southsider2k5 Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 9, 2012 -> 08:46 AM) They may say that they care about the military, gay rights, drug rights, but the fact that Ron Paul ran for the Republican nomination and his supporters fit there ought to tell you all you need to know about which issue they really care about. The most realistic chance of winning? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hogan873 Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 QUOTE (greg775 @ May 7, 2012 -> 05:56 PM) I have a question. I was thinking the other day: Is there ANYTHING Obama could do to cost him the election? I mean the economy is so bad it is laughable. It's not like he's been some sort of international guru. Yet I ask ... Is the upcoming election the biggest lock in politico history? Seriously? It's an obvious landslide victory. And my other question is: 2.) Now that we have had an African American president, do you think we will forever have an African American president? After Obama who is the next African American candidate on the Democrat side? I'm just thinking in this age of political correctness the so called minority candidate will be a lock to win each and every election. I do believe that we are there as a society. That if it's 1 vs. 1, democrat vs. republican, the minority candidate WILL WIN. I do not mean to come across as a jerk here. I CAN ASSURE YOU I am not racist. I voted for Obama and all that. Pls. answer my 2 questions. Thanks. I guess I have a third question: Does the term "minority" still get used? Haven't Afr. Americans surpassed Caucasians in terms of numbers of people in the U.S? I don't see Obama losing this election. You're right about the economy being bad, but that has been building for a long time. I hate political arguments, but I've had discussions about the economy and the president with my brother in-law several times. He's a "anybody but Obama" guy...well to be fair, he's a "anybody but a democrat" guy, and he constantly argues that a republican president would turn the economy around. I argue that the president can only do so much, and there has bene so much damage done to the economy for many many years. And to put my own two cents worth in, how can lower to middle class people believe that a guy like Romney would help them? As far as your second question, no I do not believe we will forever have a black president. I do believe that we will eventually see a women president and a hispanic president. And, I believe that a "minority" candidate would have a leg up, but they wouldn't necessarily be a lock...especially as time goes on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 9, 2012 -> 09:46 AM) The most realistic chance of winning? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted May 9, 2012 Author Share Posted May 9, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 9, 2012 -> 08:38 AM) The military's role in the world is a huge issue for Libertarians. That one is the biggest difference between myself and the Libertarians. Socially and Economically I fit their views more than anyone else. It is, but push-comes-to-shove, they are much more likely to vote R before they vote D. Ron and Rand Paul are a good example since they run as Republicans and caucus with Republicans but take a libertarian foreign policy view. I believe the Libertarian Party also supported both the Afghan and Iraq wars, though I know many libertarians don't associate with the party. Libertarians have been pretty divided over that issue: pro-sell-yourself-into-slavery Walter Block takes Randy Barnett (leading force against PPACA) to task here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenksismyhero Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ May 8, 2012 -> 09:10 PM) Jenks, http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/pro-lif...-232932573.html They explained the policy. Its in case the baby is born before the visit and they still want to go, otherwise theyd have to refuse access. The more hypocritical position is that if you kill an unborn fetus you can be charged with murder. Because 3 month old babies are huge security threats. I mean, they can drop bombs, but not THOSE kind of bombs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 9, 2012 -> 10:07 AM) Because 3 month old babies are huge security threats. I mean, they can drop bombs, but not THOSE kind of bombs. They could be wearing hooded sweatshirts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 Jenks, Come on now, you know the White House cant let anyone in without being cleared, even if they are a baby. What would stop a terrorist from inserting a bomb into a kid and using it as a weapon. Terrorists are willing to do anything, so I would think most people would want all safety measures taken when it comes to letting people into the White House, whether they are 1 minute old or 100 years old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenksismyhero Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ May 9, 2012 -> 10:09 AM) Jenks, Come on now, you know the White House cant let anyone in without being cleared, even if they are a baby. What would stop a terrorist from inserting a bomb into a kid and using it as a weapon. Terrorists are willing to do anything, so I would think most people would want all safety measures taken when it comes to letting people into the White House, whether they are 1 minute old or 100 years old. They run quick background checks on you. That's why they need that info. A baby has no background to check. This is one of those things where someone along the lined stopped using common sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenksismyhero Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 9, 2012 -> 09:14 AM) They could be wearing hooded sweatshirts. lol, nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg775 Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 (edited) QUOTE (pittshoganerkoff @ May 9, 2012 -> 01:47 PM) I don't see Obama losing this election. You're right about the economy being bad, but that has been building for a long time. I hate political arguments, but I've had discussions about the economy and the president with my brother in-law several times. He's a "anybody but Obama" guy...well to be fair, he's a "anybody but a democrat" guy, and he constantly argues that a republican president would turn the economy around. I argue that the president can only do so much, and there has bene so much damage done to the economy for many many years. And to put my own two cents worth in, how can lower to middle class people believe that a guy like Romney would help them? As far as your second question, no I do not believe we will forever have a black president. I do believe that we will eventually see a women president and a hispanic president. And, I believe that a "minority" candidate would have a leg up, but they wouldn't necessarily be a lock...especially as time goes on Has Obama been great or the media, as expected, been easy on him? I mean I get the feeling he just blames the economy on somebody else and the media worships him and that's that ... four more years in a landslide no matter who the opponent would be. Edited May 9, 2012 by greg775 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 Depends on what media you listen/watch. Some media blames Obama for everything, other media doesnt. And there are opponents who could beat Obama, they just likely would never get out of the primary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg775 Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 (edited) QUOTE (Soxbadger @ May 9, 2012 -> 07:47 PM) Depends on what media you listen/watch. Some media blames Obama for everything, other media doesnt. And there are opponents who could beat Obama, they just likely would never get out of the primary. I don't mean the radical talk show hosts like Rush. They don't count. Voters don't care about them. I mean the regular media; newscasters in every town; newspaper/website reporters, etc., who throw him softballs and have the glazed-eye look when they interview him. And national reporters at the press conferences, etc., the ones who daily shape how he's viewed nationally. Edited May 9, 2012 by greg775 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanOfCorn Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 QUOTE (greg775 @ May 9, 2012 -> 02:01 PM) I don't mean the radical talk show hosts like Rush. They don't count. Voters don't care about them. I mean the regular media; newscasters in every town; newspaper/website reporters, etc., who throw him softballs and have the glazed-eye look when they interview him. And national reporters at the press conferences, etc., the ones who daily shape how he's viewed nationally. Let's not start the news media thing again. News media, other than Fox, tend to skew left...it's almost always been that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg775 Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 QUOTE (CanOfCorn @ May 9, 2012 -> 09:31 PM) Let's not start the news media thing again. News media, other than Fox, tend to skew left...it's almost always been that way. True. I just think because of the liberal media, the fact we currently have a handsome black president means we always for the rest of time have a handsome black president. Or "minority" president. The news media will help make it that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 QUOTE (CanOfCorn @ May 9, 2012 -> 05:31 PM) Let's not start the news media thing again. News media, other than Fox, tend to skew left...it's almost always been that way. QUOTE (greg775 @ May 9, 2012 -> 06:54 PM) True. I just think because of the liberal media, the fact we currently have a handsome black president means we always for the rest of time have a handsome black president. Or "minority" president. The news media will help make it that way. I'm not going to have time to debate this, but I'm just going to drop in an assertion so that you know people don't agree with this...you're both wrong and it's been a long, long time, decades, since you could reasonably classify the media as "Liberal". Lazy, corporatist, motivated solely by money, sure. Are there Liberals in the group? Sure. Are there some liberal shows? Is CNN, ABC, NBC, or CBS a markedly liberal network? No, and it's been a long time since you could actually say that, if ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 9, 2012 -> 05:57 PM) I'm not going to have time to debate this, but I'm just going to drop in an assertion so that you know people don't agree with this...you're both wrong and it's been a long, long time, decades, since you could reasonably classify the media as "Liberal". Lazy, corporatist, motivated solely by money, sure. Are there Liberals in the group? Sure. Are there some liberal shows? Is CNN, ABC, NBC, or CBS a markedly liberal network? No, and it's been a long time since you could actually say that, if ever. *yawn* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 QUOTE (kapkomet @ May 9, 2012 -> 06:58 PM) *yawn* They weren't going to get away with that assertion without getting at least a challenge noted by me, and you know that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 9, 2012 -> 05:59 PM) They weren't going to get away with that assertion without getting at least a challenge noted by me, and you know that. Well, okay. Actually, lol. That's kind of funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted May 10, 2012 Author Share Posted May 10, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 9, 2012 -> 05:57 PM) I'm not going to have time to debate this, but I'm just going to drop in an assertion so that you know people don't agree with this...you're both wrong and it's been a long, long time, decades, since you could reasonably classify the media as "Liberal". Lazy, corporatist, motivated solely by money, sure. Are there Liberals in the group? Sure. Are there some liberal shows? Is CNN, ABC, NBC, or CBS a markedly liberal network? No, and it's been a long time since you could actually say that, if ever. They are so desperate to be seen as unbiased that they focus on horse race crap, repeat press releases verbatim and refuse to call out bulls*** when it is plainly obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanOfCorn Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 9, 2012 -> 05:57 PM) I'm not going to have time to debate this, but I'm just going to drop in an assertion so that you know people don't agree with this...you're both wrong and it's been a long, long time, decades, since you could reasonably classify the media as "Liberal". Lazy, corporatist, motivated solely by money, sure. Are there Liberals in the group? Sure. Are there some liberal shows? Is CNN, ABC, NBC, or CBS a markedly liberal network? No, and it's been a long time since you could actually say that, if ever. Fine...let me clarify. News STATIONS other than Fox and possibly MSNBC tend to skew right and left. News PEOPLE tend to skew left. As a former broadcast journalist, I have knowledge of this to be true. And no matter how hard a person tries, it is nearly impossible to remove your personal beliefs when reporting the news. Even if it's just an inflection or tone or wording. And one more thing...I wasn't classifying the media as "Liberal." I was saying the media skews to the left. To me, liberal means agenda. Skewing left is personal beliefs. Sorry about that, should have been more clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN are all blatantly pro-Democrat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 QUOTE (mr_genius @ May 10, 2012 -> 08:20 PM) ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN are all blatantly pro-Democrat. no way. They're non-biased news professionals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted May 11, 2012 Author Share Posted May 11, 2012 Apparently Mitt said he'd take a lot of credit for the auto industry turn around the other day. wtf? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ May 10, 2012 -> 07:14 PM) Apparently Mitt said he'd take a lot of credit for the auto industry turn around the other day. wtf? As long as he's sincere about that statement then I have no reason to complain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg775 Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 QUOTE (mr_genius @ May 11, 2012 -> 01:20 AM) ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN are all blatantly pro-Democrat. A lot of people think the media is easy on Obama except for radicals like Limbaugh who don't really count. I can't see why any Republican would want to run against him and get land-slided. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts