Support NeoGAF

[Manmademan]

Al Sharpton was asked by someone about Jesse Jackson, I forget who asked, but he said this (and I think it resonates with a lot of black people of that generation): "Jesse Jackson will always be, to me, the person whom I remember on the balcony as Martin Luther King died, pointing in the direction of the gunfire."

Obama doesn't need to cater to Jackson and Sharpton and the ilk, but he can't outright blow them off either, without risking looking like an Uncle Tom (which I'm sure he's gonna get called anyways) in the election and losing the support of the black people who should be supporting him, if for nothing else than the image that being black doesn't mean being inferior anymore.

The problem with Jackson and Sharpton is that neither one of them are really taken seriously anymore, even within the black community. They show up when an opportunity presents itself for publicity, and rarely anytime else. Having their backing will NOT help Obama in any meaningful way.

 

[Cheebs]

The problem with Jackson and Sharpton is that neither one of them are really taken seriously anymore, even within the black community. They show up when an opportunity presents itself for publicity, and rarely anytime else. Having their backing will NOT help Obama in any meaningful way.

Obama doesn't have their backing. Sharpton is closer to Clinton and Obama doesn't have any sort of close ties to Jackson, outside appearing at a few events with him and many other leaders.

Sharpton seems bitter and jealous toward Obama if anything. He is not at all friendly about him when he does his cable news appearances.

 

[ronito]

Yay! We might have ourselves our first black Vice President!

 

[scorcho]

Yay! We might have ourselves our first black Vice President!

an Edwards/Obama ticket would be quite nice.

 

[Manmademan]

an Edwards/Obama ticket would be quite nice.

Edwards might be the only candidate running with less experience than Obama Has.

Obama/Clinton (in that order) FTW

 

[Cheebs]

Edwards might be the only candidate running with less experience than Obama Has.

Obama/Clinton (in that order) FTW

Clinton would NEVER accept VP.

Also Edwards had 6 years in the senate.
As of 08 Obama will have 4 years.

 

[mckmas8808]

The problem with Jackson and Sharpton is that neither one of them are really taken seriously anymore, even within the black community. They show up when an opportunity presents itself for publicity, and rarely anytime else. Having their backing will NOT help Obama in any meaningful way.

You are right, but Sharpton is a good speaker and debater.

 

[Manmademan]

Clinton would NEVER accept VP.

Also Edwards had 6 years in the senate.
As of 08 Obama will have 4 years.

Obama served 4 years in state senate before his current term. in terms of total political experience, he has more than edwards does.

 

[mckmas8808]

Sharpton seems bitter and jealous toward Obama if anything. He is not at all friendly about him when he does his cable news appearances.

Actually Sharpton likes Obama a lot. He just wants to know more of his stances on certain issues. No more, no less.

 

[Dr. Jade]

Having voted Republican for some time now, I'd be very interesting in seeing how Obama presents himself as a potential president. So far the idea of him as president has captured my imagination in a very positive way. If he continues to speak well and prove himself worthy, I would very seriously consider voting for him. Hilary on the other hand has no chance in my corner, or that of anyone I know. I wouldnt care how well she may present herself, even in a debate. Her whole past record and flip floppy politics in the senate are a huge negative. At this moment I cannot see her running this country anywhere other than into the ground. Perhaps she may persuade me to think otherwise but right now she is a loud NO.

 

[vitaflo]

Obama is the only chance the dems have. Every other politician thinking about running is unelectable.

 

[teiresias]

Having voted Republican for some time now, I'd be very interesting in seeing how Obama presents himself as a potential president. So far the idea of him as president has captured my imagination in a very positive way. If he continues to speak well and prove himself worthy, I would very seriously consider voting for him. Hilary on the other hand has no chance in my corner, or that of anyone I know. I wouldnt care how well she may present herself, even in a debate. Her whole past record and flip floppy politics in the senate are a huge negative. At this moment I cannot see her running this country anywhere other than into the ground. Perhaps she may persuade me to think otherwise but right now she is a loud NO.

Given all of this I'm really tempted to ask what you heard that actually convinced you to "vote republican for some time now" since I'm assuming this implies votes for George W. - perhaps you've only now decided to care about someone's qualifications?

 

[mckmas8808]

Obama is the only chance the dems have. Every other politician thinking about running is unelectable.

As a black man, I'm seriously am not sure if America is ready for a black president. I hate to say this a day after MLK day, but it's true.

 

[Smiling Bandit]

Sure, I'm gonna vote for someone just because he's black - that's racist! I see nothing in his values that would make me want to vote for the guy. All he's trying to do is to please everybody so he gets voted.

My vote is on Hillary. Finally a woman in power!

 

[whytemyke]

Sure, I'm gonna vote for someone just because he's black - that's racist! I see nothing in his values that would make me want to vote for the guy. All he's trying to do is to please everybody so he gets voted.

My vote is on Hillary. Finally a woman in power!

You see nothing in Obama's values but you're voting for HILLARY?!

 

[ronito]

You see nothing in Obama's values but you're voting for HILLARY?!

QFT.

What the???

 

[Matix]

You see nothing in Obama's values but you're voting for HILLARY?!

I'm pretty sure SB was spitting some sarcasm, at least I sincerely hope so..

 

[Dr. Jade]

Given all of this I'm really tempted to ask what you heard that actually convinced you to "vote republican for some time now" since I'm assuming this implies votes for George W. - perhaps you've only now decided to care about someone's qualifications?

Well in the last election I really had little desire to vote for either Bush or Kerry. The Dems lost a huge opportunity by choosing to run with Kerry. He lacked both charisma and any sort of solid plan for carrying the state through a war. Through the debates and the way he side skirted around foreign policy and Iraq issues just gave me the impression that this politician is not a leader; he is just a politician. He will cave in to the advise and instruction of everyone around him. He is a senator, not a president. Just as everyone who voted for Kerry had the banner of anyone but Bush. For me it was more like anyone but Kerry. At the time Bush presented a plan. He may have screwed up in Iraq but it wasnt as bad then as it is now. The picture that was being painted in Iraq then was that it could be swayed for good or for bad. Dont get me wrong I believe Bush has been bad but I still stand by my vote because of the simple fact that I just cannot see how Kerry would have done better. If anything he would have pulled troops and Iraq would be an even bigger mess than it is now. If there was a stronger candidate at the time I would have certainly voted that way dem or rep.

 

[Systems_id]

You see nothing in Obama's values but you're voting for HILLARY?!

I think his post was meant to be sarcastic but I'm not quite sure how.

 

[malek4980]

Obama is the only chance the dems have. Every other politician thinking about running is unelectable.

According to the polls on a generic 2008 presidential ballot more people would vote for the Democratic candidate. All things being equal the person nominated by the Democrats will already have an advantage from the start. In addition there is no candidate that is exciting the Republican base. So it seems the election is very winnable for the Democrats and they need a candidate that won't lose it.

 

[Cheebs]

According to the polls on a generic 2008 presidential ballot more people would vote for the Democratic candidate. All things being equal the person nominated by the Democrats will already have an advantage from the start. In addition there is no candidate that is exciting the Republican base. So it seems the election is very winnable for the Democrats and they need a candidate that won't lose it.

The Democrats going into the 2008 election are in the best position amongst the public the party has been since going into the 1976 election.

Right now the public at large HATES the republican party on a scale not seen since watergate. It is very much the democrats election to lose, even if the nominee is Hillary.

 

[Shig]

IMO, the president's most important job is to be a good representative for our country. Experience means little. There are plenty of "experienced" senators out there who couldn't rationally debate their way out of a paper bag. I refuse to admit that the drop-off in international support we've seen isn't related to the fact that Bush is dismal at intelligent diplomatic discourse and makes it searingly obvious that he (and vis-a-vis, our country) is completely dismissive of any compromise or change of policy.

Obama has that sort of spark that makes a great representative. He's genial, eloquent, and intelligent, and can at least make it appear that he's considering other viewpoints. If he can surround himself with a solid cabinet, he's absolutely the best man for the job, relative to the other presidential hopefuls we've seen.

 

[Man of Knowledge]

He could be the first Muslim president. He has not admited to being muslim, but it is well known that he is infact a Muslim.

 

[Manmademan]

IMO, the president's most important job is to be a good representative for our country. Experience means little. There are plenty of "experienced" senators out there who couldn't rationally debate their way out of a paper bag. I refuse to admit that the drop-off in international support we've seen isn't related to the fact that Bush is dismal at intelligent diplomatic discourse and makes it searingly obvious that he (and vis-a-vis, our country) is completely dismissive of any compromise or change of policy.

Obama has that sort of spark that makes a great representative. He's genial, eloquent, and intelligent, and can at least make it appear that he's considering other viewpoints. If he can surround himself with a solid cabinet, he's absolutely the best man for the job, relative to the other presidential hopefuls we've seen.

re: the bolded parts- I see this as an experience issue. Bush is terrible at diplomacy, compromise, and pretty much everything because he lacks GOOD experience at it. That, and he just doesn't seem to care.

 

[Cheebs]

He could be the first Muslim president. He has not admited to being muslim, but it is well known that he is infact a Muslim.

what the ****? He is a christian, a evangelical christian at that!

You mean because his dad that he never knew growing up and only met twice in his entire life was a muslim means Obama is muslim? Obama is a very open christian. :lol

 

[Shig]

Don't you know? Religion is hereditary!

 

[Man of Knowledge]

what the ****? He is a christian, a evangelical christian at that!

You mean because his dad that he never knew growing up and only met twice in his entire life was a muslim means Obama is muslim? Obama is a very open christian. :lol

U sure about that. I thought I remember him saying he didn't want to reveal what his religion was.

 

[explodet]

Yay! We might have ourselves our first black Vice President!

But then some black guy would just kill the President!

 

[Man of Knowledge]

He is still a god believer. That alone make him a bad choice in my mind. We need an atheist as president. I do know Obama is against same sex marriage, and thus a bigot. Religion makes people bigots.

 

[Cheebs]

U sure about that. I thought I remember him saying he didn't want to reveal what his religion was.

Uh...no. He is chastised by the left for being too religious. He calls for the democrats to be more accepting of Christians in the party.

Obama said his mother was secular but he on his own discovered Jesus later in life and was born again...etc.

Obama has a controversial, amongst liberals, close relationship with the evangelical church leader Rick Warren.


Also Obama's stance on gay marriage is shown how he votes

Voted NO on constitutional ban of same-sex marriage. (Jun 2006)

 

[Manmademan]

He is still a god believer. That alone make him a bad choice in my mind. We need an atheist as president. I do know Obama is against same sex marriage, and thus a bigot. Religion makes people bigots.

25% of america believes that Jesus is coming back. Not "eventually," but THIS YEAR. Sad as it sounds, the religious sect outnumbers atheists by a good bit, and this means we're highly unlikely to see open atheists elected to office anytime soon.

 

[Cheebs]

For a "Man of Knowledge" you have gotten his religion wrong as well as his gay marriage stance. :lol

 

[Man of Knowledge]

Uh...no. He is chastised by the left for being too religious. He calls for the democrats to be more accepting of Christians in the party.

Obama said his mother was secular but he on his own discovered Jesus later in life and was born again...etc.

Obama has a controversial, amongst liberals, close relationship with the evangelical church leader Rick Warren.


Also Obama's stance on gay marriage is shown how he votes

He is against a legal ban, but has said he believes it is morally wrong based on his religion. That makes him a bigot.

 

[Man of Knowledge]

For a "Man of Knowledge" you have gotten his religion wrong as well as his gay marriage stance. :lol

Google his gay marriage stance. He is against a state ban, but thinks gay marriage is morally wrong.

 

[Cheebs]

He is against a legal ban, but has said he believes it is morally wrong based on his religion. That makes him a bigot.

A minority in this country are for gay marriage. The fact he thinks it should be legal is good enough for me as a gay marriage supporter. As long as he supports it in law, his personal views are meaningless.

 

[mckmas8808]

He is still a god believer. That alone make him a bad choice in my mind. We need an atheist as president. I do know Obama is against same sex marriage, and thus a bigot. Religion makes people bigots.

Yeah okay pal.

 

[malek4980]

A minority in this country are for gay marriage. The fact he thinks it should be legal is good enough for me as a gay marriage supporter. As long as he supports it in law, his personal views are meaningless.

I don't think he supports it, but is simply against a ban. However he does support civil unions.

 

[siamesedreamer]

Obama has two things going for him that the other serious candidates do not:

- he has absolutely no ties to the Iraq invasion
- he is a fantastic speaker

I think Hillary is DOA. There's too much percieved baggage with her Clinton name and people are really gonna be put off when they start seeing her speak more - she is a terrible, terrible speaker. I also think she's really hurt herself by not being as forthcoming about admitting her Iraq vote was wrong. I know she has said some things about it, but comparing her responses to Edwards is like night and day. She seems to be completely avoiding the issue altogether the last few months.

My gut tells me Edwards is gonna win it. Although, I think Obama is a better candidate and would make a better president - especially when it comes to returning credibility in the world community.

I just shudder at the thought of having the DEMs control everything from 2009-10 and possibly longer. But, that's the price you have to pay for Bush driving your party off a cliff.

 

[GaimeGuy]

A minority in this country are for gay marriage. The fact he thinks it should be legal is good enough for me as a gay marriage supporter. As long as he supports it in law, his personal views are meaningless.

Just because you don't agree with something doesn't mean you should ban it everywhere. He might not agree with it, but I'm sure he recognizes that there are benefits to marriage embedded within our government now.... To deny someone those benefits based on sexual preference would be discriminatory.

Also, the effects of two individuals of the same sex marrying on those around them.... what are they? Nothing that I can think of except for the fact that the people around them might not agree with what they're doing. Aside from that, there's no harm done by allowing gays and lesbians to marry.... it's not like they pose any threat to those around them.

The fact that he supports it in law but is against it personally is a very good thing, in my opinion. It shows me that he can separate his religious views from his political views. (Not saying that they're completely independent, as morals are an important part of both religion and government) He is willing to go against his own personal feelings and do what's right for his citizens.

 

[whytemyke]

There is no chance ever of an open athiest becoming President. Americans don't just disagree-- a lot of them outright hate athiests and consider them tied to evil.

Mark my words-- you will never see an admitted athiest as President of the United States of America.

 

[Diablos]

I just shudder at the thought of having the DEMs control everything from 2009-10 and possibly longer. But, that's the price you have to pay for Bush driving your party off a cliff.

It's almost comforting to know that some of you Republican fanboys seem pretty confident that Democrats will win back the White House, despite your hatred of them.

 

[mckmas8808]

I don't think he supports it, but is simply against a ban. However he does support civil unions.

Man how in the hell can you hate Rosa Parks?!?!

 

[Cheebs]

It's almost comforting to know that some of you Republican fanboys seem pretty confident that Democrats will win back the White House, despite your hatred of them.

Go to republican internet outlets like Free Republic. Most feel that John McCain and the like can be defeated by Hillary/Obama/Edwards and are moaning about 4 years of dem rule coming upon us.

 

[mckmas8808]

There is no chance ever of an open athiest becoming President. Americans don't just disagree-- a lot of them outright hate athiests and consider them tied to evil.

Mark my words-- you will never see an admitted athiest as President of the United States of America.

In our lifetimes. You forgot to add that part.

 

[Cheebs]

We have had many athiest or at least agnostic/non-religious presidents. They were just in the closet about it. Our most recent was considered one of the most moral and beloved by the right wing christians. Hmm......

Spoiler

Ronald Reagan

 

[siamesedreamer]

It's almost comforting to know that some of you Republican fanboys seem pretty confident that Democrats will win back the White House, despite your hatred of them.

Hate? Sheesh..............I vehemently disagree on a plethora of things, but I do not hate DEMs. I am able to recognize that they are a necessary component of the governmental process.

And at this point, I am so down on the REP party as a whole that I cannot possibly see how they will ever take back anything ever again. I know it will eventually happen because these things are cyclical, but I don't see that happening anytime before the 2016 election.

IMO, the 2008 election will make 2006 look like a tiny ripple.

 

[Cheebs]

IMO, the 2008 election will make 2006 look like a tiny ripple.

Agreed assuming the war does not turn around. Chris Matthews said something rather telling when talking about stances for candidates in 2008 "in this political climate it is nearly impossible for a candidate to be too liberal". I think that is true in spirt, for now.

 

[WrathOfOtaibah]

For people whining about why there wasn't an atheist in office, read some of what Thomas Jefferson had to say about religion. He was a Deist but his views on Christianity line up well with atheism.

 

[Cheebs]

For people whining about why there wasn't an atheist in office, read some of what Thomas Jefferson had to say about religion. He was a Deist but his views on Christianity line up well with atheism.

Most of our founding fathers aren't what we'd call "christians" today.

Didn't jefferson cut up the bible to get rid of all the miracle/unexplainable non history stuff? :lol

 

[whytemyke]

Most of the founding fathers were Deists.

Anyways, it wouldn't happen today. The moment someone was running and wasn't openly Christian, they'd get beaten by at least 20 points.