View Poll Results: Democract Primary

Voters
53. You may not vote on this poll
  • Barack Obama

    37 69.81%
  • Hillary Clinton

    13 24.53%
  • Another Democrat Candidate (and share below who)

    3 5.66%
Page 1 of 15 12345611 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 285
  1.    #1  
    I think it would be interesting to hold our own Democratic Primary. We have a varied population here with the only common ground of owning a high end cell phone.

    If you had to vote in the Democratic Primary right now today, who would you vote for? Then please feel free to share why you voted the way you did.
    Last edited by HobbesIsReal; 02/19/2008 at 06:16 PM.
  2. #2  
    Clinton uses experience as one of her main campaign slogans.

    The fact that she's been there before as the first lady and that her husband with her help did what I consider to be an excellent job makes me feel that she with the help of her husband as 'First Gentleman'?? could do similarly well.

    I will have to say, though, that Obama's argument of electibility is a concern but I feel that either of these candidates will have some serious fighting to do to get elected due to prejudice and bias.
    Grant Smith
    A+, Net+, MCPx2, BSIT/VC, MIS

    eNVENT Technologies
    Use your imagination.
    --
    Sprint HTC Evo 4G

    DISCLAIMER: The views, conclusions, findings and opinions of this author are those of this author and do not necessarily reflect the views of eNVENT Technologies.
  3. #3  
    Quote Originally Posted by gksmithlcw View Post
    Clinton uses experience as one of her main campaign slogans.

    The fact that she's been there before as the first lady and that her husband with her help did what I consider to be an excellent job makes me feel that she with the help of her husband as 'First Gentleman'?? could do similarly well.

    I will have to say, though, that Obama's argument of electibility is a concern but I feel that either of these candidates will have some serious fighting to do to get elected due to prejudice and bias.
    I agree with all that.

    Hillary has been in a street fight with a press corps that HATES her.

    I have never understood the viciousness of the coverage that democrats like Clinton, Gore, Kerry, and Clinton get.

    I'm someone who loves and respects Keith Oberman. But he's been nothing but dishonest and hypocritical in his snide observations about her and and her campaign.

    The rest of MSNBC's pose has been even worse. Mathews that sniveling retard -- I absolutely cringe when he crosses my screen. And I don't much like Russert either. What is really melting me into a pool of crazed venom though, is that Faux news -- even that snarly turd Reilly -- has treated her with more fairness than MSNBC...

    My frustration is predicated on knowing that if and when Obama becomes the nominee, his "honeymoon" will terminate with extreme prejustice -- and the press will tear into him with all the viciousness that they've always given to every democratic candidate...
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  4.    #4  
    I have seen very similar posts from far right wing posters but with Bush plugged in instead of Clinton and with NY Times & LA Times instead of MSNBC. It is always interesting to watch perspectives from the extremes of both ends of the scale.

    But I do agree Hillary has been getting hammered. Putting all stances of policies to the side, one bad thing for HRC is that she is a candidate that many middle and right leaning voters would love to vote against, even if they didn't really like John McCain. Whether if it is real or perceived, she has too much baggage, both her own and Bill's. I think the Dems would have a better chance with a fresh face to present to the nation with Barack Obama.

    Of course there is no scientific backing for this perception except my own observation and personal opinion.
  5. #5  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    Putting all stances of policies to the side, one bad thing for HRC is that she is a candidate that many middle and right leaning voters would love to vote against, even if they didn't really like John McCain.
    Actually for many of us, myself included, it will seriously push us to the edge. I for one tend to vote for a candidate rather than against one. I may just have to do just that (vote against) this time around.
    No problem should ever be solved twice.

    Verizon Treo650 W/Custom ROM
  6. #6  
    I don't think either one will get elected if the GOP smear machine works as well on the public as it has in the past. Obama will be painted as a liberal Muslim terrorist whose names rhymes with two of our arch enemies. Hillary's last name is Clinton - nuff' said. And neither are white males.

    That said, I like the excitement around Obama. I have concerns about his experience but frankly think that Presidential leadership requires surrounding yourself with experience and having the smarts to go toe-to-toe with your subordinates in a credible manner to achieve a balanced yet successful administration. Bush failed in this regard because he simply wasn't as smart as those around him and he mostly surrounded himself with like-minded neo-conservatives. Armed with an average IQ (at best) he wasn't able to manage his subordinates, but rather was managed by them.

    Obama may be inexperienced but the manner in which he has run his campaign has been noteworthy. For instance, his campaign seems to have both Hilary and McCain beat in terms of fiscal management - although I am not sure how that will all translate to balancing our nation's budget. He does seem to be able to lead though; creating an excitment and rallying many with different opinions, rather than only a few with narrow mindsets.
  7.    #7  
    So will Obama bring on McCain or Romney as an advisor?
  8. #8  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    So will Obama bring on McCain or Romney as an advisor?
    Funny. Although I wouldn't mind if he did. His voting record seems to indicate otherwise though - he votes straight along party lines each and every time - that is, when he isn't voting "present" that is. So you make a good point.

    I guess I'm hoping he'll be more of a uniter than GWB turned out to be and wouldn't mind finding out if he can be. But again, I just think the GOP attack machine is too well oiled and this guy is prime meat in many respects - some truth, sprinkled with gobs of distortions and lies will still get them lots of mileage.
  9.    #9  
    It totally agree that it happens. There is little doubt that the well oiled attack machines are not a monopoly though, or even on an unbalanced scale. It is a two way street with a traffic jam going both ways. Stuff like this, no matter what side it is coming from, has always been a major pet peeve for me.

    You cannot recognize it going only one way without ignoring the slinging going back over the fence. Heck Hillary has a fierce reputation of attacking those of her own party that she sees as opponents...I have even seen it reported in a newspaper that she has a research staff for just this purpose. Look at the recent article against McCain with no solid evidence and totally ignoring and not sharing the facts that was sent to them when researching the article that McCain voted against the woman's lobbying groups something like 19 times.

    I have seen several examples of exaggerations and attacks against Dems from the Rep side as well.

    Again this is not to say that the GOP is not doing just the same thing in any way, only that a tit for tat could go on forever and that if one recognizes it happens they would have to recognize it comes from all directions.
  10.    #10  
    As for Hillary & Obama....no matter who is the final Dem candidate, as of this morning they now have another front to worry about stealing votes away from them! Nader has officially jumped in the ring again.
  11. morrie's Avatar
    Posts
    259 Posts
    Global Posts
    265 Global Posts
    #11  
    i used to admire nader when he was a consumer activist. his entry into the 2000 election cost al gore the election and the 8 year disaster of bush. nader is too full of himself to have the best interests of the country and it disgusts me to know he is running again. al gore the man nader helped to defeat has done more for the green movement then nader ever could do.
    morris stalk
  12.    #12  
    It is simply the way of a 3 party race. Clinton would not have ever been President if Perot didn't run. Only 4 out of 10 people voted for Clinton in the 1992 election with 60% of all votes against him. Then rep were complaining about a 3rd party and the Dems were as happy as can be. Then when Nader ran and threatened Gore's chances it was a horrible idea again. It is all a matter of perspective to one's party loyalty.
  13. #13  
    Quote Originally Posted by moderateinny View Post
    I don't think either one will get elected if the GOP smear machine works as well on the public as it has in the past. Obama will be painted as a liberal Muslim terrorist whose names rhymes with two of our arch enemies. Hillary's last name is Clinton - nuff' said. And neither are white males.

    That said, I like the excitement around Obama. I have concerns about his experience but frankly think that Presidential leadership requires surrounding yourself with experience and having the smarts to go toe-to-toe with your subordinates in a credible manner to achieve a balanced yet successful administration. Bush failed in this regard because he simply wasn't as smart as those around him and he mostly surrounded himself with like-minded neo-conservatives. Armed with an average IQ (at best) he wasn't able to manage his subordinates, but rather was managed by them.

    Obama may be inexperienced but the manner in which he has run his campaign has been noteworthy. For instance, his campaign seems to have both Hilary and McCain beat in terms of fiscal management - although I am not sure how that will all translate to balancing our nation's budget. He does seem to be able to lead though; creating an excitment and rallying many with different opinions, rather than only a few with narrow mindsets.
    Yup, I've said as much in regard to Obama several times myself.

    Should he be the nominee I hope he has the shrewdness to counter those inevitable attacks and smears -- something that neither Kerry, Gore, Dukasis, or McGovern had.

    Should he become President, I pray he'll be half as great as Bill, and be able to channel both messiah and ******* as the times might require.

    Cynical and long of memory as I am, BARYE remains wary and unable to yet believe.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  14. #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    It is simply the way of a 3 party race. Clinton would not have ever been President if Perot didn't run. Only 4 out of 10 people voted for Clinton in the 1992 election with 60% of all votes against him. Then rep were complaining about a 3rd party and the Dems were as happy as can be. Then when Nader ran and threatened Gore's chances it was a horrible idea again. It is all a matter of perspective to one's party loyalty.
    The dems need to focus on states and not let it come down to one state again. Personally, I never blamed Nader for 2000 or 2004, I blamed the dems and how they approached the election. 2000 gore was "stiff" and did not use his big brother, Bill. Bush kicked gore's **** all over the country just about... nader only had like 5% of the vote (if that).

    In 2004, Nader had 1%. Again, bush kicked **** all over the country. Kerry picked a running mate that gave him nothing as far as states. Dems "felt good" about Edwards, but that was about it. I think kerry could have picked me as a running mate and won the same states.

    Dems have to get (some of) those swing states. And of course keep the "safe" states.

    Nader is not an issue... heck, maybe with him in the race they can get more dems out to vote.
    01000010 01100001 01101110 00100000 01010100 01101000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01100100 00100000 01000011 01110010 01100001 01110000 01110000 01100101 01110010 01110011 00100001
  15. #15  
    Quote Originally Posted by theog View Post
    The dems need to focus on states and not let it come down to one state again. Personally, I never blamed Nader for 2000 or 2004, I blamed the dems and how they approached the election. 2000 gore was "stiff" and did not use his big brother, Bill. Bush kicked gore's **** all over the country just about... nader only had like 5% of the vote (if that)...
    need I mention that it was Gore who won the largest percentage of votes cast in 2000 -- nationally ?? (and Florida BTW).

    I myself have directly asked Nadir (on camera) if he ever feels guilt for junior and all the horrors that have befallen the planet since 2000.

    That arrogant egoist scumbag said why should he ?? Does Gore have guilt for taking votes from him ??

    Nadir is without self contemplation or reflection. He hasn't a scintilla of a pang of conscience -- he's all swarmy me me me, look how brilliant and self righteous I am.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  16. #16  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post
    need I mention that it was Gore who won the largest percentage of votes cast in 2000 -- nationally ?? (and Florida BTW).

    I myself have directly asked Nadir (on camera) if he ever feels guilt for junior and all the horrors that have befallen the planet since 2000.

    That arrogant egoist scumbag said why should he ?? Does Gore have guilt for taking votes from him ??

    Nadir is without self contemplation or reflection. He hasn't a scintilla of a pang of conscience -- he's all swarmy me me me, look how brilliant and self righteous I am.
    lol winning he popular vote does not count. Gore did not win FL anyway.

    There were a lot of swing states that gore "should" have won... heck, if he had won one "medium" (let alone major) swing state he would have won.

    I know... Nader, Nader, Nader. I understand the hate for Nader, but I still don't think it was Nader that did gore in... Gore did himself in with the decisions he made. But that is my lone opinion.
    01000010 01100001 01101110 00100000 01010100 01101000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01100100 00100000 01000011 01110010 01100001 01110000 01110000 01100101 01110010 01110011 00100001
  17. #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by theog View Post
    lol winning he popular vote does not count. Gore did not win FL anyway.

    There were a lot of swing states that gore "should" have won... heck, if he had won one "medium" (let alone major) swing state he would have won.

    I know... Nader, Nader, Nader. I understand the hate for Nader, but I still don't think it was Nader that did gore in... Gore did himself in with the decisions he made. But that is my lone opinion.
    First: Its spelled Nadir.

    Second: Gore won the most votes, and yes he also won Florida.

    Do I wish he'd have fought harder to get a fair count in Florida ?? Absolutely.

    But he was up against a state controled by junior's brother, a state whose voting appartus was controled by junior's state campaign manager: Katherine Heris, and where the the ballots were so screwy that thousands of elderly liberal jews mistakenly cast ballots for Buchanan (something Buchanan has readily acknowledged himself on several occaisons.)

    Could he have run stronger with a better running mate than Liberman ?? Could the press have skewered him less for his inability to disguise his contempt for junior ?? Could he have been less shy about embracing the accmplishments of the Clinton/Gore administration, less shy about embracing Bill ??

    Could he have down played his support for some gun law restrictions ?? Could he have somehow stopped the ridiculous phoney attacks and false innuendos about his soliciting money from Buddists and the Chinese ??

    Maybe yes to all that.

    Could he have won his home state of Tennesee ??

    No -- definitely not.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  18. #18  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post
    First: Its spelled Nadir.
    What are you talking about?



    Second: Gore won the most votes, and yes he also won Florida.
    However you want to spin it... spin on! Old news now anyway... getting away from my point, but spin on....


    Do I wish he'd have fought harder to get a fair count in Florida ?? Absolutely.

    But he was up against a state controled by junior's brother, a state whose voting appartus was controled by junior's state campaign manager: Katherine Heris, and where the the ballots were so screwy that thousands of elderly liberal jews mistakenly cast ballots for Buchanan (something Buchanan has readily acknowledged himself on several occaisons.)

    Could he have run stronger with a better running mate than Liberman ?? Could the press have skewered him less for his inability to disguise his contempt for junior ?? Could he have been less shy about embracing the accmplishments of the Clinton/Gore administration, less shy about embracing Bill ??

    Could he have down played his support for some gun law restrictions ?? Could he have somehow stopped the ridiculous phoney attacks and false innuendos about his soliciting money from Buddists and the Chinese ??

    Maybe yes to all that.

    Could he have won his home state of Tennesee ??

    No -- definitely not.
    Yea, he had issues.
    01000010 01100001 01101110 00100000 01010100 01101000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01100100 00100000 01000011 01110010 01100001 01110000 01110000 01100101 01110010 01110011 00100001
  19. #19  
    originally Posted by BARYE
    .
    First: Its spelled Nadir.
    Quote Originally Posted by theog View Post
    What are you talking about?

    ...
    Nadir

    noun:
    1. an extreme state of adversity; the lowest point of anything
    Last edited by BARYE; 02/25/2008 at 04:28 AM.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  20. #20  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post
    Nadir

    noun:
    1. an extreme state of adversity; the lowest point of anything
    He he he heh...
    Grant Smith
    A+, Net+, MCPx2, BSIT/VC, MIS

    eNVENT Technologies
    Use your imagination.
    --
    Sprint HTC Evo 4G

    DISCLAIMER: The views, conclusions, findings and opinions of this author are those of this author and do not necessarily reflect the views of eNVENT Technologies.
Page 1 of 15 12345611 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions