/youtube:820a7]
Oh boy you just can see she wanted to jump across the stage and lay him out! LOLOL Now come on boys and girls your going to tell me this isn't better then the SuperBowl? This is the best form of entertainment around!
You had to love Hillary's facial expressions the whole debate. Get that chip off your shoulder Hillary, jesus. The Dems are too funny. Their race has degraded to bickering like children and pointing fingers at Bubba. What a mess.
I'll say one thing Obama didn't do a great job at defending or coming back at her. You could hear the breaks in his voice, either from being unsure of himself or so frustrated with her he lost his cool. In any event I'd give that exchange to Hillary.
I disagree, Tommy. I think that he handled it quite well, and though he may have come across as frustrated, he made it quite clear that Hillary's intention is not to discuss the issues, but to smear him. He backed himself up wonderfully I thought. I have new respect for him now.
Not that it matters, but, John Edwards came off looking pretty good.Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Bird76
As for Obama, I think he finally brought the problem of Bill Clinton to the front stage & you may actually see Bill Clinton take a step back....Clinton made a huge mistake & gave Obama a chance to explain the "present" vote by quoting an example which Obama was able to explain away, huge mistake on Clinton's part. Edwards jumped right & said that if Obama can explain the reason for his votes, why can't they, perfect timing on John Edwards.Quote:
"Well, I can't tell who I'm running against sometimes," Obama countered.
For the life of me, I can not figure out why don't Edwards & Obama challenge Clinton on her experience claims.......
Phil watch it again...Clinton's attack was sharp and precise, Obama's response was weak, indecisive and the breaks in his voice were deverstating. I'm not saying I don't like him, in the Dem camp he's my choice but I think he could have been more polished with his response. The case for her attack was weak but the way she carried it out was much better then how he responded. I didn't pay to much attention to Edwards....he's done IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil D.
John Edwards is a hell of a politician. You have to be to get rich the way he did :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Midnight Mike
Because Clinton's experience claims are hurting her, even if they are true. Obama's lack of experience is helping him by implication, so why bring it up and give Clinton a chance to fire back?Quote:
Originally Posted by Midnight Mike
What really pissed me off about this debate is that the Republicans can't come up with anyone to challenge these clowns.
Much toooooo early, wait until the Republicans lighten the load to 2 or 3 candidates. The Republicans had a strong field of players this year, while the Democrats have only had 3 strong candidates, while the Republicans have had about 5 strong choices.Quote:
Originally Posted by adam613
After Florida, may see 1 or 2 Republican candidates bow out, then it will get really interesting....
Mike the GOP isn't doing anything this year....McCain is to extreme, Romeny is to Morman, and Rudy will be out of it soon. His plan of waiting until Super Tuesday isn't going to pay off, you needed to be in this thing from the start, plus his never ending 9/11 speech is growing old. If McCain has a strong pull on Super Tuesday I'd wager he's going to get the GOP nomination. In the end on Nov 7th I see it being Clinton with over 50% of the vote to McCain's 30% something percent.Quote:
Originally Posted by Midnight Mike
Here are the latest polls in Florida
McCain - 23.3
Giuliani - 20.0
Romney - 19.3
Huckabee - 16.0
Thompson - 8.3
Paul - 5.5
Clinton - 48.8
Obama - 29.8
Edwards - 11.3
(Average was taken from various polls)
Romney is going to surpass Rudy down there, that's for sure. If Rudy places third his first time out of the gate basically he might as well pack it up. The problem with Rudy is he's not running on his record of cleaning up the city but just the few months after 9/11.
Rudy will finish 1 or 2, any lower than that, & he is toast....Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Bird76
With attention being drawn to economy, Romney has a chance to actually win, Would be an interesting combo if Rudy & Romney were to form a ticket....
After Florida, expect the herd to dwindle down to a 3 man race, my guess is
that it will be (McCain, Rudy, & Romney). Out of those 3 names, expect 2 to unite....
Thompson is done, & the Huckabee wave will come to a slowdown....
Great point. In his book "Leadership" he writes about all his experiences from his days as mayor fixing what everyone said was unfixable, managing things everyone said were unmanageable. He talks about his days as a US Attorney, hired by Ronald Reagan...the mafia these days the Italian mafia is a pale image of what it was 20 years ago, due in large part to the work of Giuliani. I think voters would be very receptive of these stories in a time where many sectors of our government seem unmanageable and out of control. Instead, he endlessly recounts his 9/11 stories, and hearing about this guy running down Broadway with a dust mask for the 5000th time doesn't help Joe Smith make his mortgage payment.Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Bird76
Seeing Rudy flail the way he is almost hurts. I do think he had great potential, but his 9/11 train is running out of steam. I'm sick of it myself.
Mike, I have to agree with others when they say that the GOP has no good players this year. Nine candidates and no one that truly has potential.
From the looks of it, Hillary will be winning it. Man, that hurts to say.
Is it too late to register as a Democrat to vote for Obama int he primary? :(
I agree with you Phil on Obama. I want to throw my support behind him. The simple fact that he hasn't been in Washington his entire life sells me on him. I really beleive he's the kind of canidate that can "look outside the box" so to speak and bring a fresh perspective to politics. He's young to so I think he understands the trends and the challenges that will affect the younger future generations of this country. I also like his social ideas that would affect me personally.Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil D.
Fred Thompson has called it quits.
Might be just me but I wouldn't be surprised to see him on the ticket as a VP with whoever gets the GOP nomination.Quote:
Originally Posted by GothamSpotter
Very well said, Tommy. That's exactly why I plan on voting for him. I just got back from dropping off my voter registration. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by T-Bird76
Greets,
-Omar S.
OMG that is so AWESOME OMAR!!!! Congrats on taking part in this thing we call democracy! I remember when I first voted, man it was great! I'm glad to see you care about the issues and how the canidates will affect your life! Every young person needs to vote!Quote:
Originally Posted by jran225
Yes, now the Republican party will start getting interesting!Quote:
Originally Posted by GothamSpotter
Oh yeah, this is what Dick Morris said about Hilliary Clinton:If nominated Clinton will not win, she will get the support of the Democrat base, but, Independents will vote Republican. Obama has a better chance of winning the Independant votes.Quote:
Hillary Clinton stated she has experience because she has 8 years in the white house, Dick Morris stated "so has the pastry chef".
Mike it depends on who her running mate is. A Clinton/Obama ticket could just be the thing to put her in the White house. I don't see him playing second fiddle to her but he's young and could run again very easily or look at a VP spot as a spring board for the Oval office. In any event I'm going to be doing some research on Obama myself. I love this election stuff...The Giants in the Superbowl have nothing on this! LOLOLOLQuote:
Originally Posted by Midnight Mike
I think you will be a little surprised, I think Rudy will do well in Fla, his candicy is not just about 9/11. I don't know what you guys are watching but it's not all just 9/11. At least not what I have seen. Romney is jelly fish who flip flops on everything and unfortunately his being a mormon will prevent him from getting the nod. It will be McCain or Rudy beating Hillary. I don't know where Tommy got this 50% for Hillary in the general. The majority of the country hates her. You have to carry more than California and NY to win as we saw in 04'. So Hiillary will not be our first female president. As for the debate I think Obama did a decent job of defending himself but you have to realize when he said "What the Clintons are saying about me is not true" it's nothing we don't already know about Bubba and Hillary, they are Eliteists, who indulge themselves in entitelism and in the end Obama's being left of her and just a tad inexperienced will be his downfall. Not some rhetoric the Clinton machine is speading about him.
Nick, I agree about what you say about many of the candidates, but the truth is that the media doesn't show a lot of that stuff and therefore the people who don't do research (most people) won't know it either. all you see on TV is Rudy saying "9/11!!!" and smear campaigns.
True but as we saw in 04' after polsters predicted a Kerry landslide you have to remember that there are many voters that don't get involved with the rhetoric and this crap we saw last night. That uses the candidates stance on issues to make a decision. For all you new Obama supporters do you know he voted against English as our official language? Don't confuse his ability to speak in front of a lot of people as the ability to lead. As much as I hate to admit but Hillary is much smarter and much more capable of leading this country than he is. As for everything else we should wait till after super tuesday since the picture will get much clearer.Quote:
Nick, I agree about what you say about many of the candidates, but the truth is that the media doesn't show a lot of that stuff and therefore the people who don't do research (most people) won't know it either. all you see on TV is Rudy saying "9/11!!!" and smear campaigns.
Hillary talks more about potential actions, and Obama talks about vision. I'd honestly rather have someone who know where the country should be and figure out how to do it later than someone who has plans for things I feel would be bad for the country.
Agreed and I see the point, but with his lack of experience concerns me because it can make it difficult for him to pick a sold cabinet, which a "man of vision" needs to back up his thoughts.Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Bird76
[quote=Phil D.]Hillary talks more about potential actions, and Obama talks about vision. I'd honestly rather have someone who know where the country should be and figure out how to do it later than someone who has plans for things I feel would be bad for the country.
Agreed and I see the point, but with his lack of experience concerns me because it can make it difficult for him to pick a sold cabinet, which a "man of vision" needs to back up his thoughts.[/quote:0e88d]Quote:
Originally Posted by "T-Bird76":0e88d
Phil have you asked yourself what kind of experience did Washington had running a country? He was a man of vision and his vision turned out pretty good. Experience can be an overrated trait that can blind people to our countries full potential.
The complexities of running a country have changed a lot.
A President with a bit less experience or knowledge can easily apply his vision with a strong cabinet. I think that the cabinet a President picks is just as important as the President him/herself.
I like Obama...I really do. I'd vote for him over Romney if it came down to that. However, it seems that he doesn't have the networking accomplished, or enough buddies in Washington to put together a good team.
Like for me. Sure, I think I can make decisions for the site, but I don't have all the skills to apply absolutely everything I can to it.. Without a team to help do the work, the research, the moderating, programming, etc., I need a skilled team.
The only thing the impresses me about Obama is that he can give a good speech & he seems to be a very likeable guy.Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Bird76
As for his change mantra, which he borrowed from John Edwards, not sure how he is going to accomplish it with his lack of experience in both the private sector & government.
Obama has been in the Senate for less than "1" term.
1993-1996 lawyer
1997-2004 served in the State Senate
2004-present US Senate (sworn in 2005)
John Kerry critized John Edwards back in 2004 for his lack of experience & John Edwards served in the US Senate for 1 term (6 years) which was more than Obama, & yet, John Kerry is endorsing
Obama in 2008 & Obama has "2" years of expierence in the Senate.
As for Obama surrounding himself with experience, welll here are some of Obama's endorsements (Senator John Kerry, Senator Carl Levin, Retired Senator Tom Daschle , Senator Claire McCaskill, Senator Tim Johnson & Senator Ben Nelson). So, if you voted for John Kerry in 2004, then Obama's your man....
Of couse, when looking at the other options, Clinton or Edwards, Obama does seem like an interesting alternative.
Kind of funny how people say the Republicans don't have any good candidates & I say the Democrat choices this year are terrrible.
Looking at the 3 choices, you have 1 candidate who has 2 years of experience in the Senate, another candidate that has "6" years of experience, & finally the most experienced of the group has about "7" years of experience. All have never has any jobs where they gained any type of leadership experience.
So, I say, vote for the person you want, but, really take a look at the backgrounds of the various candidates & not just to listen to the speeches......
It's true about Obama. He may well collapse under the pressure.
It's one thing for someone to not have experience (Hillary, Obama), but it's another for some people (Hillary) to toss us all a shovel-full of it that they have 35 years of it. It honestly shocks me.
Phil what could be more complex then to establish a new country? The foundations and building blocks of nation building are amazing complex. I think it’s shortsighted of us to think that 231 years was any less complex then it is today. Just because the world wasn't a short plane ride or phone call away doesn't mean the complexities didn't exist. The world was far less stable back then, then it is today. Sometimes in life you have to put your faith in someone that represents a new way of doing things. Obama has proven to be a leader; his track record so far from what I read is pretty good. AT the very least what we need someone right is someone who is likeable, at the very least!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil D.
Not to go off-topic discussing 1770 politics, but I'm not saying it wasn't complex back then. But I think it's tougher to run the US today than back then.
When this country was formed, it was a medley of ideas that put it all into motion. There were much less mechanics in the federal operation.
With 50 states and 350 million people today, it's tougher domestically. Our foreign affairs today deal with almost every country and just as many languages, as opposed to discussions with just France, England, Spain and Russia, which were 95% of our foreign involvement back then.
Balancing our budget, I think, is the toughest part. How many departments do we have today, and how much more red tape, and everywhere our money goes, corporations and politicians pushing and pulling....it doesn't even compare to the smaller financial responsibilites from back then.
People with amazing vision are rare. Obama has that. I don't think Hillary does. People that can truly execute that vision, however, are 100 times more uncommon.
I don't think lack of time to network will be an issue for Obama. He's been in the Senate for three years...that's plenty of time to know where a lot of people stand and who is an expert on what. You don't need to know someone well to know they'd do a good job in X cabinet position.
I first realized how bad Bush was going to be in early 2001 when he packed his cabinet with yes-people who had previously demonstrated loyalty, almost all of whom were Republicans. That isn't how a responsible leader conducts himself in a democracy. Obama's lack of networking, combined with his vision, will lead him to surround himself with a good team.