2008 Presidential Announcement Thread.

[southsider2k5]

I just see racial hate on a different level I guess.

 

It doesn't matter how you or I view it, its all about the guy with the hate, and what it motivates him to do.

[NorthSideSox72]

It doesn't matter how you or I view it, its all about the guy with the hate, and what it motivates him to do.

I think any Prez candidate takes a chance of getting killed, and one like Obama who is maybe more controversial will be even more at risk (so would Clinton, BTW). But of course, even for the most mundane candidate, there is still risk.

 

I have to say, having dealt with professionally, and knowing people employed at, virtually all of the federal law enforcement/security agencies... the USSS is the most impressive to me. They are the most professional, most well-trained, and most focused group in my experience. Given how many wackos there are out there, and how few ever even get a shot off, says a lot I think.

[Texsox]

I'm not talking about the assbags that the Republicans have carted out there, I'm talking about Obama. Quit deflecting the subject.

 

P.S. - Reagan had a record. He was governor, remember?

 

I understand that Reagan was a Governor, he was also President of the Motion Picture Academy, but what parallels will you point to between a Governor and President? Foreign policy? Perhaps knowing your way around Washington is an advantage that we have ignored through the past several decades?

 

And I wasn't deflecting, just making a prediction that you will be voting for the GOP candidate.

 

So what kind of a track record are you looking for? Voting on Federal issues? A Governor will have none, we'll have a couple years of Obama, and more with other candidates. There will be a much different set of issues to tackle if a Governor/Mayor is running versus a Senator/VP/Congressman/CIA Head etc.

 

What we are asked of by voting is who would make the best President. If in your eyes, running a state is critical, you will vote for most any Governor over a Senator. (of course I don't see you passing over a GOP Senator to vote for a Dem Governor). I place much more faith on their vision of America and what we can become in 4 years under their direction. I look at their ability to forge compromise with various factions. I look at their ability to raise the American spirit. I want a glimpse at their character, citizenship, and mental and physical fitness. I want to know their views reflect mine in most areas.

 

I don't know what track record could have predicted that Bush would be off the charts brilliant during 9/11 and terrible in New Orleans. What track record would have predicted Kennedy's brilliance in staring down the Russians and vitalizing the space program.

[kapkomet]

I understand that Reagan was a Governor, he was also President of the Motion Picture Academy, but what parallels will you point to between a Governor and President? Foreign policy? Perhaps knowing your way around Washington is an advantage that we have ignored through the past several decades?

 

And I wasn't deflecting, just making a prediction that you will be voting for the GOP candidate.

 

So what kind of a track record are you looking for? Voting on Federal issues? A Governor will have none, we'll have a couple years of Obama, and more with other candidates. There will be a much different set of issues to tackle if a Governor/Mayor is running versus a Senator/VP/Congressman/CIA Head etc.

 

What we are asked of by voting is who would make the best President. If in your eyes, running a state is critical, you will vote for most any Governor over a Senator. (of course I don't see you passing over a GOP Senator to vote for a Dem Governor). I place much more faith on their vision of America and what we can become in 4 years under their direction. I look at their ability to forge compromise with various factions. I look at their ability to raise the American spirit. I want a glimpse at their character, citizenship, and mental and physical fitness. I want to know their views reflect mine in most areas.

 

I don't know what track record could have predicted that Bush would be off the charts brilliant during 9/11 and terrible in New Orleans. What track record would have predicted Kennedy's brilliance in staring down the Russians and vitalizing the space program.

 

Actually, I said that I think Bill Richardson is the most qualified candidate out there somewhere else around here. He has executive experience, was an ambassador for us, and has some good, moderate views.

[Balta1701]

Actually, I said that I think Bill Richardson is the most qualified candidate out there somewhere else around here. He has executive experience, was an ambassador for us, and has some good, moderate views.

I'll add a couple little notes to that. First off, we still dont' know anything on the status of Wesley Clark, and in terms of qualifications, the 4-star general route has worked fairly well in the past. But other than that, yeah, Richardson is at the top of the qualifications list.

 

And on the other hand, paper qualifications do not necessarily make for a good candidate. George W. had executive experience leading a state for 8 years and look how he's turned out. And the people around him, the Cheneys, Rumsfelds, etc., all had a boatload of experience coming into their current jobs as well. And Obama is smart enough to know that all he needs to say to diffuse the experience argument right now is to say the words "Cheney and Rumsfeld".

 

And on the other subject up for discussion...folks, go re-watch season 1 of 24

[kapkomet]

Yea, I need to catch up on seasons 2-5 now.

[Jenksismyhero]

If anyone wants a true moderate, best to be voting for Obama out of the current crop of candidates. Unlike McCain, Romney, or Guiliani, he's not a moderate when convenient. He's moderate enough to piss off a lot of base Democrats all the time. Whether or not he peters out is left to be seen, but Obama is no crazy liberal, that's for sure.

 

 

Seriously? First I'd like Obama to actually tell me what he's for and what he's against, then maybe I'll agree with this. I'd also like him to differentiate himself, not just from Bush who's ubber-right republican, but from anyone else thats close to him on the political spectrum. He's kept his mouth shut thus far. He gets SO much free press because he's a half-black man who speaks very well. He comes out and supports the Bears over the Saints and it becomes a national news story. He goes swimming in the ocean and it becomes a national news story. As unfair as it seems he'll be elected because of his race and how that shows what progress our society has made. The media has already jumped on this story and will run with it for the next year two years until election time. He doesn't have to say a word about politics and can stick to "i want to keep taxes low, social programs high and keep us from being attacked by terrorists" and the office is his, without regard to any of his qualifications (shockingly, this is what his dem convention speech amounted to....jack crap....and he was automatically dubbed the next great president).

 

And I don't fault him for this or think negatively about him for this. It's the media trying to sell a story thats the most profitable which becomes our news source. It's sad. But I don't buy into that crap and I hope others don't either. I want him to tell me what he's for and against before he gets my vote.

 

Out of that list I'd think Guilliani is far and away the most moderate. For abortion rights and for gay rights while being an economic conservative. That's pretty much being right down the middle.

[Chet Lemon]

I'd also like him to differentiate himself, not just from Bush who's ubber-right republican, but from anyone else thats close to him on the political spectrum.

 

He broke w/ Durbin and mostly every liberal in the Senate last week by voting against Durbin's motion to table an amendment which sunshines earmarks. In other words, he put tax paying citizens' interest of where their taxes are spent over party unanimity.

[Texsox]

Actually, I said that I think Bill Richardson is the most qualified candidate out there somewhere else around here. He has executive experience, was an ambassador for us, and has some good, moderate views.

 

Where do you fit the intangibles into this? The stuff that made Reagan magical and Bush Jr. inconsistent?

[kapkomet]

My point is this early in the game, intangibles is all Obama has, and he's being annoited as the best thing since sliced bread. He ain't s***, yet, but he's the new media darling... that is until her thighness Ms. Clinton jumps in.

[Texsox]

My point is this early in the game, intangibles is all Obama has, and he's being annoited as the best thing since sliced bread. He ain't s***, yet, but he's the new media darling... that is until her thighness Ms. Clinton jumps in.

 

Well it sure did take you a long time to get to your point and I agree with you. I thought he would be a great candidate in 2012. This feels too soon. But don't underestimate the intangibles, the American public can feel its way into and out of a recession very easily. You do realize, by your criteria, you eliminated Senators from serious consideration. For the most part they have little executive experience.

[Balta1701]

Well it sure did take you a long time to get to your point and I agree with you. I thought he would be a great candidate in 2012. This feels too soon. But don't underestimate the intangibles, the American public can feel its way into and out of a recession very easily. You do realize, by your criteria, you eliminated Senators from serious consideration. For the most part they have little executive experience.

But of course, the key is, in 2012, he'd either be challenging a Dem. incumbent in the primary or challenging an incumbent Repub in the general, and that's guaranteed to be a lot more difficult than saying why you're the guy to clean up Bush's mess.

 

And no one wants to wait for 2016, and Hell, I've already penciled in Elliot Spitzer for that year anyway.

Edited January 18, 2007 by Balta1701

[Texsox]

But of course, the key is, in 2012, he'd either be challenging a Dem. incumbent in the primary or challenging an incumbent Repub in the general, and that's guaranteed to be a lot more difficult than saying why you're the guy to clean up Bush's mess.

 

Agreed. He's a man ahead of his time and resume.

[knightni]

I haven't seen his politics totally yet, but I'd consider crossing the aisle for Obama.

[Balta1701]

Agreed. He's a man ahead of his time and resume.

Of course, there's also something to be said for keeping one's resume in the Senate moderately short. In Congress, unlike say being a Governor, you vote on all sorts of compromise bills, you make all sorts of votes on different versions of bills, and they can be spun this way and that by an aggressive campaigner. It worked damn well as a method for Mr. Bush to go after Mr. Kerry as a flip-flopper, especially with the "voted for it before I voted against it" remark (there were 2 bills that came up for a vote, of course he's voting for 1 of them!)

[southsider2k5]

Of course, there's also something to be said for keeping one's resume in the Senate moderately short. In Congress, unlike say being a Governor, you vote on all sorts of compromise bills, you make all sorts of votes on different versions of bills, and they can be spun this way and that by an aggressive campaigner. It worked damn well as a method for Mr. Bush to go after Mr. Kerry as a flip-flopper, especially with the "voted for it before I voted against it" remark (there were 2 bills that came up for a vote, of course he's voting for 1 of them!)

 

I agree with this totally. Everyone keeps saying "Its too soon, build your record" but campaigns don't work that way anymore. Its not about what you have done, its about what you have done wrong. Obama had to run now, or risk someone taking him down in between.

[RibbieRubarb]

I agree with this totally. Everyone keeps saying "Its too soon, build your record" but campaigns don't work that way anymore. Its not about what you have done, its about what you have done wrong. Obama had to run now, or risk someone taking him down in between.

 

I think it's that reason combined with the fact that in 2012 he would be running against an incumbent...Dem or GOP and in 2016 he'd be up against that VP, probably. The field is as wide open as ever right now.

[southsider2k5]

I think it's that reason combined with the fact that in 2012 he would be running against an incumbent...Dem or GOP and in 2016 he'd be up against that VP, probably. The field is as wide open as ever right now.

 

I think the country is ready for something different. No Bush, no Clinton, no Kerry, no Gore. Let's start over, and try something different. Obama is a perfect guy in that respect.

[Texsox]

I think the country is ready for something different. No Bush, no Clinton, no Kerry, no Gore. Let's start over, and try something different. Obama is a perfect guy in that respect.

 

Something different could be any Senator. Perhaps a war hero type, a Republican. Someone like McCain.

 

What I am going to enjoy is the heavyweight primary battles for both parties. There are some studs running. People who can campaign hard with great oratory skills. I believe this cycle will be remembered for generations. On the Dem side you will have a couple people who could tear down barriers. Obama and Hillary are electable. Rudy and McCain to start the GOP would be an epic party battle. I wish there was a candidate in all this that I could really jump behind. Someone I would want to pound the pavement for. I don't want to be on the sidelines watching the body bags.

[RibbieRubarb]

Something different could be any Senator. Perhaps a war hero type, a Republican. Someone like McCain.

 

What I am going to enjoy is the heavyweight primary battles for both parties. There are some studs running. People who can campaign hard with great oratory skills. I believe this cycle will be remembered for generations. On the Dem side you will have a couple people who could tear down barriers. Obama and Hillary are electable. Rudy and McCain to start the GOP would be an epic party battle. I wish there was a candidate in all this that I could really jump behind. Someone I would want to pound the pavement for. I don't want to be on the sidelines watching the body bags.

 

I don't think we realize what an historic election this might be in America. Combine the factors of no incumbent running, the possibility of a female or African-American Presidential frontrunner, the state of the world and America's image to the rest of the planet...This has all the markings of one for the ages.

 

I hope it lives up to the hype I am starting.

Edited January 18, 2007 by RibbieRubarb

[NorthSideSox72]

I don't think we realize what an historic election this might be in America. Combine the factors of no incumbent running, the possibility of a female or African-American Presidential frontrunner, the state of the world and America's image to the rest of the planet...This has all the markings of one for the ages.

 

I hope it lives up to the hype I am starting.

Plus a Prez election amidst a failing war. And add a potentially viable Hispanic candidate to the female and african american ones.

 

I must say, I'm looking forward to it.

 

 

Something different could be any Senator. Perhaps a war hero type, a Republican. Someone like McCain.

 

What I am going to enjoy is the heavyweight primary battles for both parties. There are some studs running. People who can campaign hard with great oratory skills. I believe this cycle will be remembered for generations. On the Dem side you will have a couple people who could tear down barriers. Obama and Hillary are electable. Rudy and McCain to start the GOP would be an epic party battle. I wish there was a candidate in all this that I could really jump behind. Someone I would want to pound the pavement for. I don't want to be on the sidelines watching the body bags.

McCain, like Edwards-Kerry-Clinton-Gore, is I think seen as old news. Not something different.

 

As for hitting the pavement, I am already looking into doing that very thing for Richardson. I've been involved in politics at various levels, but I've never hit the bricks for a Prez candidate, and I want to see how that works.

[Jenksismyhero]

Something different could be any Senator. Perhaps a war hero type, a Republican. Someone like McCain.

 

What I am going to enjoy is the heavyweight primary battles for both parties. There are some studs running. People who can campaign hard with great oratory skills. I believe this cycle will be remembered for generations. On the Dem side you will have a couple people who could tear down barriers. Obama and Hillary are electable. Rudy and McCain to start the GOP would be an epic party battle. I wish there was a candidate in all this that I could really jump behind. Someone I would want to pound the pavement for. I don't want to be on the sidelines watching the body bags.

 

 

Agreed. Should be some good debates this time around as opposed to "you're an X," "no you're a Y."

[RibbieRubarb]

Plus a Prez election amidst a failing war. And add a potentially viable Hispanic candidate to the female and african american ones.

 

I forgot about Bill Richardson...

He is is an incredibly viable candidiate.

[kapkomet]

I forgot about Bill Richardson...

He is is an incredibly viable candidiate.

See, and I actually respect him. It's too bad he probably won't get much traction.

[southsider2k5]

Plus a Prez election amidst a failing war. And add a potentially viable Hispanic candidate to the female and african american ones.

 

I must say, I'm looking forward to it.

McCain, like Edwards-Kerry-Clinton-Gore, is I think seen as old news. Not something different.

 

As for hitting the pavement, I am already looking into doing that very thing for Richardson. I've been involved in politics at various levels, but I've never hit the bricks for a Prez candidate, and I want to see how that works.

 

McCain has a small chance of emerging as different, but unless he does something drastic, he isn't my first choice by a long shot. That Edwards blog posting literally scared the s*** out of me regarding him. I haven't seen that scary by a serious canditate since Ross Perot was running with his horribly destructive economic plan the first time around.