2008 Presidential Announcement Thread.

[Chet Lemon]

Al Gore is not running

[Gregory Pratt]

Al Gore is not running

There's the link! Thank you.

[EvilMonkey]

After looking at his voting records, i am not sure what anyone sees here that would be refreshing and new other than his skin color.

http://www.vote-smart.org/voting_category....can_id=BS030017 Obama's record

compare to Teddy's record, you find suprising similarities. Might as well elect ted!

http://www.vote-smart.org/voting_category....can_id=S0410103

[Balta1701]

By the way, since this is just the dark dungeons of the internets, it's ok to do some rumor mongering...it seems that Gov. Richardson has been dogged for years by, let's call them, Clintoninan rumors regarding his personal life.

[NorthSideSox72]

By the way, since this is just the dark dungeons of the internets, it's ok to do some rumor mongering...it seems that Gov. Richardson has been dogged for years by, let's call them, Clintoninan rumors regarding his personal life.

Hm. On the one hand, looking at this and the linked articles, I don't see a whole lot to be concerned about. The only reported news I see, from the Free New Mexican, talks about "poking" or wrestling around that doesn't really concern me.

 

On the other hand, that is not "Presidential" behavior. Kind of like Obama's smoking. Not something you want to linger. If, as Richardson shows up more often in the national media, he continues to show those little less-than-Presidential behaviors, that could be all that is needed to knock him out of the race.

[Balta1701]

Hm. On the one hand, looking at this and the linked articles, I don't see a whole lot to be concerned about. The only reported news I see, from the Free New Mexican, talks about "poking" or wrestling around that doesn't really concern me.

 

On the other hand, that is not "Presidential" behavior. Kind of like Obama's smoking. Not something you want to linger. If, as Richardson shows up more often in the national media, he continues to show those little less-than-Presidential behaviors, that could be all that is needed to knock him out of the race.

I just sort of picked the most convenient source on that today. If you google around, there's more than a few places where people have Casually alluded to those rumors. And all it takes is a little bit of speculation on Fox News to turn idle rumors into major stories (remember Drudge's attempted Kerry-mistress smear?)

[NorthSideSox72]

I just sort of picked the most convenient source on that today. If you google around, there's more than a few places where people have Casually alluded to those rumors. And all it takes is a little bit of speculation on Fox News to turn idle rumors into major stories (remember Drudge's attempted Kerry-mistress smear?)

Yeah, that's kind of what I was getting at. Looks to me like nothing substantial, but even that "air" of not carrying himself properly could potentially cause problems.

[jasonxctf]

Hm. On the one hand, looking at this and the linked articles, I don't see a whole lot to be concerned about. The only reported news I see, from the Free New Mexican, talks about "poking" or wrestling around that doesn't really concern me.

 

On the other hand, that is not "Presidential" behavior. Kind of like Obama's smoking. Not something you want to linger. If, as Richardson shows up more often in the national media, he continues to show those little less-than-Presidential behaviors, that could be all that is needed to knock him out of the race.

 

 

less than presidential behaviors.... you mean like DUI's on your record, being an Alcoholic until 40 and snorting coke???

[NorthSideSox72]

less than presidential behaviors.... you mean like DUI's on your record, being an Alcoholic until 40 and snorting coke???

Actually, I wasn't talking about that sort of thing. I was referring more to demeanor, affect, etc. Richardson appears to be the kind of guy who may occasionally do things in public that, while basically harmless, make people cringe when considering him as the next President. Like, for example, putting a high school kid in a headlock wrestling around with him at some sort of award presentation. Just for fun I am sure, but, will ultimately scare off some people.

 

The sort of thing you are referring to, actual illegal or immoral behaviors in their past, doesn't appear to be an issue with Richardson (at least, that we have yet seen). These things he has done are, if ONLY in his past, likely to fade away like so much babble. He just needs to not do those things from here forward.

[Texsox]

After looking at his voting records, i am not sure what anyone sees here that would be refreshing and new other than his skin color.

http://www.vote-smart.org/voting_category....can_id=BS030017 Obama's record

compare to Teddy's record, you find suprising similarities. Might as well elect ted!

http://www.vote-smart.org/voting_category....can_id=S0410103

 

If you believe that the only thing important is their voting record, then I guess you could. I believe their is much, much more to being President. A voting record will not shed any light on their character, citizenship, or mental and physical fitness. Their abilities to forge a concensus, their abilities to lead in good times and bad.

[Gregory Pratt]

http://www.freenewmexican.com/news/36605.html

Richardson gives me the creeps.

[NorthSideSox72]

http://www.freenewmexican.com/news/36605.html

Richardson gives me the creeps.

That was the linked article, out of the ones Balta posted, that I referred to earlier.

[EvilMonkey]

If you believe that the only thing important is their voting record, then I guess you could. I believe their is much, much more to being President. A voting record will not shed any light on their character, citizenship, or mental and physical fitness. Their abilities to forge a concensus, their abilities to lead in good times and bad.

Tex, if his voting record shows that he toes the party line, how does that NOT give you insight into his character? I was merely pointing out that people say that he is a refreshing change. Well, other than being sober, what difference is there between him and kennedy? While voting may not shed light on his citizenship, etc, it does shed light on his political leanings and how he would tend to lead on issue based items, such as taxes, defense, etc. That IS important.

[Texsox]

Tex, if his voting record shows that he toes the party line, how does that NOT give you insight into his character? I was merely pointing out that people say that he is a refreshing change. Well, other than being sober, what difference is there between him and kennedy? While voting may not shed light on his citizenship, etc, it does shed light on his political leanings and how he would tend to lead on issue based items, such as taxes, defense, etc. That IS important.

 

I am not saying it is important, but remember we usually elect a Governor and we never have that to judge them by. Plus as a freshman Senator, you would expect him to toe the party line 100%, no matter which party he hails from.

 

With so many votes always along party lines, if that was the biggest criteria, it wouldn't matter who either party nominates. Actually for a segment of the voting population, party affiliation is the only criteria. For the independent, swing voters, voting records will only be a small part.

 

Plus, where in any of these candidates voting record could you predict how they would handle a 9/11 or Katrina type of catastrophe?

[NorthSideSox72]

Tex, if his voting record shows that he toes the party line, how does that NOT give you insight into his character? I was merely pointing out that people say that he is a refreshing change. Well, other than being sober, what difference is there between him and kennedy? While voting may not shed light on his citizenship, etc, it does shed light on his political leanings and how he would tend to lead on issue based items, such as taxes, defense, etc. That IS important.

Further on this subject, check out his index ratings from various interest groups. Obama is, for better or worse, pretty darn blue. In pretty much every category, he votes heavily or entirely with the typical Democratic party positions.

 

What Obama chooses to emphasize in terms of issues, we'll have to wait and see. But based on his admitedly short voting record, he seems to be pretty much right in line with the bulk of the Democratic party.

[Balta1701]

Further on this subject, check out his index ratings from various interest groups. Obama is, for better or worse, pretty darn blue. In pretty much every category, he votes heavily or entirely with the typical Democratic party positions.

 

What Obama chooses to emphasize in terms of issues, we'll have to wait and see. But based on his admitedly short voting record, he seems to be pretty much right in line with the bulk of the Democratic party.

When evaluating any voting record for a guy who's been in the Senate for 2 years, there's a lot of other little factors that you should take into account. For example...what exactly has the Senate been doing those 2 years? (hint: very, very little).

 

The last few years have been an extraordinarily partisan Congress, I think we all know that. The people running the show were more than happy to go to 50+1 votes in the Senate on any issue they wanted; reaching out to the other side was not particularly important. So in other words, there were very few opportunities to even consider reaching across the aisle; because the people writing the bills didn't want that. They wanted bills as hard to their side of the ideological spectrum as humanly possible, and that's how they wrote them.

 

And on top of that, it's not like the Senate actually did anything of huge importance over the past 2 years. There were no huge reforms, almost no huge tax cuts, no gigantic reform of medicare, no Patriot Act (although there was a renewal compromise struck), etc. The Senate just sort of sat around paralyzed. So it's not like you're evaluating Barack on how he worked on any gigantic compromise bills or anything; you're evaluating him based on his votes for a mere 2 years under a do-nothing Senate.

[Chisoxfn]

I don't like Bill Richardson, but the man is much more capable of running this country than Obama. I've never seen a guy make so much political headway on the basis of one speach.

 

Sure he seems like a decent guy, but politically (sans one speach) the guy has done absolutely nothing. Richardson on the other hand has been one of the bigger faces of the party, has tons of experience running a state (as governor) and to me is a far better person.

 

I disagree with his political agenda (which is natural) but he's far more deserving and capable. Of course that doesn't necessarily mean much anything.

[Texsox]

I don't like Bill Richardson, but the man is much more capable of running this country than Obama. I've never seen a guy make so much political headway on the basis of one speach.

 

Sure he seems like a decent guy, but politically (sans one speach) the guy has done absolutely nothing. Richardson on the other hand has been one of the bigger faces of the party, has tons of experience running a state (as governor) and to me is a far better person.

 

I disagree with his political agenda (which is natural) but he's far more deserving and capable. Of course that doesn't necessarily mean much anything.

 

Perhaps politically isn't the best yardstick to use? I'm not defending Obama here, but perhaps we have laways over rated political experience. The primary business of politics is to get elected. Perhaps when evaluating a Presidential candidate we should open that horizon to include the rest of their lives and achievements.

 

btw, I believe it's speech Mr. Quayle

[southsider2k5]

Perhaps politically isn't the best yardstick to use? I'm not defending Obama here, but perhaps we have laways over rated political experience. The primary business of politics is to get elected. Perhaps when evaluating a Presidential candidate we should open that horizon to include the rest of their lives and achievements.

 

btw, I believe it's speech Mr. Quayle

 

So essentially you are saying we should elect the best preformer to the highest office in the country?

[Texsox]

So essentially you are saying we should elect the best preformer to the highest office in the country?

 

No, What I am saying is political skills might not be the best yardstick to use in evaluating if someone would be a good President. We should also look to private industry, public not for profits, the military, etc. and include that experience in the yardstick. Steve Jobs might just be better than Congressman Bill Jefferson even though Jefferson has done more politically (to use an extreme example).

[Chet Lemon]

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll...&vote=00018

 

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll...&vote=00005

 

Aforementioned links are for two fundamental issues which Obama and Kennedy divided on. These votes were taken place within roughly a week or so.

 

Yes, Obama has done nothing except for making a damn speech! He secured more funding for Ill. wounded veterans who were ranked 48th in terms of benefits paid/available care in the country in his first month as Senator. Support/God Bless the Troops, but only with rhetoric and bumper stickers not with socialisttedkennedybarackhussein benefits!

[Texsox]

The "undeclared" 2008 presidential candidates have

suddenly begun declaring, and it is our patriotic

duty as Comedy-Americans to mock them mercilessly.

First up: Illinois Senator Barack Obama.

 

 

The Top 18 Barack Obama Campaign Slogans

 

 

18> Barack to the future!

 

17> Please ignore the Middle-Easterny name.

 

16> Because the whole "slow-witted Texan with a safe-sounding

name" thing didn't work out so well.

 

15> Face it, America: It's me or the Ice Woman.

 

14> Once you go Barack, you never go back.

 

13> Barack: Cultural Learnings of Books and the Enlightenment

for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of America

 

12> Hey, what's the problem? You elected Marion Berry *twice*!

 

11> Not Hillary Clinton for president.

 

10> Your last chance for a black president before the country's

overrun by Mexicans.

 

9> Straight Outta Cul-De-Sac

 

8> He beats Hillary hands down in the bathing suit competition!

 

7> After our last president, we need one Hussein.

 

6> Obama: Just pretend he's Irish.

 

5> Restoring English as the official language of State of

the Union addresses.

 

4> C'mon, you KNOW you want to see Trent Lott piss his pants!

 

3> America: Movin' on up!

 

2> It's time for a different B.O. in the White House.

 

 

and Topfive.com's Number 1 Barack Obama Campaign Slogan...

 

 

1> As American as imam's apple pie!

 

 

[ Copyright 2007 by Chris White/TopFive.com ]

[EvilMonkey]

The "undeclared" 2008 presidential candidates have

suddenly begun declaring, and it is our patriotic

duty as Comedy-Americans to mock them mercilessly.

First up: Illinois Senator Barack Obama.

The Top 18 Barack Obama Campaign Slogans

18> Barack to the future!

 

17> Please ignore the Middle-Easterny name.

 

16> Because the whole "slow-witted Texan with a safe-sounding

name" thing didn't work out so well.

 

15> Face it, America: It's me or the Ice Woman.

 

14> Once you go Barack, you never go back.

 

13> Barack: Cultural Learnings of Books and the Enlightenment

for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of America

 

12> Hey, what's the problem? You elected Marion Berry *twice*!

 

11> Not Hillary Clinton for president.

 

10> Your last chance for a black president before the country's

overrun by Mexicans.

 

9> Straight Outta Cul-De-Sac

 

8> He beats Hillary hands down in the bathing suit competition!

 

7> After our last president, we need one Hussein.

 

6> Obama: Just pretend he's Irish.

 

5> Restoring English as the official language of State of

the Union addresses.

 

4> C'mon, you KNOW you want to see Trent Lott piss his pants!

 

3> America: Movin' on up!

 

2> It's time for a different B.O. in the White House.

and Topfive.com's Number 1 Barack Obama Campaign Slogan...

1> As American as imam's apple pie!

[ Copyright 2007 by Chris White/TopFive.com ]

I like number 6

[southsider2k5]

Hillary is going to refuse public funding for her Presidential run, as well she should if she wants to win... Personally I would like to see one canditate who said they are wanting to reform campaign financing actually make the statement by sticking with public funding, and trying to find alternative ways to get their message out. I'd have much more respect for that than sticking with the flawed system.

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206....Q&refer=us

 

Clinton Won't Take Public Funds for Presidential Race (Update1)

 

By Kristin Jensen

 

Jan. 22 (Bloomberg) -- New York Senator Hillary Clinton won't take public funds in her bid for the U.S. presidency, a move that may hasten the end of a financing system set up in the wake of the Watergate scandal.

 

While politicians previously have declined public financing for primary elections to avoid the system's spending limits, no major party candidate has given up public funds in the general election. The program, designed to curb the influence of major contributors, doled out $75 million each to President George W. Bush and Democratic candidate John Kerry in the 2004 election.

 

The 2008 campaign is shaping up to be a much more expensive proposition and candidates may not want to abide by the spending limits. Clinton could raise as much as $500 million and the federal grant would probably be $83.8 million, according to the Los Angeles Times, which earlier reported Clinton's decision.

 

``It is a further nail in the coffin of the public funding system,'' said Kenneth Gross, a campaign finance lawyer at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher and Flom in Washington. Now even Clinton's Republican rival, John McCain, who has a reputation as a campaign finance reformer, ``would be foolish to impose spending limits on himself,'' Gross said.

 

Clinton aide Howard Wolfson confirmed her plan to opt out of the public financing system in the general election, should she win the Democratic nomination. McCain's advisers are still considering how to handle the issue of public financing, though a spokesman said the Arizona senator has been working to fix the system in Congress.

 

`Must Be Reformed'

 

``Senator McCain believes the public financing system is not fulfilling its original goal and must be reformed,'' said Danny Diaz, a spokesman for his presidential exploratory committee.

 

A candidate who accepts the public funds can't exceed that amount after accepting a party nomination. That gave an advantage in 2004 to Bush, whose nominating convention took place more than a month after Kerry's, allowing the president a longer period to raise money and spend it freely.

 

By law, an individual can donate $2,100 to a presidential candidate for the primary and another $2,100 for the general election. The general election donation can be returned if the candidate doesn't win the nomination or decides to accept public financing. Clinton's campaign Web site offers donors the option to give the total $4,200 in one chunk.

 

`Very Smart'

 

``Hillary Clinton's decision to begin raising general election money now is very smart strategically,'' said Federal Election Commissioner Michael Toner. ``It's going to place tremendous pressure on other candidates to follow suit.''

 

Clinton's top competitors for the Democratic nomination so far are former vice presidential candidate John Edwards of North Carolina and Illinois Senator Barack Obama. Officials from their campaigns didn't immediately respond to questions about whether the candidates would also opt out of the public system.

 

A spokesman for former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney declined to comment on plans for the general election, should he win the Republican nomination. A spokeswoman for Rudy Giuliani, the Republican ex-mayor of New York, had no immediate comment.

 

The money for public financing has lagged behind the amounts that candidates can raise directly as fewer Americans check the box on their tax returns that sends $3 to the system. In 2004, Kerry and Bush would have been able to spend less than $50 million in the primaries if they had opted to accept public funds for that phase; instead, each raised more than $200 million.

 

Toner supports increasing the available funds and raising the spending limits to keep the system viable. Without changes to make public financing more attractive, he said he expects multiple candidates to raise $100 million this year alone, with the top candidates toting up $500 million or more in donations for the campaign as a whole.

 

``No serious candidate for president in 2008 is going to accept public funds,'' Toner said.

 

To contact the reporter on this story: Kristin Jensen in Washington at [email protected]

[Soxy]

Bucky Katt announces his intentions.

 

Just for those Get Fuzzy fans.