- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
March 20, 2008 at 10:43 pm #617442
beachdrivegirlParticipantJohn M…your comment didnt show up???
March 20, 2008 at 10:43 pm #617443
JoBParticipantI have said that Geraldine Ferraro is not careful what she says… She is what she is. But she is not a racist.
she was talking about a political contest and she was speaking in the context of other political contests where race and/or sexism have been an issue…
those remarks followed some about her own campaign…
if you weren’t so inflamed by all of this and read the remarks in context to both the question she was answering and her earlier remarks.. you would be asking yourself why your panties are in such a bunch.
and being a woman.. i think i can use that phrase.
I am not pretending anything…
if i am inaccurate in a quote or misspell or ask someone else to actually look up the stats for me it is because i have an illness which makes it exceedingly difficult to remember names, quotes, stats… etc.
I can often be inaccurate in details.. so i try to paraphrase and not quote.. and to approximate stats… but have found i am seldom inaccurate in basic content.
You can choose to dismiss what i say as trying to find some way to frame her comments so they were less offensive… but the truth is you couldn’t be further from the truth about my intent.
In context she was simply stating the obvious. And if it isn’t obvious to you as well, you simply don’t want to see it.
She didn’t say it was all he had going for him.. she said it was one of his advantages. It is.
It is not ok with me when this degenerates into name calling. Geraldine Ferraro has earned her reputation the good old fashioned way and before you decide she is racist perhaps you ought to go look at what she has accomplished… and who she accomplished it for.
And the same could be said for Hillary Clinton. If you took your hate blinders off you might find an accomplished woman who has done a lot that directly benefited you.
Your candidate does not have to be “all right” to win. He doesn’t have to be perfect.
But he does have to be consistent and be able to weather the kind of storm his pastor’s remarks created if he is going to be able to beat John McCain.
If he can’t, he shouldn’t be our candidate.
March 20, 2008 at 10:44 pm #617444
JoBParticipantI have said that Geraldine Ferraro is not careful what she says… She is what she is. But she is not a racist.
she was talking about a political contest and she was speaking in the context of other political contests where race and/or sexism have been an issue…
those remarks followed some about her own campaign…
if you weren’t so inflamed by all of this and read the remarks in context to both the question she was answering and her earlier remarks.. you would be asking yourself why your panties are in such a bunch.
and being a woman.. i think i can use that phrase.
I am not pretending anything…
if i am inaccurate in a quote or misspell or ask someone else to actually look up the stats for me it is because i have an illness which makes it exceedingly difficult to remember names, quotes, stats… etc.
I can often be inaccurate in details.. so i try to paraphrase and not quote.. and to approximate stats… but have found i am seldom inaccurate in basic content.
You can choose to dismiss what i say as trying to find some way to frame her comments so they were less offensive… but the truth is you couldn’t be further from the truth about my intent.
In context she was simply stating the obvious. And if it isn’t obvious to you as well, you simply don’t want to see it.
She didn’t say it was all he had going for him.. she said it was one of his advantages. It is.
It is not ok with me when this degenerates into name calling. Geraldine Ferraro has earned her reputation the good old fashioned way and before you decide she is racist perhaps you ought to go look at what she has accomplished… and who she accomplished it for.
And the same could be said for Hillary Clinton. If you took your hate blinders off you might find an accomplished woman who has done a lot that directly benefited you.
Your candidate does not have to be “all right” to win. He doesn’t have to be perfect.
But he does have to be consistent and be able to weather the kind of storm his pastor’s remarks created if he is going to be able to beat John McCain.
If he can’t, he shouldn’t be our candidate.
March 20, 2008 at 10:45 pm #617445
JoBParticipantsorry.. i thought it hadn’t posted
March 20, 2008 at 10:48 pm #617446
JoBParticipantSA..
the democratic party is not imploding.
it is in the midst of healthy debate.
it’s too bad the republicans aren’t, because they have plenty to debate… if they just cared enough.
March 20, 2008 at 10:50 pm #617447
JoBParticipantjohn M.. would i be debating only one? that would be a novel concept..
March 20, 2008 at 10:53 pm #617448
JoBParticipantI am issuing a challenge to Obama supporters …
which of you will actually step up and commit to work for the election of the democratic nominee supporting democratic principles in the fall.. regardless of who that candidate is?
because that is what this envoy from the Go Hillary camp has already done.
And i know of at least one more from this forum who has already done so.
March 20, 2008 at 11:05 pm #617449
AnonymousInactiveSA, democrats aren’t imploding. There is no disagreement on the direction we want the country to go, just who can best make that happen. It’s a good thing that there are/were such strong choices. It is making us all more involved in the process. The republican choice is nothing but a default candidate because the party has no idea what they stand for anymore.
March 20, 2008 at 11:07 pm #617450
AnonymousInactiveAnd JoB, I think I’ve already stated this, but I will definitely support the chosen democratic nominee.
March 20, 2008 at 11:37 pm #617451
walfredoMemberJoB- I could never support a candidate who won election by any means necessary and changed the rules as they went along.
I will support the candidate that wins as decided by pledged delegates and the rules set at the beginning of the contest. I will abandon the lost democratic party if they make a decision so undemocratic of denying the candidacy of the candidate who does come out ahead.
I would not be rooting for Obama to be handed this election by the superdelegates, and I would absolutely support Clinton if she were to somehow win this election. Not if she steals it…
March 21, 2008 at 12:00 am #617452
AnonymousInactive“Imploding” may be too strong a word, but what SA says is completely true. The Dem’s are so busy ripping each other apart, it’s a wonder what will happen if one of them lands in office. Look at your fellow Dem’s just on this forum. Several have stated that they will not vote for Clinton if she gets the nomination. They will abandon their party.
Also, I actually do care about my candidate. It’s just that we already have one and don’t have to mess around with all of this ugliness… yet. Maybe it DOES say a lot about the Republican party that we are not going through what the Democrat’s are. And maybe it says a lot. I have to say, I’m proud to be a Republican right now.
March 21, 2008 at 1:30 am #617453
JoBParticipantWalfredo..
then you might as well hand the election to John McCain… because if not Obama.. that’s the choice.
this isn’t about the candidates … four more years of the same or worse mess than we have now is the payback for your moral stance.
You may think it’s worth it.. but i don’t. And i doubt you would after living it.
And i doubt your candidate does either.
Obama, like most of his supporters… refuses to commit to the election if he is not the delegate… that’s a mistake.
in doing so, he refuses to commit to his own principles…
Now I think that is something for the democratic superdelegates to take into consideration.. don’t you? …. For the good of the party and all..
March 21, 2008 at 1:36 am #617454
JoBParticipantNew resident…
democrats will vote in this election for democrats…
those who won’t vote if it isn’t Obama aren’t too likely to vote anyway.
the uncommitted and independents will vote their pocketbook.. and your guy doesn’t have much of a lead on them.
we will get a lot of anybody but another republican in the white house votes…
I am glad you are happy with your candidate… I hope you enjoy defending him.. because you will be doing a lot of that this fall.
March 21, 2008 at 1:38 am #617455
KayleighMemberMarch 21, 2008 at 1:51 am #617456
JoBParticipantMarch 21, 2008 at 1:57 am #617457
AnonymousInactiveJoB – I don’t look forward to defending him against you. You are way smarter than I am and I have no problem admitting that. You definitely know a lot more about the election and the entire process. I am educating myself, but obviously will not be on par with you come this fall (I’ll mostly leave it up to House) . I say all this with the utmost respect and I hope you see that.
I was however commenting on the fact that, it seems anyways, all the Obama supporters (Dems) will absolutely NOT vote for Hillary. I know that if Obama gets the nomination, you will vote for him, but that doesn’t seem to be the consensus the other way around. I know enough to know that that is a shame for the Democratic party.
March 21, 2008 at 2:06 am #617458
JoBParticipantJT.. i didn’t mean to say any of us should hand the election to McCain… i meant to say that those who won’t support the democratic candidate no matter who it is might as well be handing the election to John McCain…
and i am not about to do that…
and yes, new resident.. it doens’t matter who the democratic candidate is.. i will be out there canvassing for them.
and what if i’m not as smart as you think …
just right?
March 21, 2008 at 2:12 am #617459
charlabobParticipantI have already said I’ll support and work for Clinton if she wins. I find the question disingenuous. I’ll work for her whether or not she steals the election. I’ll be too busy worrying about Repug caging (which is already taking place) to do anything else.
I do resent the “Only we are noble,” martyr tactics of the Clintonistas. Let’s see, if we don’t elect the candidate of the right wing Democratic Leadership Council, we’re not true Democrats? I don’t think so.
I do tend to think that Clinton, possibly subconsciously, thinks if Obama is nominated and loses she’ll be left to pick up the pieces and run successfully in 2012. I can guarantee you that won’t happen. The dems, at their most fractious, aren’t that stupid.
Meantime, whoever wins our nomination will, in fact, win in November. Frankly, the Republicans have made such a mess, they only want to leave it for the Dems to try to clean up.
By the way, if I could actually believe that the nominee of the Democratic party supported democratic princples, I might be a more enthusiastic supporter.
c
March 21, 2008 at 2:34 am #617460
JoBParticipantwalfredo..
i did not read you clearly..
and for that i apologize…
Hillary is running her campaign by the rules …
if she wins, it will be because she has the required number of delegates on the first. second. third or 50th ballot at the convention.
The same as will be true for Obama.
if Michigan and Florida are seated.. it will be because the Obama and Clinton camps worked out a compromise that works for both of them.
you seem to forget that Obama is in there negotiating too.
And both candidates are bending every rule just as far as they can mange to win before the convention. it’s what candidates do.
Nobody is going to be able to steal anything… it’s too important to the democrats.
i am sorry i got testy.
i am trying to quit cocacola … to which i am addicted… and am obviously going through withdrawals… we will see how long this lasts.
March 21, 2008 at 2:40 am #617461
charlabobParticipantNR, do not sell yourself short. You are more articulate and convincing than you think. Among other things, you obviously retain some respect for viewpoints other than your own.
I’m sure you’ve made more lurkers think than you’ll ever know. :-)
March 21, 2008 at 5:42 am #617462
SAMemberIf the Dems don’t win this election they will have imploded. Too strong a word? I don’t think so. They’re following arguably the worst president in our history. They should not only win this election… they should win it in a landslide.
Instead you have a Democratic congress with worse approval ratings than the president, the DNC has potentially disenfranchised voters in two key states (FL and MI) and you have two candidates with supporters of distinct demographics that have polarized the party.
It’s a healthy debate when one wants to compare their two health insurance plans… or their exit strategy for Iraq… or how they might solve our current lending/credit problem. It’s not healthy when they’re accusing the other side of being racists.
March 21, 2008 at 6:06 am #617463
AnonymousInactiveSA, That was well stated and I would have to agree. So what is the answer? Neither side wants to budge and believes they are in the right. I just want a democrat, please!
March 21, 2008 at 6:31 am #617464
SAMemberJT,
The proposal I heard today was to have a superdelegate primary. I think the best time would be a week after the last state primary/caucus on June 3rd. This will give the losing side some time to heal and to go into their convention united behind one candidate. The healing could also be helped by the runner-up addressing the delegates absent a contentious environment. I’d imagine a celebration… a big love fest if you will.
On the otherhand, if the nominee isn’t decided until the convention (image of backroom dealing) it will be very disappointing for one side without an easy way to soothe the hard feelings. And those hard feelings will mean less Dems at the polls in November.
March 21, 2008 at 6:50 am #617465
AnonymousInactiveThat’s interesting. Hadn’t heard that idea yet. Searched out the story and it says Hillary *isn’t repelled* by the idea. But Dean is against it and apparently there isn’t a chance if the DNC isn’t on board? Obama hasn’t been approached/weighed in yet.
I do think it needs to get resolved before the convention as well. It would be a complete disaster if it’s not and we definitely risk your imploding scenario. It’s all just very frustrating.
March 21, 2008 at 2:45 pm #617466
JoBParticipanti believe that all that really has to happen for the implosion to stop is for Brak Obama to say loudly that if Hillary wins the nomination, he… will be campaigning for her and he hopes his campaigners will be doing the same.
the “let the best man win” strategy. It’s incredibly uniting.
BTW.. for those Obama supporters who missed it.. she already has.
and if Obama has and i have missed it.. please tell me.
I don’t believe he will do that.
The “destruction of the party” is one of his strong cards in negotiation… and i don’t believe he will give it up.
It’s an all or nothing campaign.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.