For GOP only

[southsider2k5]

Wonderful. Thanks to the Obama-trons for taking over yet another thread for you propaganda. In all seriousness, you guys have done more to make me hate Barack Obama than just about anywhere else. I used to at least respect the guy, even if I didn't agree with him. The blind obsessive support is just scary, not to mention is makes have a discussion about anything than Obama-approved story lines impossible. The whole point of having separate threads was to allow people who knowingly have different opinions the chance to be able to speak their minds with other like-minded people, without being subject to partisian crap. Well thanks to your insistence, that is gone. Thanks again.

[mr_genius]

Wonderful. Thanks to the Obama-trons for taking over yet another thread for you propaganda. In all seriousness, you guys have done more to make me hate Barack Obama than just about anywhere else. I used to at least respect the guy, even if I didn't agree with him. The blind obsessive support is just scary, not to mention is makes have a discussion about anything than Obama-approved story lines impossible. The whole point of having separate threads was to allow people who knowingly have different opinions the chance to be able to speak their minds with other like-minded people, without being subject to partisian crap. Well thanks to your insistence, that is gone. Thanks again.

 

 

Great post. Honestly, Obama could gain more votes if his supporters would make a more convincing case for him. Spamming us with left wing blogs isn't going to win over posters in this thread.

[whitesoxfan101]

I have to 3rd the "Obama supporters make me hate him" idea. The 'Obama-trons', from his supporters to the media and everywhere in between, are relentless with their repetitive propaganda, and try and make you think your a bad person if you don't want his "change". Obama is a master of using words (whether they have meaning or not is up for debate) to convince people and inspire them, but his supporters are not.

[EvilMonkey]

There are many more than three that feel that way. Most of us didn't like him much to begin with, but the Ron Paulian style gushing and rabid defense has made many people just sick of seeing or hearing him. That, and this seemingly endless campaign.

[EvilMonkey]

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/washington-whi...ike-mccain.html

 

Voters (Heart) Obama, But Think Like McCain

May 16, 2008 04:03 PM ET | Paul Bedard | Permanent Link

 

 

This election is starting to look like a tragic play, one where the heart fights the brain. Polls show that voters are passionate about Sen. Barack Obama. Even 23-year-old Meghan McCain thinks he's "cute." But when they consider where the candidates stand on the political spectrum, voters find themselves closer to Sen. John McCain. The latest evidence comes to us from the Winston Group, which just asked voters where they stand ideologically compared with Obama, the Democrat, and Republican McCain.

 

Winston Group Senior Vice President Myra Miller says most voters see themselves as center-right. On a scale of 1 to 9, with 1 being very liberal, 5 moderate, and 9 very conservative, the average voter is at 5.85. Miller says voters put McCain just to their right, at 5.94. And Obama is off to the left at 4.1.

 

So is it a lock for McCain? Well, yes, no—and maybe. "Because they are ideologically closer to McCain, voters will be more inclined to hear what he has to say and be open to his ideas, presenting McCain with a structural advantage toward building a center-right majority coalition," says Miller. However, she adds, "it is not a given that voters will vote for a candidate that they are closer to ideologically. Voters still want to hear ideas and what a candidate is going to do, especially in this environment." So keep on talking, guys.

 

 

[Controlled Chaos]

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/washington-whi...ike-mccain.html

They had Obama at 4.1??? If Obama is 4.1 where is Biden...5?? Obama is the most liberal Senator out there. So put him where he should be, #1, and then see how far he really is from your center right ideologies.

[EvilMonkey]

They had Obama at 4.1??? If Obama is 4.1 where is Biden...5?? Obama is the most liberal Senator out there. So put him where he should be, #1, and then see how far he really is from your center right ideologies.

That was the point where the people they surveyed put him at. As the article said, they heart Obama, so he wasn't as liberal to them in thier 'view', but they 'thougth' close to McCain.

[Controlled Chaos]

That was the point where the people they surveyed put him at. As the article said, they heart Obama, so he wasn't as liberal to them in thier 'view', but they 'thougth' close to McCain.

Yeah, and they can heart Obama all they want....but if this was a serious poll...they should look at where his voting puts him...and that isn't anywhere close to center....but anywhoo...

[southsideirish71]

Hamas leader Mahmoud al-Zahar said Wednesday in an event marking 60 years to the Palestinian “Nakba” in the Gaza Strip that “the right of (Palestinian) return is closer than ever." According to al-Zahar, “The Zionist legend about the 'unbeatable' is ruined. Today, I reiterate and emphasize more than ever that we will never recognize Israel. We will establish a Palestinian state on all of Palestine’s territory.”

 

Just another reminder of the position of Hamas. Elected, sure. But their goal is pretty obvious. Well obvious to everyone, but the Obama campaign who think that face to face will make any difference in hamas's view that Israel needs to be wiped off the map.

 

 

[lostfan]

Just another reminder of the position of Hamas. Elected, sure. But their goal is pretty obvious. Well obvious to everyone, but the Obama campaign who think that face to face will make any difference in hamas's view that Israel needs to be wiped off the map.

Um. I'm not sure what the source of this rumor is but to my knowledge the Obama camp has never said they're going to meet with Hamas. With adversaries like Iran sure, so make of that what you will. But not terrorist groups: http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSN03459104

 

Democratic U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama on Monday backed the Bush administration's policy of shunning contact with the Islamic militants of Hamas in its Middle East peace diplomacy.

 

The Illinois senator has said he would break with President George W. Bush's stance of declining to talk to some other international adversaries but that stance does not apply to Hamas, which controls the Gaza Strip and is committed to the destruction of Israel.

[NorthSideSox72]

Just FYI to folks in here, once the Dem nomination is sealed up, we'll probably re-organize the pinned threads a bit.

 

I'd like some feedback on how these threads should work. I've been thinking we should make the GOP Only and DEM Only threads be truly that - any discussions that are prompted by posts there should be started as new threads or put elsewhere, maybe just a link to the original post. How does that sound to people? Or should we just let them go wherever they go?

 

[lostfan]

What do we do when we see an argument in either thread that we want to challenge?

[NorthSideSox72]

What do we do when we see an argument in either thread that we want to challenge?

That's what I am asking about. We can either just let people do it in each thread, like we are doing here... or, we can tell people to start a new thread for that topic.

 

[lostfan]

That's what I am asking about. We can either just let people do it in each thread, like we are doing here... or, we can tell people to start a new thread for that topic.

Well I think there's a difference between the post I made a few posts ago, and a full-blown partisan argument. From a mod/admin's standpoint, I don't think there is any way you can actively separate the two. I think minor challenges just go as is, but when it goes farther than a few posts someone should step in and make them take it to another thread if the poster doesn't take it upon themselves to do it. JMO.

 

If things were to go strictly "red" and "blue" then that kind of defeat the purpose of having this section.

[southsider2k5]

I think the general election thread would be the place to have the partisian bickering...

[Controlled Chaos]

IMO, I think it's pretty simple really...

There is a GOP forum and a DEM forum...leave em as just that.

 

The GOP forum is for the guys on the right.....It will have biased GOP articles and all the DEM bashing one can hope for. If you don't like it...don't come in here. If there is something posted in here that irks you soo much...then start a new thread in the main forum and discuss it.

 

The DEM forum is the same way. If you want to post in there, Bush is the devil, that's your right and I'm not gonna come in there and try to convince you he's not. If you had made a whole list of reasons why and I didn't agree with it or thought it was filled with lies....then I would start a thread in the main forum and those that wanted to be part of the discussion would.

 

The problem I see is Dems can't handle a differing opinion. If it's different from theirs then it's absolutely wrong and they can't let it go. They have to make a post and convince you why it's wrong. That's just how I see it...and the posts in this thread, from the first page to the last, kinda back that up

Edited May 20, 2008 by Controlled Chaos

[NorthSideSox72]

IMO, I think it's pretty simple really...

There is a GOP forum and a DEM forum...leave em as just that.

 

The GOP forum is for the guys on the right.....It will have biased GOP articles and all the DEM bashing one can hope for. If you don't like it...don't come in here. If there is something posted in here that irks you soo much...then start a new thread in the main forum and discuss it.

 

The DEM forum is the same way. If you want to post in there, Bush is the devil, that's your right and I'm not gonna come in there and try to convince you he's not. If you had made a whole list of reasons why and I didn't agree with it or thought it was filled with lies....then I would start a thread in the main forum and those that wanted to be part of the discussion would.

 

The problem I see is Dems can't handle a differing opinion. If it's different from theirs then it's absolutely wrong and they can't let it go. They have to make a post and convince you why it's wrong. That's just how I see it...and the posts in this thread, from the first page to the last, kinda back that up

I think you are on the same track as I am, up until that last graf. Then you had to put "Dems" where "Strong party backers from either party" would have been more accurate.

 

[whitesoxfan101]

Just another reminder of the position of Hamas. Elected, sure. But their goal is pretty obvious. Well obvious to everyone, but the Obama campaign who think that face to face will make any difference in hamas's view that Israel needs to be wiped off the map.

 

To me, Obama's whole "we have to talk to our enemies too" shtick has been his biggest mistake outside of spending 20 years under the tutelage of Jeremiah Wright. McCain should and probably will pound Obama on the campaign trail for that. Things like this really seem to show either that Obama's lack of experience is glaring, or if that's not the case, he's just generally ignorant to the purpose and goals of enemies, especially like Hamas.

[BigSqwert]

...he's just generally ignorant to the purpose and goals of enemies, especially like Hamas.

As lostfan mentioned a few posts earlier, Obama has not stated he would talk to Hamas. It was McCain, in 2006, that implied that we should talk to Hamas.

[whitesoxfan101]

As lostfan mentioned a few posts earlier, Obama has not stated he would talk to Hamas. It was McCain, in 2006, that implied that we should talk to Hamas.

 

I am not an expert on everything McCain as much as you are since I am not one to spin everything for one person, but if you don't realize what Obama said, that's your problem. He only won't talk to Hamas NOW because he has seen how much the "talking to our enemies as well" comment doesn't really resonate with the voters.

Edited May 20, 2008 by whitesoxfan101

[BigSqwert]

I am not an expert on everything McCain as much as you are since I am not one to spin everything for one person, but if you don't realize what Obama said, that's your problem. He only won't talk to Hamas NOW because he has seen how much the "talking to our enemies as well" comment doesn't really resonate with the voters.

2 points.

 

1 - I provided a link with video footage of McCain in 2006 suggesting we start talking to Hamas and everyone bashed me.

 

2 - Please provide a quote of Obama saying that he would talk to Hamas without precondition.

[EvilMonkey]

2 points.

 

1 - I provided a link with video footage of McCain in 2006 suggesting we start talking to Hamas and everyone bashed me.

 

2 - Please provide a quote of Obama saying that he would talk to Hamas without precondition.

Your McCain link wasn't 'in context' showing the whole of the response. And we all know how you Obamamaniacs love context. He conditioned his reply upon Hamas meeting certain guidelines before taking would occur, something your link ommitted.

[southsider2k5]

As lostfan mentioned a few posts earlier, Obama has not stated he would talk to Hamas. It was McCain, in 2006, that implied that we should talk to Hamas.

 

He just has his surrogates do it privately... very Clintonesque.

[southsider2k5]

It’s conceivable that there are those in the Arab world who say to themselves, “This is a guy who spent some time in the Muslim world, has a middle name of Hussein, and appears more worldly and has called for talks with people, and so he’s not going to be engaging in the same sort of cowboy diplomacy as George Bush,” and that’s something they’re hopeful about.

 

 

"The radical Islamists, the al-Qaida … would be dancing in the streets in greater numbers than they did on Sept. 11 because they would declare victory in this war on terror," "His middle name does matter, it matters because they read a meaning into that."

 

Interesting couple of statements huh?

[HuskyCaucasian]

I just got to thinking...

Let's assume, for the sake of argument, McCain loses to Obama. I think the 2012 Republican Primaries might be VERY similar to the democrats this year. "Elite" Romney vs "BlueCollar" Huckabee. I think it might be epic.