News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 8.6K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 39K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 4.8K     0 

Who will be the next US president?

  • John McCain

    Votes: 8 7.8%

  • Barack Obama

    Votes: 80 77.7%

  • Other

    Votes: 15 14.6%
  • Total voters
    103
heckles said:
Florida's delegates should count. There was a planned election and all candidates were on the ballot. This is a national nomination process and there were nationally televised debates and coverage for over half a year before the election in Florida.

The DNC has no right to say that an entire state's delegation shouldn't count.
Click to expand...

The DNC has that right, it is within there power to punish states that do not follow party rules.

No they should not, those states violated rules and that was the punishment that was handed out. ALL the candidates agreed with the punishment, ALL of the candidates said that it should not count BEFORE the election happened, ONLY once Clinton fell behind, did she want to CHANGE the agreed election conditions. Changes afterwards are not acceptable. A good compromise would be to hold new primaries in those states where ALL candidates are on the ballot, and ALL the candidates know that they will count, and ALL candidates have the chance to campaign in those states. That is the only fair solution.
 
heckles said:
The caucus and primary system is broken. If we're going to have a primary/caucus system to nominate delegates for a national party's nomination process, we need a unified date that all 50 states hold their primary or caucus on. And in my opinion, caucuses should be done away with if we're doing primaries. Or we should do all caucuses. Whatever it is, it should be the same.

But the system is broken and that's nothing new.
Click to expand...

I agree that caucuses should be done away with. The primary system is great, a unified date in the US would not be very good - NO small candidate would have a chance in hell - and the system would become even more weighted to the rich. The primaries should happen over a four month period starting in March, but which primaries go early should vary. Split the country into four sections, each of the four regions would have a draw on which state is to go first (a draw to order the states within the region), and a draw between the regions would choose the order these regions go in. I would prefer a weighting where the you would get more balls the smaller the state is - so that they are more cost effective to the candidates in the beginning.
 
Ugh, regardless of the politics I just need a Canadian boyfriend to marry and be done with this place. How many years have I been a Canadian wannabe? going on 6? DAMN.

Too long of a wait.
 
What I don't get is why Michael Bloomberg is supposedly planning to run as an independant. First you have Darth Nader, now Bloomberg?

That said, I'd consider voting for Nader if I lived in a solidly Blue State (CA, DC, IL, MA, MD, ME, NJ, NY, RI, VT, WA) or a solidly Red State. He is right in many ways about the Democrats. If I lived in a crucial state like Missouri, Florida, Ohio, or even a wavering state like Michigan, Pennsylvania Nevada or New Mexico, it would have to be a Democratic vote.

I hate strategic voting, but sometimes I feel one has to hold their nose to keep out some politicans or parties.
 
Darth Nader, :D:D lol!

23oped_darth_nader.gif
 
Clintons go racist AGAIN...

Obama slams smear photo (photo at website)
By: Mike Allen
Feb 25, 2008 09:50 AM EST

Obama campaign hits Drudge report on circulated photo of senator dressed as Somali elder.
Photo: AP

Obama campaign manager David Plouffe accused the Clinton campaign Monday of "shameful offensive fear-mongering" by circulating a photo as an attempted smear.

Plouffe was reacting to a banner headline on the Drudge Report saying that aides to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) had e-mailed a photo calling attention to the African roots of Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.).

"The photo, taken in 2006, shows the Democrat front-runner dressed as a Somali Elder, during his visit to Wajir, a rural area in northeastern Kenya," the Drudge Report said.

The Clinton campaign did not deny the charge, but did not comment further.

Plouffe said in a statement: “On the very day that Senator Clinton is giving a speech about restoring respect for America in the world, her campaign has engaged in the most shameful, offensive fear-mongering we’ve seen from either party in this election. This is part of a disturbing pattern that led her county chairs to resign in Iowa, her campaign chairman to resign in New Hampshire, and it’s exactly the kind of divisive politics that turns away Americans of all parties and diminishes respect for America in the world," said Plouffe.

The photo created huge buzz in political circles and immediately became known as "the 'dressed' photo," reflecting the Drudge terminology.
 
Clinton campaign puts out weak response....

Which shows they intended and condoned the actions of the staffers.

There was obvious attempt on their part to Osamatize Obama...

If Barack Obama's campaign wants to suggest that a photo of him wearing traditional Somali clothing is divisive, they should be ashamed. Hillary Clinton has worn the traditional clothing of countries she has visited and had those photos published widely.

This is nothing more than an obvious and transparent attempt to distract from the serious issues confronting our country today and to attempt to create the very divisions they claim to decry.

We will not be distracted.
Click to expand...
 
cacruden said:
Obama slams smear photo (photo at website)
By: Mike Allen
Feb 25, 2008 09:50 AM EST

Obama campaign hits Drudge report on circulated photo of senator dressed as Somali elder.
Photo: AP

Obama campaign manager David Plouffe accused the Clinton campaign Monday of "shameful offensive fear-mongering" by circulating a photo as an attempted smear.

Plouffe was reacting to a banner headline on the Drudge Report saying that aides to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) had e-mailed a photo calling attention to the African roots of Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.).

"The photo, taken in 2006, shows the Democrat front-runner dressed as a Somali Elder, during his visit to Wajir, a rural area in northeastern Kenya," the Drudge Report said.

The Clinton campaign did not deny the charge, but did not comment further.

Plouffe said in a statement: “On the very day that Senator Clinton is giving a speech about restoring respect for America in the world, her campaign has engaged in the most shameful, offensive fear-mongering we’ve seen from either party in this election. This is part of a disturbing pattern that led her county chairs to resign in Iowa, her campaign chairman to resign in New Hampshire, and it’s exactly the kind of divisive politics that turns away Americans of all parties and diminishes respect for America in the world," said Plouffe.

The photo created huge buzz in political circles and immediately became known as "the 'dressed' photo," reflecting the Drudge terminology.
Click to expand...

The original source was actually other places, notably Free Republic.

Its not RACIST. Its an official visit by Barack Obama in Somalia and he's wearing local attire.

The Hillary campaign sent it out in an email to supporters and some in her media bandwagon and other media personalities, not as a flyer in mailboxes, and it had no caption. It basically said that if this were Hillary Clinton she'd be demonized yet Barack gets a free ride from the media.

There was nothing racist about it.

If you ask me, this is reverse negativity. The Hillary campaign did no wrong.

http://www.drudgereport.com/flashoa.htm

That's who is reporting it: Matt Drudge, no friend of the Clintons. He wants to paint Hillary in a negative light.

Besides, how is sending an email out to many supporters racist? I get email from the Hillary team all the time, and the photo had no caption or saying attached. Its a photo.

What it did say is that if it were Hillary there would be a double standard and she'd be demonized, just like there is a double standard with this reporting.

Pro-Obama forces are painting Hillary in a negative light by using reverse negativity.
 
The picture is not racist, the use of the picture in an attempt to cause "fear" in Obama is. The original source has nothing to do with why and for what purpose this picture was distributed for IN THIS CAMPAIGN. It was distributed by a campaign operative now, not to use as a news story, or to show how presidential Obama was, but to cause fear by having people associate Obama with "peoples" that the American public has been wary about (or at least a certain segment of the public). By using a picture in this context it becomes a racist gesture. The Clinton campaign more or less condoned said actions in the way they responded.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top