Support NeoGAF

[Kitschkraft]

And why would you support obama over a republican but not a clinton? obama and clinton have the same policies for the most part.

Democrats trashed voters for picking Bush over the "intelligent" Gore and Kerry because he was more likeable. Yet they are refusing to support a candidate they agree with policy wise over the likeability issue.

I LOVE THE IRONY!

Isn't there such a thing as holding yourself to higher standards?

Also, I simply cannot forgive these people for practically turning the racial clock back (At least during their campaign). I really hope this "fairy tale" shit comes back to haunt the Clintons in the general elections, hopefully, bruthas are wise to whats going on and don't just forget how one of our own candidates with a serious chance at election gets treated by the powers of the party after we have been supporting these (white) people for decades.

I choose to and not to support candidates on a number of reasons, and I don't claim to have some set guideline as to who and who not I would support. Yeah, it was stupid as shit to vote for the "college buddy" last time around, so what? My issues with the Clintons go far beyond pure "likability"...hell, Slick Willy is still "Likeable" to an extent (Although, I'm getting damn sick of him in his old age, the charm wore off yeeears before me, and during that same time, I've began to wonder what exactly he accomplished and it's not all that great).

 

[Kitschkraft]

Judging from their current behavior, I might be scared to fight back if I was Obama as well. Wouldn't be surprised to see the Clintons slip in some sort of "wild negro" type idea into their campaign if he got a little aggressive (Of course, they would never admit it, and nobody would man up and call them on it) much like Harold Ford was treated in the past by republicans.

 

[CoolTrick]

What have the Clintons done for blacks?

Nothing.


Absolutely nothing.


Nothing at all.






Why can't people control themselves before spouting off stupid shit that just makes them look stupid?

 

[Dan]

Democrats trashed voters for picking Bush over the "intelligent" Gore and Kerry because he was more likeable. Yet they are refusing to support a candidate they agree with policy wise over the likeability issue.

I don't think those two situations can in any way be compared. Yes, idiots voted for Bush because they thought he'd be fun to drink a beer with. Obama fans aren't opposed to Hillary because of what it might be like to hang out with her, it has to do with her rhetoric ("the terrorists are watching our elections, vote for me"), her entrenchment in Washington's dirty political machine, her shameless pandering, etc.

 

[Juice]

I actually think CLinton (as an obama fan) is better in a general cause she is willing to swift boat and tear down her opponent. Obama will play nice.

Too many variables to outright state one would be more likely to win than the other. What you said is true, but Clinton only has to make a few more people hate her and then she's going to need to drag down her opponent with attacks if she's going to secure a win.

I think overall, Obama's appeal is broader; he's an unknown unknown variable which will at least initially hamper the Republicans in framing the debate; but where Clinton has baggage he might have skeletons.

We know one thing: the Republicans want to run against Hillary and are outright stating that they're afraid of running against Obama. That says something, because the same people were pretty happy to be facing Kerry, too.

 

[Kitschkraft]

Nothing.


Absolutely nothing.


Nothing at all.






Why can't people control themselves before spouting off stupid shit that just makes them look stupid?

Nothing about the 90's leaps out to me in regards to Bill Clinton, blacks, and policy making.

Sorry, I don't buy into the bullshit "He was the first black president, look, he ate soul food and cheated on his wife" bullshit that is mainly projected on us by (And I admit, mostly black) comedians.

I'm not saying he's as bad as Reagan, but I do feel that some of the current comments coming from that camp are reminiscent of "Good ole boy" Ronalds "Welfare queens" comments (Which were also directed at blacks but done so so cowardly that people can't bring themselves to admit it).

 

[whytemyke]

Am I the only person here willing to admit that I don't like Hillary Clinton for no other reason than she annoys the shit out of me?

I mean, that kind of rationale worked in high school so I don't see any reason to exclude it from modern american politics, especially since most people who speak the loudest have no higher than a high school education. the only difference between most politics and high school is that in national politics the blowjobs last longer.


and for proof look no further than the future first husband.

 

[Kitschkraft]

Too many variables to outright state one would be more likely to win than the other. What you said is true, but Clinton only has to make a few more people hate her and then she's going to need to drag down her opponent with attacks if she's going to secure a win.

I think overall, Obama's appeal is broader; he's an unknown unknown variable which will at least initially hamper the Republicans in framing the debate; but where Clinton has baggage he might have skeletons.

We know one thing: the Republicans want to run against Hillary and are outright stating that they're afraid of running against Obama. That says something, because the same people were pretty happy to be facing Kerry, too.

I'd say that they are definitely heading towards one of the lowest black turnouts in quite some time.

I still find it hard to believe that any republicans can still win this election after Bush (Does anyone even take this man seriously as a president anymore?) but who knows.

 

[Cheebs]

GAF makes me glad that those under like 45 have no say in politics.

 

[Cheebs]

I'd say that they are definitely heading towards one of the lowest black turnouts in quite some time.

Clinton in a general will get over 90% of the black vote, no question at all.

 

[whytemyke]

Clinton in a general will get over 90% of the black vote, no question at all.

That's not what people are saying though. They're saying that it means nothing if only 10% of black people in the country turn out to vote.

GAF makes me glad that those under like 45 have no say in politics.

yeah, cuz the people over 45 are doing an awesome job, aren't they?

 

[Cheebs]

yeah, cuz the people over 45 are doing an awesome job, aren't they?

I dont think people who ADMIT to not liking hillary on pure personal issues, not policy are the people who know what the hell they are doing voting wise.

 

[grandjedi6]

WINNSBORO, S.C. (AP) -- A day after getting his "butt kicked" in the Nevada caucuses, presidential candidate John Edwards said Sunday that he's the only Democrat who can successfully take on Republican John McCain.

McCain won Saturday's South Carolina GOP primary and Edwards, a former North Carolina senator looking to make the Democratic contest here a three-way race, told reporters that a campaign finance advocate like himself is needed to counter McCain on that issue.

"This is a guy who has made central to his political life campaign finance reform. It seems to me we ought to be putting up somebody up against him who's never taken money from special interest packs or Washington lobbyists," said Edwards, who's trailed Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama in polls. "Between the three of us, that's me."

On Saturday, Edwards got 4 percent of support in Nevada, compared with Clinton's 51 percent and Obama's 45 percent. The South Carolina native who won here in 2004 insisted he's not going away.

"Oh, I'm in the race. I'm in the race for the long-term," he said. "Got my butt kicked and now I'm going to get up in spite. Going to fight for all the things that I care about - and those causes have not gone away and haven't changed."

Edwards said McCain "is starting to look like the Republican nominee and I think it's important for us to have somebody to run against McCain who can beat him and the national polls show that I'm the one who beats John McCain in the general election."

Edwards has made the electability claim against McCain in campaign ads that are based on a CNN poll taken before Iowa's caucuses that had him as the only Democrat with more support than Republicans in head-to-head match ups. But since then Obama won Iowa and Clinton won New Hampshire. After the New Hampshire contest, CNN's polling showed Clinton and Obama lead GOP contenders in head-to-head matchups.

Edwards wrapped up the day at a service honoring slain civil rights leader the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. at a black Baptist church in Columbia. Edwards did not speak to those gathered inside, but was recognized after taking his seat.

He spoke briefly with reporters beforehand about working to create jobs and end poverty but did not take questions

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EDWARDS_SC?SITE=DCUSN&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

Edwards is getting desperate as his chance to win the nomination is fleeing and being a kingmaker is essentially nonexistant now

 

[whytemyke]

I dont think people who ADMIT to not liking hillary on pure personal issues, not policy are the people who know what the hell they are doing voting wise.

And I don't think people who would write off everyone under a predetermined age group as not being important to the political process (how old do you think the people are running these campaigns?) or would equate a horrible sample in GAF to being indicative of "young adults" around the country should be talking about knowing what they're doing on the whole "voting issue."

imo.

 

[VALIS]

Poor Edwards. He's my favorite candidate of them all, but doesn't have the special hook that Barack or Hillary does. He's just some dude, which isn't very compelling to voters or the media this time around.

 

[WrathOfOtaibah]

Clinton vs. Obama reminds me a lot of Kerry vs. Dean.

In 2004, Howard Dean was the one that the young people backed, the one that seemed like he was most willing to roll up his sleeves and make things for the better. John Kerry was just an Establishment Democrat, a guy who will just be more of the same. Idealism lost. This time around, the hope is directed towards Obama and Clinton is the Establishment Democrat.

As for some of your comments, granted I'm against the idea of American dynasties and neoliberalism but I'd far rather take Hillary over McCain or Giuliani. Hillary is just another bought and paid for candidate by special interest groups but no doubt will she roll back or water down some of the more far right initiatives that the Bush administration passed. I don't expect her to change the Bush stance on terrorism but I do expect that she will baby the CEOs of corporations less than McCain or Giuliani would. Better than nothing. Depressing but better than 4-8 more years of a Republican.

 

[grandjedi6]

Obama is doing far better than any idealistic candidate before him though. He hasn't had any negative actions kill him like Dean, he hasn't run out of money like many pre-internet idealistic candidates and he is actually staying competitive with Hillary. The democratic party hasn't had this close of a primary in years.

 

[WrathOfOtaibah]

Obama is doing far better than any idealistic candidate before him though. He hasn't had any negative actions kill him like Dean, he hasn't run out of money like many pre-internet idealistic candidates and he is actually staying competitive with Hillary. The democratic party hasn't had this close of a primary in years.

The comparison I made was more of a new direction of Democrats vs. the current establishment of the Democrats. Obama and Dean were widely perceived to be in the former category and Kerry and Clinton were widely perceived to be in the latter.

 

[grandjedi6]

The comparison I made was more of a new direction of Democrats vs. the current establishment of the Democrats. Obama and Dean were widely perceived to be in the former category and Kerry and Clinton were widely perceived to be in the latter.

Yeah I got what you were saying. Though it was really Gephardt who was the establishment choice candidate until both his and Dean's campaigns imploded. Then the establishment jumped onto the Kerry train

 

[Cheebs]

Yeah I got what you were saying. Though it was really Gephardt who was the establishment choice candidate until both his and Dean's campaigns imploded. Then the establishment jumped onto the Kerry train

Kerry was the establishment favorite day one and the early front runner. He just fell apart before he had his comeback before Iowa.

Much like John McCain.

 

[Enron]

I actually agree with your post but on a sidenote what crazy mod changed you back from red to green? That's like removing the bell from the neck of the cat...

booo f'n hooo.

 

[Cheebs]

The Washington Post explains about the delegate count. How early states delegates = jack shit:

Although Sen. Barack Obama's (Ill.) campaign did a wonderful job spinning the results of the Nevada caucuses ("She won the popular vote, we won the delegate fight") the truth of the matter is -- for the moment --the race stands two states for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, to one for Obama. As the race gets closer to Super Tuesday, Feb. 5, the delegate counts are certain to matter more. But none of the first four states (including South Carolina next Saturday) were EVER cast as a battle for delegates in the campaign. They were momentum builders and early organizational tests. In that regard, Clinton won yesterday.

 

[scorcho]

Am I the only person here willing to admit that I don't like Hillary Clinton for no other reason than she annoys the shit out of me?

[raises hand]

oh, here's Cheebs again, now quoting the word momentum instead of typing it out.

MOMENTUM!

 

[Cheebs]

[raises hand]

oh, here's Cheebs again, now quoting the word momentum instead of typing it out.

MOMENTUM!

You laugh but that is all early states are about, all they have ever been about. And all they ever will be about till the primary system has a major over-haul.

 

[typhonsentra]

Could someone repost the link for the website that compares their Iraq voting records?

 

[Cheebs]

This was last night. A day after many congressional dems called the Clinton camp to tell Bill to stop campaigning like its his own campaign trashing the other candidates.

Bill Clinton (and the Hillary camp) look to have responded with a "fuck you" of sorts. They let bill get up and trash Obama last night ignoring the requests. Bill is such a badass. :lol

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PO1t6q7dkgo

 

[harSon]

This was last night. A day after many congressional dems called the Clinton camp to tell Bill to stop campaigning like its his own campaign trashing the other candidates.

Bill Clinton (and the Hillary camp) look to have responded with a "fuck you" of sorts. They let bill get up and trash Obama last night ignoring the requests. Bill is such a badass. :lol

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PO1t6q7dkgo

Wasn't much of a slam? Seemed like more piggybacking to me. And Hillary wonders why people think Bill Clinton is going to indirectly run the office? :lol

 

[Enron]

I still cant believe so many democrats are shocked by the level of vitriol between those vying for the nomination. Honestly, this is very tame compared to the standards set in past elections.

 

[APF]

I lurrrve how the usual suspects here are parroting-off right-wing slams against the Clintons. Basically any Republican should be furiously masturbating throughout this campaign.

 

[Guileless]

I'm not saying he's as bad as Reagan, but I do feel that some of the current comments coming from that camp are reminiscent of "Good ole boy" Ronalds "Welfare queens" comments (Which were also directed at blacks but done so so cowardly that people can't bring themselves to admit it).

Ironically, it was President Clinton who proposed and signed comprehensive welfare reform. It was the domestic equivalent of Nixon going to China.

 

[Incognito]

This was last night. A day after many congressional dems called the Clinton camp to tell Bill to stop campaigning like its his own campaign trashing the other candidates.

Bill Clinton (and the Hillary camp) look to have responded with a "fuck you" of sorts. They let bill get up and trash Obama last night ignoring the requests. Bill is such a badass. :lol

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PO1t6q7dkgo

Yeah, that's real "bad ass." I can't even tell who's running for president in that video.

 

[APF]

Remember when Bill Clinton went-off on that poor reporter and everyone here was cheering for him because finally someone had the balls to call those bastards out on their BS and of course it was Bill who is a fucking saint you can't say anything bad about or you hate blowjobs and freedom and are a fucking Bush Administration viral marketer so go to hell Bushie?

I loved those days.

 

[Cheebs]

Yeah, that's real "bad ass." I can't even tell who's running for president in that video.

Shortly after Iowa the campaign seemed to decide to bring back the co-presidency campaign style, the two for the price of one message of '92. After winning NH they seem to be sticking with it for the long haul.

You see Bill giving rallies and appearing on tv as much as, if not more than Hillary.

You gotta give him credit. Hell Bill is given almost entirely credit for winning Nevada. Since they won by getting 7 out of the 9 casino's Obama was expected to sweep. Mainly since he personally visited every single one.

Obama fans are pissed but Bill Clinton almost single handidly won Nevada for her, he isn't going away.

You know in the general they will send bill to the tough states like Ohio and Flordia far more than they'll send Hillary. He works his magic and wins states she shouldn't be able to win.

 

[NWO]

What have the Clintons done for blacks?

Far as I know, more blacks were sent to prison under Bill Clinton then any president in history.

So Bill Clinton is now responsible for sending people to prison?

 

[Incognito]

Remember when Bill Clinton went-off on that poor reporter and everyone here was cheering for him because finally someone had the balls to call those bastards out on their BS and of course it was Bill who is a fucking saint you can't say anything bad about or you hate blowjobs and freedom and are a fucking Bush Administration viral marketer so go to hell Bushie?

I loved those days.

That's a cool non sequitur.

 

[WrathOfOtaibah]

Bill is one of Hillary's greatest assets. If he is overshadowing her, that is because Hillary wants it that way. Bill is looked at fondly by most of America ('cept the far right and the religious right, which is waning in force) because he is gifted with public speaking and he presided over the huge economy boom, which is an even bigger positive considering the economic environment so far in 2008.

If he brought in success in Nevada, then he is going to be used everywhere else. In an election year, you use all your advantages.

Personally, I wasn't a fan of Clinton. He was a moderate that continued to hack away at the social programs and allowed companies to run wild because the stock kept going up (see: Enron and Wal-Mart, companies that grew tremendously but had suspect practices).

 

[APF]

That's a cool non sequitur.

I'm sorry, were you just completely silent there?

 

[Cheebs]

If he brought in success in Nevada, then he is going to be used everywhere else. In an election year, you use all your advantages.

Exactly. Why would they care what is "proper" of a former president to do? He is getting her wins thats all that matters to someone in an election.

Why give Obama an advantage? Obama currently has to run against two clintons who are running around seperate parts of the country, one giving policy, one attacking. He has do all that as one person. It gives Hillary a HUGE advantage.

She stays clean while getting attacks in and she gets double the rallies and events.

The only reason gaffers are whining because THEY dont have double the candidates running on their team. If Clinton was running around attacking Hillary and supporting Obama would they whine? Hell no.

 

[Fragamemnon]

The only reason gaffers are whining because THEY dont have double the candidates running on their team. If Clinton was running around attacking Hillary and supporting Obama would they whine? Hell no.

In fact, the gaffers would be gloating, and saying how much Hillary deserves it-using some quite colorful epithets for sure!

The Hillary/Big Dog tag team seems unstoppable. I can't see anyone on either side of the race being able to handle that combo.

 

[Cheebs]

The Hillary/Big Dog tag team seems unstoppable. I can't see anyone on either side of the race being able to handle that combo.

Which is why they demand them to stop. Obama has to take on two candidates under one ticket, there is nothing illegal or wrong about what the Clintons are doing, it just puts Obama at a disadvantage. And when your a candidate you take all the advantages you get.

The Clintons tag-team politics is something I am shocked really has not been copied since they have been using it since 1992 (but in that time Hillary was the attack dog and Bill was the above the fray policy guy)

 

[thekad]

Which is why they demand them to stop. Obama has to take on two candidates under one ticket, there is nothing illegal or wrong about what the Clintons are doing, it just puts Obama at a disadvantage. And when your a candidate you take all the advantages you get.

The Clintons tag-team politics is something I am shocked really has not been copied since they have been using it since 1992 (but in that time Hillary was the attack dog and Bill was the above the fray policy guy)

I wish our politicians were above that. Well, one is.

 

[Cheebs]

I wish our politicians were above that. Well, one is.

Above what?

How is it being "above that" if you have a former president on your campaign? Again, if Obama had Bill Clinton he'd use him just as much as Hillary. Why wouldn't he?

There is nothing wrong, immoral, or below the fray with what Bill Clinton is doing. He is making up and exaggerating attacks, something tons of candidates do. He is doing what many people running for president do in primaries. It's just that his camp has double the candidates of a normal campaign and thus double the media attention and double the places that can be visited.

There is nothing wrong with that.

 

[AmishNazi]

Above what?

How is it being "above that" if you have a former president on your campaign? Again, if Obama had Bill Clinton he'd use him just as much as Hillary. Why wouldn't he?

He has someone way more loved than Bill.

Spoiler

Oprah

 

[Particle Physicist]

Above what?

How is it being "above that" if you have a former president on your campaign? Again, if Obama had Bill Clinton he'd use him just as much as Hillary. Why wouldn't he?

above playing on peoples stupidity. tons of people are voting for hillary because they think its going to be another bill presidency. if obama would use bill the same way hillary has been, i would be pretty miffed as well. so stop conjecturing please.

 

[Cheebs]

He has someone way more loved than Bill.

Spoiler

Oprah

Except Oprah isn't campaigning every single day is she? She only did it once.

above playing on peoples stupidity. tons of people are voting for hillary because they think its going to be another bill presidency. if obama would use bill the same way hillary has been, i would be pretty miffed as well. so stop conjecturing please.

And based on the amount of time Bill is campaiging they are lining it up to be very much a co-presidency. Is there anything wrong with showcasing how it is likely to be?

 

[AmishNazi]

Except Oprah isn't campaigning every single day is she? She only did it once.

You said Obama would use his ace just as much as Hillary if he had one....

 

[Cheebs]

You said Obama would use his ace just as much as Hillary if he had one....

That is pretty stupid of a comparison. Oprah has a job 5 days a week on television. Of course she can't campaign daily. And she isn't a politician who knows how to campaign.

A tv talk show host does not = a president in terms of politicking.

 

[Particle Physicist]

And based on the amount of time Bill is campaiging they are lining it up to be very much a co-presidency. Is there anything wrong with showcasing how it is likely to be?

it certainly will not be a co-presidency. thats not quite legal. is it? and its still playing on peoples stupidity.

bill is basically running as if he were campaigning for himself. thats what people are having issues with.

 

[belvedere]

I'm lttp, but why do people think black people will vote for Hilary?

 

[NewLib]

Above what?

How is it being "above that" if you have a former president on your campaign? Again, if Obama had Bill Clinton he'd use him just as much as Hillary. Why wouldn't he?

There is nothing wrong, immoral, or below the fray with what Bill Clinton is doing. He is doing what many people running for president do in primaries. It's just that his camp has double the candidates of a normal campaign and thus double the media attention and double the places that can be visited.

There is nothing wrong with that.

Dont you understand? Hilary is the epitome of all that is evil in this world. She is Hilary Bush. And we all know that Bush is someone who would even make Hitler blush.

Obama on the otherhand is really the political messiah. He has come to wash away this nation's sins (and hopefully the evangelicals too). The fact anyone is even running against him without giving him the Edward's patent tongue lashing on his balls is heresy.

Seriously though, I really like Obama. But the man's a politician. He has been unclear about previous positions and tried to paint Hilary as some rock which will only change if the winds of America force it. The amount of idol worshiping going on with this man among the younger generation of Americans scares me.