Obama Presidency Discussion Thread

How would you vote in the 2008 US Presidential Election?

  • Obama-Biden (Democrat)

    Votes: 67 59.3%
  • McCain-Palin (Republican)

    Votes: 18 15.9%
  • Barr-Root (Libertarian)

    Votes: 14 12.4%
  • Nader-Gonzales (Independent-Ecology Party / Peace and Freedom Party)

    Votes: 5 4.4%
  • McKinney-Clemente (Green)

    Votes: 1 0.9%
  • Baldwin-Castle (Constitution)

    Votes: 7 6.2%
  • Gurney-? (Car & Driver)

    Votes: 1 0.9%
  • Other...

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    113
  • Poll closed .
If we're both on the same idea that Bush and his neo-cons are essentially socialist sellouts and do a far worse job than 'real' socialists, then yes, I agree.

Otherwise, I miss the old McCain who was a bit more open to progressive ideas and staying far, far away from the moral-majority type folks who drive me absolutely insane...
 
foolkiller: I don't believe that "redneck central" horse hockey about the appalachian area for one minute. the only places I might really worry about are the backwaters of Alabama and Mississippi (and, I hear, portions of florida). I'd be smart enough to make sure i could good ol boy them right back, anyway.

I live in Amish Central in this state (but not in Amish Core, IE Lancaster), and I've been working with these guys for five years, I think I know them by now.

as I've said before, I'm gay. and people don't take that lightly, not in this country. this country was FOUNDED by religious extremists and the bitter disposesed, with a permanently ticked off native population to deal with on top of that.

I'm looking for security, and in this country, there's almost no such thing.

america has and always will lean toward the right BECAUSE (as far as I'm concerned) of all the religious freedom. no, that is not an argument against it.

I just wish religion would mind it's own business, sometimes.
 
foolkiller: I don't believe that "redneck central" horse hockey about the appalachian area for one minute. the only places I might really worry about are the backwaters of Alabama and Mississippi (and, I hear, portions of florida). I'd be smart enough to make sure i could good ol boy them right back, anyway.
I take it you haven't heard the one about how Obama is Muslim and will open the door to Al Qaeda? Or my personal favorite, "Obama is Muslim, just like Jesus, so you should vote for him." It is on both sides of the aisle here in Kentucky.

And trust me, I can show you places where they still don't have running water and electricity. I'm not talking Deliverance crazy, but they don't call it the Bible Belt for nothing. I remember being in college at Western Kentucky University, in Bowling Green, the only non-Christian or Country radio station I could tune in was the campus station.

I live in Amish Central in this state (but not in Amish Core, IE Lancaster), and I've been working with these guys for five years, I think I know them by now.
Amish are far from representative of the Moral Majority. If you think they represent the thoughts of the Christian basis in this country you are mistaken.

this country was FOUNDED by religious extremists and the bitter disposesed,
Um, no. Colonized, yes. Founded, no. If it were we would have a national religion, and we don't. This country was founded by capitalists who wanted to run their newspapers the way they wanted to, so they stirred up the population.

I'm looking for security, and in this country, there's almost no such thing.
Considering recent court rulings I can't believe you have so little faith in this country and its willingness to defend your rights. Sure, certain individuals, and possibly even a majority, wants to limit them, but read Danoff's sig quote. That is why we have a Bill of Rights, a Constitution, and multiple branches of government.

Twenty years ago you could have been legally kicked out of an apartment and fired from a job. I just did our company's annual disciplinary and harassment training and I can assure you that cannot openly happen today. Any manager wanting to do it would have to attempt to find a legitimate excuse.

Just looking at things that have happened in my own lifetime I can guarantee you that the changes in this country show a trend not leading to a religious dictatorship. You are openly gay, at least on this site, and I remember a time when saying that would have meant ruining your life. The debate has moved from should we tolerate homosexuality (the answer ended up being yes) and has moved on to how to define homosexual marriage.

america has and always will lean toward the right BECAUSE (as far as I'm concerned) of all the religious freedom.
I think you have that backward, at least somewhat. It depends on how you define religious freedom. Is there a religious right because people are allowed to practice religion at all? Yes. Outlawing religion is a Communist thing. Is there a religious right because we are allowed to practice the religion we choose? No. To see the other side of that look at places like Iran or Taliban run Afghanistan. That is a religious dictatorship, and religious freedom is preventing that from happening in the US.


I think your problem is not based on the US, but rather on the area you live in. Working in the largest city in Kentucky I know plenty of people who were in your situation and moved to Louisville to get away from it.

I also think you know the wrong kind of religious people. My cousin and her wife had a wedding ceremony in a church (technically it was a commitment ceremony, but I use the terms wedding and wife because that is really what it was).
 
I'm really, honestly proud to be an American at this moment, it should be amazing to see what happens.

That kind of makes me ashamed to be an American.

At least Obama broke the clinton-bush chain.
 
Smirk* i had to listen to Sean Hannity for MONTHS...I know about the "Obama is a muslim" routine. that's scare mongering.

Amish are true conservatives, as far as I'm concerned. No electric or running water is nothing unusual. I've had to live with that.

founded/colonized...same diff as far as I'm concerned.

who's to say they won't either, in a reactionary move? they pulled a kid at an airport security point for wearing a t-shirt with optimus prime on it, because Op was carrying his gun, for God's sake!


sorry, but as a member of a minority that even other minorities (especially those over fifty) hate vehemently, I want to take NO chances.

if you haven't noticed (and I'm suprised, living near Appalachia), the US is host to the extremes of the Christian branches. sorry, but telling me I'm immoral because I don't follow their rules to the letter gets up my wig as far as I'm concerned.
I'm a member of Gen X and cynical. sue me :P

oh, and you can KEEP the city. I will NOT put up with the dirt, noise, and ethnic people who think every caucasian is a scumbag. I am, and always will be a country-boy. and i HATE country music. it's the same damn thing OVER and OVER.


as for the political main topic.
I've allready heard someone say, just a few minutes ago, that Obama will promptly be assasinated immediatly if he gains the White House :P
 
founded/colonized...same diff as far as I'm concerned.

Actually, it's a very different diff. The colonists who founded New England-- the ones who burned people at the stake for eating mushrooms-- are not the same people nor did they share the same mentality as the founders of our country.
 
I've allready heard someone say, just a few minutes ago, that Obama will promptly be assasinated immediatly if he gains the White House :P

George Bush stood a better chance of getting assassinated in my mind.
 
*smirk* that's wishfull thinking. the last attempt was on the late President Regan
 
*smirk* that's wishfull thinking. the last attempt was on the late President Regan

No, I believe the last attempt was on George Bush Jr. The previous attempt was on Clinton. If I remember, there have been a few crackpots who failed miserably going after both Presidents.
 
Is the idea that Barack Obama will now definitely be president? Or that him and Hilary Clinton were only competing to represent the democrats in the election and that someone from the republic will compete against Obama to be the president?
 
Yeh, the Presidential election is not until November... Obama and Clinton were (and apparently Hillary still is) battling to officially represent the Democrats in the Presidential election...

Although the battle is not officially over, and Hillary Clinton has not conceded defeat to Obama yet, George W. Bush has already congratulated Obama on his "historic achievement"...!
 
Yeh, the Presidential election is not until November... Obama and Clinton were (and apparently Hillary still is) battling to officially represent the Democrats in the Presidential election...

Although the battle is not officially over, and Hillary Clinton has not conceded defeat to Obama yet, George W. Bush has already congratulated Obama on his "historic achievement"...!

Then who will be competing to represent the Republics?
 
Well I am happy that the country saw through skin colour on something for a change. It really doesn't matter what colour your skin is but rather the policies that person stands for. I can honestly say I don't agree with many of Obama's polices but his ethnic background is probably the least of my concerns with him.

I'm not really sure who I'm going to vote for come November, I don't really like the policies of McCain or Obama. Guess I'll have to root around in the third party again looking for someone who supports the way I think. Granted they probably don't win, but the only way to get third parties active is to do your part to support them if you agree with their views.
 
If Obama is elected it will be very bad for this country. If you think things are bad for us now(and aside from the gas prices I don't think it's all that bad), imagine how it will be with a decreased and underfunded and underdeveloped military,overtaxed working class and of course "universal health insurance".
 
George Bush stood a better chance of getting assassinated in my mind.

Yes, and Bush was in line for the year-pattern of assassinated presidents.

I'm not really sure who I'm going to vote for come November, I don't really like the policies of McCain or Obama. Guess I'll have to root around in the third party again looking for someone who supports the way I think. Granted they probably don't win, but the only way to get third parties active is to do your part to support them if you agree with their views.

(btw, Barr is going to be on Colbert tonight at 11:30.

 
If Obama is elected it will be very bad for this country. If you think things are bad for us now(and aside from the gas prices I don't think it's all that bad), imagine how it will be with a decreased and underfunded and underdeveloped military,overtaxed working class and of course "universal health insurance".

*sigh*

...And sinking $600 Billion into Iraq while McCain threatens Iran with nuclear war while offering everyone a thinly veiled socialized medicine program and no funding to operate it is any better?

Please...

I'm absolutely ashamed of the Republicans right now. I'm sad that I've proudly worn that badge in the past. I may not like all of Obama's policies, but at the very least, there is some common sense behind them. When McCain openly says he doesn't understand economics and for some reason thinks visiting the green zone in Iraq gives him better foreign policy experience... I just have to shake my head.

Four more years of President Bush's policies under McCain will only make matters worse in this country.
 
I don't understand. Other than the war and taxes (both of which Obama is unrealistic about anyways), how is what Obama promising any different from what you claim McCain is going to screw up? I don't think the fact that Obama is telling us outright that he is going to do all of the things you claim McCain is hiding makes Obama any better of a candidate. Maybe more honest, if not for the fact that Obama claims to know what is best for the country on an economic and foreign scale when he clearly has no experience with either.

I'm also annoyed that you keep referring to McCains policies as "four more years of Bush" when the only thing I see them sharing is their foreign policy in the Middle East.

And, for that matter, the country isn't even really that bad off. It has some problems, yes, but many of them have been festering since Clinton was in office. Comparatively speaking, we aren't in the mid 90s anymore, no. But on the other hand, this also isn't the 70s. Or the late 80s. Or the 30s. Or the late 60s.
For that matter, Obama will be hard pressed to do anything constructive at all with his potential four years if Congress stays similar in makeup to the way it is now.
 
Our problems have been festering since Woodrow Wilson.
 
Omnis: there were a couple good breaks after wilson. FDR, JFK, and Regan. George Sr didn't do a bad job either.

i found out what the precieved "assasination attempt" on obama would be. My step-father is comparing Barak Obama to Bobby Kennedy.
 
Funny bit from The Onion on Bob Barr getting the Libertarian nomination, and possibly stealing Republican votes.
http://www.theonion.com/content/amvo/barr_may_take_republican_votes

The best line is this one:
Andrew Saunders,
Animal Trainer

"So up until this nomination, our best choice to ensure public rights and personal freedoms was John McCain?"



EDIT:
Sniffs
Omnis: there were a couple good breaks after wilson. FDR, JFK, and Regan. George Sr didn't do a bad job either.

i found out what the precieved "assasination attempt" on obama would be. My step-father is comparing Barak Obama to Bobby Kennedy.
Actually, Hillary was the one that made that comparison.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/0523200...ll_wont_drop_out__bobby_kennedy_wa_112232.htm


Perhaps I am mistaken, but I thought that nearly every president has had an assassination attempt, just that most fail before they get far enough along to gain media attention.
 
Omnis: there were a couple good breaks after wilson. FDR, JFK, and Regan. George Sr didn't do a bad job either.

You're calling them good breaks? Lol.

Problems still been festering mayne. I could go back to Lincoln, but I would use beginning instead of festering in that case. Now, that's also not to say that we've had other breakthroughs and have fared well otherwise. Yet, the same problems still exist and have persisted.
 
Omnis: there were a couple good breaks after wilson. FDR, JFK, and Regan.


How you can list FDR and Reagan in same light is beyond me. Their domestic policies were almost as polar opposite as theoretically possible. FDR was the single worst president in the history of the united states. No president has done more lasting harm than he. He was quite literally the wrong guy at the wrong time.
 
And that is exactly my point.

Let me rephrase.

My statement is accurate from the point of view of the US constitution, and from the point of view of the US economy, and from the point of view of personal freedom. No president has done more lasting damage in those areas, and I think that should qualify him as "worst" in just about anyone's eyes.

Better?
 
Yes, but I still don't think it is particularly accurate. Personally, I don't see what the big deal is with Roosevelt love, because I look at most things from a statistical point of view. And from that point of view, Roosevelt more or less made things worse by stifling the economy at the worst possible time.

However, one must also remember that Roosevelt's terms had a very real effect on American morale during a time of crisis. Regardless of whether or not he helped or made things worse, the fact that people viewed him as helping at a time when they think they needed help had to have had a lasting effect on something if many think he is one of the greatest president ever. Public opinion of an administration can be just as important as the administrations actions if it leads to the public having a hopeful outlook, and I honestly doubt very many people really view Roosevelt's presidency from a Constitutional point of view because of that outlook.
 
Regardless of whether or not he helped or made things worse, the fact that people viewed him as helping at a time when they think they needed help had to have had a lasting effect on something if many think he is one of the greatest president ever.

It's not just that he hurt then. It's that his policies are STILL hurting. The damage he did to the constitution is STILL causing it to erode. His programs are currently threatening no less than to bankrupt the nation. Hitler was viewed as a great leader in his time as well, that shouldn't stop him from being considered the worst thing to happen to Germany. I don't care how people viewed him, I care about what he did and how it has affected the nation since.

Hitler was a great leader, and I think similarly, Roosevelt was a great leader. But that doesn't stop him from being the worst president this country has ever seen.
 
Back