Anyone who may have read my posts about John Edwards knows that I have been an Edwards supporter. But after having a chance to see the entire group of Democrat Candidates again I find that I am now leaning towards Clinton.
Edwards' populist tone appeals to me but after hearing his stump speeches before, the populist angle doesn't ring as true as it did four years ago.
I am a life-long Democrat and I want my candidate in the White House. I want a winner. Beautiful losers can't help anyone.
Barack is formidable. It's amazing the way he says just the right thing every time he opens his mouth. But for my taste, he is too much of an unknown. I'm not in the mood to take chances.
I have taken a new look at Hillary and it looks to me like Clinton and her team are going to take the White House. She faces a divided Republican Party that can't get past Reagan nostalgia.
I believe Clinton will win my party's nomination, after Edwards gives her a good fight and makes her earn it. I think the real race now is for the vice-presidency.
Clinton has been running for President for years now and she has assembled the team and the slow, deliberate strategy that will take her there. Her spin, even in this early low key phase, is the best of all the candidates.
I would be very comfortable with the Clinton team back in the White House. I made considerable gains during Bill Clinton's presidency and I personally don't have a problem with peace and prosperity.
And I have to say that in the history of American politics there is nothing that can quite rival the amazing story of Bill Clinton leaving the White House only to see his wife return as president, eight years later. What a story.
I would especially like to hear what other Democrats are thinking but I'm not sure there are many Democrats hanging out at TulsaNow these days, so I can't do anything to stop you Republicans from opining. And let's hear from the Independents too.
Hillary has only a slightly better chance of winning the White House than I do.
If you're a southern governor you might have a shot at the vice presidency.
I do not like Hillary's socialist economic agenda, her plans for universal health care, her lack of a solid record in the Senate, nor her inexperience. The primary dot on her resume is "Husband Was Once Husband." Seriously, would anyone in New York have elected a woman who lived there for 5 days if that wasn't the primary reason? And that bothers me.
I think she is a very intelligent and hard working woman, but I do not like her platform nor do I think she is qualified to run a country. Same basic summary for Obama.
I am still an Edwards fan because he represents so much of what America says it wants to be and he is closer to the next generations than Clinton. However, Clinton is acceptable. I love her socialist economic agenda, her plans for universal health care, her lack of a solid record in the Senate (how many experienced Senators ever won the office? One?), and her hands on experience. She seems the most qualified having been more than an observer during her husbands two terms.
That being said, she will have a tumultous term since she is held in about the same esteem by Republicans as we hold Bush or any of their leaders.
I am an Edwards fan.
http://blog.johnedwards.com/chapter/420
Edwards is an idiot at best.....
Keep in mind there was a Republican controlled house and senate which did have something to do with Clinton's success.
I think Bush II's legacy would be a lot better if he'd have had opposition in Congress instead of a rubber stamp. It was what, five years before he vetoed a single bill?
I still like Richardson. He's a second tier candidate because everyone wants a rock star. The three front runners have 7 or less years senate experience apiece. Richardson has been a Congressman, Secretary of Energy, UN Ambassador, successful Governor, 1/2 Hispanic. IMO, he's the most seasoned candidate out of the GOP and Dems.
Only two things I don't like about him is he thinks he could bring all troops home now (pipe dream) and he thinks the solution to the border is more border patrol instead of a fence or wall.
Whomever wins the nominatin should give him a serious look for veep.
I liked Edwards when I first started reading about him in late '03. But I've come to the conclusion Edwards is the walking definition of disingenuous.
I can already picture the Hillary White House: huge tax increases, socialized healthcare, the economy tanks after two years, healthcare will become an even bigger cluster-f*** and it will all be blamed on Bush's failed economic policies...ghack!
Hillary is too much of a b!tch on wheels to win the general election. Even independents can't stand her.(http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q55/71conan/TN/square-large-redefeat.gif)
quote:
Originally posted by Breadburner
Edwards is an idiot at best.....
Now there's a seriously contemplative response.
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
quote:
Originally posted by Breadburner
Edwards is an idiot at best.....
Now there's a seriously contemplative response.
Don't you have a boat to work on?[;)]
Good to see you, WB.
He was a trial lawyer (personal injury) then politician....No Thanks......
quote:
Originally posted by Hometown
I would especially like to hear what other Democrats are thinking but I'm not sure there are many Democrats hanging out at TulsaNow these days, so I can't do anything to stop you Republicans from opining. And let's hear from the Independents too.
I'm a Democrat-though for me, I think a Clinton-Edwards ticket, or a Richardson-Edwards ticket would be what this party needs.
- Hillary was an attorney and then went into politics... the only difference is she wasn't successful as an attorney and was only so in politics because of her husband. That makes her a better choice how? Family earned some $50,000,000.00 since being elected to the Senate.
Edwards - successful attorney then politician. Billionaire.
Kerry - attorney then politician, billionaire.
Biden - Attorney for 4 years, then politician.
Dodd - peace corps, then attorney for 3 years, then politician.
Kucinich - career politician, whack job.
Barrack - 5 years for non-profits, then 13 years as an attorney (some teaching law), then politician.
Richardson - Masters in legal studies, career politician.
If you are looking for a democratic candidate that is not an attorney or career politician, dream on. They are ALL attorney's with the exception of Richardson, who has a Master's in legal studies (attorney light) and is a career politician. Obama has the most public sector actual WORK, but most of that was at a law school (hey, that's not really work).
I see real problems on the democratic ticket, and I am one of the much sought after "independents." Mostly, they are all cut from the same mold. The letter in front of your name means nothing - show me fiscal conservatism, a fairly liberal social agenda, a good resume for leadership, and a decent human being and I'm on board.
quote:
Originally posted by Breadburner
He was a trial lawyer (personal injury) then politician....No Thanks......
Hmmm, Lionel Hutz '08.
Going to be hard to find a candidate without a law degree. I agree CF they can be quite irritating but not necessarily only Democratic. If you're independent I guess I'm Bolshevik. Go looking for that profile of a candidate that pleases your needs CF and then run him for pope.
Be realistic. If any of the droopy boobs pretending to be candidates on the Republican ticket are elected the message is sent that incompetence and the trashing of hard fought freedoms is justified because the Dems just didn't measure up. So 4 more years of the same crap. If thats independent, I'm sure the repugs will allow you to register as such, even if you're poor and minority. We desperately need leadership change IMO away from idealogues and towards effective managers who will protect us from idealogues. Really, Mayor Kathy is that kind of manager. (don't know her...suspect she is closet repub too, but she manages).
My boat consumes me and I make little progress Conan, but its a nice distraction. I really just wanted to comment on the river stuff but you guys needed some enlightening.[:D]
How about Clinton / Graham? That former, was he a senator or was he a governor, from Florida?
quote:
Originally posted by wavoka
Hillary has only a slightly better chance of winning the White House than I do.
(http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p315/TYProle/edwards-1copy.jpg)
Well John clearly gets going when the fight gets started but he doesn't seem to have the team behind him that Hillary does. He has had a lot of bad spin. Maybe a good campaign shake up would make a difference. And his stump speech sounds mechanical now. Don't get me wrong, I could really go for a populist. If Huey Long was running I would vote for him, but John doesn't seem to have the fire or policies of a Huey Long. I'm waiting for the leader that is going to reinvent the Left and I just don't see it in him. And I can't see him as vice president again. What I do think he will be good for is getting Hillary ready for a brutal general election.
You've read the stories about the Clintons using heavy handed tactics in rounding up pledges of support. I can see the Clintons are not going to be hampered by Bill's southern gentleman thing this time round.
And I can't see that Obama's hometown of Chicago would add anything to the ticket.
Waterboy - I'm not saying a law degree is a negative in my book. Another poster mentioned it as being a strong negative for Edwards that he was previously an attorney. SO I was just pointing out that the alternative to an attorney isnt really even there.
and I havent found the perfect candidate yet. Still shopping. Kinda sorta leaning toward Rudy, but he is a big gun control advocate and I havent looked into his other politics enough. Someone show me a third party candidate in Oklahoma! Really, with the election a year and a half away, I'm not too concerned just yet. Talk to me a couple weeks before primaries.
----
If nothing else, Hillary's willingness to limit freedom of speech for political gain is enough for me not to support her. Her latest support of the "fairness doctrine"
http://www.breitbart.tv/html/2042.html
Basically, she thinks she should be able to force people to support both sides of the political spectrum. In the above instance, with a "legislative fix" to talk radio in a hearsay statement. Nice.
Huey Long. [}:)]
The prince of American socialism.
I agree with your assessment of candidates at this point which is way too early to take any candidate seriously. A testament to the massively unpopular administration.
Honestly, counselor. Inhofe commenting about what he thinks he overheard two senators discussing in a hallway of congress? He wasn't part of the conversation and may have missed context. And no one contacts the two liberal senators for their confirmation of the remarks from Mr. credibility? And then reported to an obvious right wing internet site? Help me out here, isn't this just "hearsay"? And political hearsay at that?
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
Huey Long. [}:)]
The prince of American socialism.
I'm guessing ya gotta be Cajun to understand the popularity of that prince.
I understand Waterboy, it certainly isn't gospel. I tried to reference it as hearsay and linked to the source for all to see. I got the link from Drudge and did not realize the source was not reliable (source, not Inhoffe). Nonetheless, this isn't the first overture I have heard from the Clinton camp on the fairness doctrine. So lets see if she denies it...
Edwards is a sockpuppet for George Soros. He can't apparently can't even think for himself anymore. Have any of you Dems bothered to witness his radical metamorphosis over the last year? He's a sitting duck for the GOP. If you think the flip-flop charges against Lurch were bad just wait for what would be thrown at Silky Pony and his $400 hair cuts and $55,000 speeches about helping the poor...
He stands 0 chance, but I hope for my sake he's the nominee.
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
Huey Long. [}:)]
The prince of American socialism.
I'm guessing ya gotta be Cajun to understand the popularity of that prince.
And I'm guessing that
YOU should live in Louisiana to understand that it's not all Cajun!
George Soros?? Iplaw, you must dream about little green footballs, or martians, every night.
quote:
Originally posted by mr.jaynes
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
Huey Long. [}:)]
The prince of American socialism.
I'm guessing ya gotta be Cajun to understand the popularity of that prince.
And I'm guessing that YOU should live in Louisiana to understand that it's not all Cajun!
You gotta understand, Waterboy thinks all the Confederate flag stands for is "defiance" and there are no racial undertones when red necks fly it. He's real knowledgeable about the South.
quote:
Originally posted by NellieBly
George Soros?? Iplaw, you must dream about little green footballs, or martians, every night.
He sure has a strange affiliation with moveon.org then. If he's not to be in bed with Soros he's at least giving reach arounds, since that's Soros' organization. Moveon has all but become Edwards08.org, but I wouldn't let a little thing like that bother me if I were you. I suppose you're lock step with Mr. Soros as well so it doesn't really matter.
Of course, considering how Edwards is running a distant third in the Dem polls, one has to question how much influence Soros has -- if he had any on Edwards to begin with.
I thought Hillary was Soros' b!tch.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
quote:
Originally posted by mr.jaynes
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
Huey Long. [}:)]
The prince of American socialism.
I'm guessing ya gotta be Cajun to understand the popularity of that prince.
And I'm guessing that YOU should live in Louisiana to understand that it's not all Cajun!
You gotta understand, Waterboy thinks all the Confederate flag stands for is "defiance" and there are no racial undertones when red necks fly it. He's real knowledgeable about the South.
The Confederate Flag is a cultural symbol that has in the last few deecades been hijacked and misappropriated by various extremist groups. Long ago, it was respected as a flag of a nation, and in the right minds today, should be considereda part of a long and rich and glorious heritage. But it has been way misused and exploited by every racial extremist group, and people have lost sight of that history.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
I thought Hillary was Soros' b!tch.
Soros parted ways with Hillary when he found out that Edwards was willing to push his agenda. If you look at Edwards, he's become more radical over the last year than at any time previous. He's rabidly anti-war and considers the WOT to a figment of our imagination. Two things he was not just a little more than a year ago.
Money talks when it comes to politics and presidential races and moveon.org is pushing Edwards. Moveon is Soros' baby. Since Soros can't give outrageous amounts money to Edwards, he offsets that with activities on moveon.org, I.E. smearing other candidates and allowing Edwards a primary position with time and advertising.
Southern does not equal "racist." It's just that there were a number of bad apples down here that made the rest of us look bad. And hey, I don't claim them. They are an affront to my very nature.
The Confederate Flag is not a symbol of racism, and those adherents to racist ideologies insult the very history of that flag when they include it in their vile theatrics.
quote:
Originally posted by mr.jaynes
Southern does not equal "racist." It's just that there were a number of bad apples down here that made the rest of us look bad. And hey, I don't claim them. They are an affront to my very nature.
The Confederate Flag is not a symbol of racism, and those adherents to racist ideologies insult the very history of that flag when they include it in their vile theatrics.
Well it was a symbol of a nation that favored slavory over freedom for black people.
Hate groups hi-jacking the image just reinforces the ideology it represented.
That's all IMO, of course.
It's a red, white and blue flag, but it ain't ours.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
quote:
Originally posted by mr.jaynes
Southern does not equal "racist." It's just that there were a number of bad apples down here that made the rest of us look bad. And hey, I don't claim them. They are an affront to my very nature.
The Confederate Flag is not a symbol of racism, and those adherents to racist ideologies insult the very history of that flag when they include it in their vile theatrics.
Well it was a symbol of a nation that favored slavory over freedom for black people.
Hate groups hi-jacking the image just reinforces the ideology it represented.
That's all IMO, of course.
Rest assured, friend Conan, that I abhor slavery (I don't like the idea that one person should be allowed to dominate other peopless like that) and that as an American, I do not favor secession. I am also not an adherent to the ideologies of Southern Nationalism, neo-Confederate revisionism, or anything that would cast my region or its citizens in a bad light. They are an affront to this country, and to the region they claim to represent.
My interest in Southern history and all that goes with it is strictly cultural, not political. Please, do not think less of me.
I don't think any less of you at all, we all have our opinions and I haven't pegged you for a racist by any means. I've carried with me a negative image of the Confederate flag ever since I first read about the Civil War in grade school.
My brother had an opportunity to move to Mobile, Al. about 12 years ago to manage an office for City Finance. Instead, he wound up managing the office in Seminole, Ok.
I said: "Are you nuggin' futz?" He said he didn't want to move to an area where black people were still covertly or otherwise thought of as being sub-human.
I don't know if that's the case or not in Mobile, but I can relate to when I used to travel to Memphis on business around that same time-frame. If I called on a white operating engineer (the guy that runs the mechanical systems like heat & air) for a property management company, he could make a purchasing decision without going to a property manager. If it was a black operating engineer, he always had to get approval from the white property manager. It's subtle, but it's still an element of racism, IMO.
You live in the south, do you see much subtle racism still? Not a loaded question, just curious.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
I don't think any less of you at all, we all have our opinions and I haven't pegged you for a racist by any means. I've carried with me a negative image of the Confederate flag ever since I first read about the Civil War in grade school.
My brother had an opportunity to move to Mobile, Al. about 12 years ago to manage an office for City Finance. Instead, he wound up managing the office in Seminole, Ok.
I said: "Are you nuggin' futz?" He said he didn't want to move to an area where black people were still covertly or otherwise thought of as being sub-human.
I don't know if that's the case or not in Mobile, but I can relate to when I used to travel to Memphis on business around that same time-frame. If I called on a white operating engineer (the guy that runs the mechanical systems like heat & air) for a property management company, he could make a purchasing decision without going to a property manager. If it was a black operating engineer, he always had to get approval from the white property manager. It's subtle, but it's still an element of racism, IMO.
You live in the south, do you see much subtle racism still? Not a loaded question, just curious.
Race isn't the problematic issue it once was down in these parts, not from what I get (but then, I tend to roll with a pretty wild crowd). Oh, sure, every so often, you'll hear this slur or that (just not from me), either subtle or outright-and not just from whites, but from black people too and every other color. But then, that's everywhere, not just down South.
Me, I've always tended to get on well with everyone, regardless of who or what they are. I have friends who happen to be black, white, hispanic, oriental, gay, straight, male, female. Some of my best friends are people.
Mobile, I've been-they have an excellent Mardi Gras, which is even older than the celebrations held in New Orleans. Not as fun, though.
quote:
Originally posted by mr.jaynes
Some of my best friends are people.
Me too, what a coincidence! [}:)]
I guess the point I'm pressing about racism, is do you have a sense of, let's say white dealers being more trusted than black dealers in the casinos?
I just had a sense when I would work down in Memphis that unless a black man was wearing a $700 suit behind a mahogany desk that his superiors didn't think he was smart enough to make good decisions. IOW- At least in similar skilled or blue collar positions, a black man was never given all the same responsibilities as a white man.
I admit to some racial stereotyping of my own. I don't think there are many people who can say they are completely innocent of it. If a black kid is trolling the parking lot at QT with pants hanging down below his butt, I assume he's a gangsta and up to no good. I assume the same thing of a white kid dressed the same way with his hat turned crooked, all blinged up. Either may well be a straight-A student at Holland Hall, but I've built a paradigm over the years.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
quote:
Originally posted by mr.jaynes
Some of my best friends are people.
Me too, what a coincidence! [}:)]
I guess the point I'm pressing about racism, is do you have a sense of, let's say white dealers being more trusted than black dealers in the casinos?
We all go through the same extensive background checks, regardless of race age or gender, and they drop they surveillance on all of us just as zealously. And that's OK, because we are talking about alot of money here.