The Hot Blog

That's been the same problem for me. I spent eight of my most formative years with Bill as President and for a long time, I was anxious to get a Clinton back in the White House because of how idyllic the world seemed when I was younger. But Obama is clearly more inspiring to the American people and especially to the young people of this country. He's making young folks passionate about politics again, believing that they can make a difference, that they can make a change. And if Hillary winds up winning the nomination, what does that say to these young folks who were finally moved to vote (for Obama)?

That's the thing, the Clinton's campaign has completely alienated a lot of Obama voters and if she were to win the nomination, I have a strong feeling that the Obama supporters will just stay home, paving the way for McCain to win. We need Obama to win the nomination so that the Dems can win the White House, but also so that the young people of this country can feel like their votes and their passion actually matters.

I doubt it, Noah. Obama or Hillary, the #1 thing on most people's minds is to keep "100 Years" McCain from giving us another four years of genocide, torture, deficits and eavesdropping. They'll come out regardless of who the nominee is, and hopefully in such numbers that the GOP's voter suppression and rigged voting machines can't overcome the difference.

". . . because of how idyllic the world seemed when I was younger."

Those are words you above the entrance to Hell.

Cadavra, why didn't you tell us you were Marion Cotillard in disguise?

It's this post and comments from Noah are EXACTLY why I find myself unable to join the Democratic party. Can the Dems get on the same page about ANYTHING?? Ever?? One thing you can say for the Republicans is they get their talking points and align the base and stick to it.

Hillary is actively trying to hurt Obama in an effort to put herself in the seat for a presidential bid. All these doubts she's putting in peoples minds is like her laying the groundwork for Rove and company...I can see them laughing about it now. If Hillary cared about the dems or America she would drop out of the race.

As an Independent, I'd probably vote for McCain over Hillary.

Obama has my vote if he wins the Democratic nomination. But if he doesn't, I am leaning towards McCain over Clinton.

"One thing you can say for the Republicans is they get their talking points and align the base and stick to it."

This is the same base that hates McCain for not sticking to the talking points? I can't wait for someone to ask him what he thinks about intelligent design. I'd love for him to piss off the base even more. At least Tuesday will finish that fool Huckabee off. 'Bout damn time.

Thankfully, regardless of who ends up winning (McCain or one of the two Dems) we know that Bush's torture regime is on its way out, because no Republican has been more firmly against torture than him. It's one of examples of sticking to a principle that almost makes me think that I would vote for McCain under different circumstances (like if his democratic opponent was the corpse of Franklin Roosevelt).

The really interesting thing is that some folks who would support Obama wouldn't support Hillary despite the fact that they have remarkably similar ideals and goals (at least as presently stated) which is why the debates have been so boring. But this just goes to show you that personality plays a large part in who we vote for and the truth of the matter is that no matter how hard she tries, people don't like Hillary for one reason or another. So I think that's one of the big reasons why Hillary is playing the "experience" card; her personality just doesn't match up to Obama's. But Petaluma, if you want to talk about being on the same page, the politics between the Dem candidates are a lot closer than McCain and Huckabee and Paul.

Obama made an interesting point in the last debate about how his rabid support is a good thing. He basically said that one of the most important parts of getting things done in politics is having the support of the people and he's proven that he can rally that support.

Exactly, the last eight years have shown what happens when we have a President supported by just barely 50% of the electorate (or a minority of the electorate in the first term).

Cadavra; there is no way in hell I would vote for Hillary. Zero. Zip. Nada. The Senator from the State of New York should have been out two months ago. Hell. She should have run for this office 4 YEARS AGO! That was her moment. Now her moment has passed, but she refuses to see the light. May the people of Ohio, Vermont, and Texas fling her ass into the light because it's time she goes home.

Whoa....I totally agree with IO.....is the sun bleeding? Are rivers running backwards?

Hold on... Satan called... it is not snowing. Repeat: it is not snowing in Hell. In other news; Lindsay Lohan is enjoying a cheesburger on Sunset. Stay tuned for further updates.

McCain's embrace of a fucking deranged lunatic like Richard Hagee is a disgrace. I don't care who he runs against. I would never vote for McCain.

Sorry. John Hagee.

Barak Obama has very little experience. Traditionally, senators haven't faired very well; they usually lose if they're going up against a governor or incumbent president. This year it seems it's all senators; but Obama has the least experience of any of them.

I know you can make the argument that governors don't have foreign policy experience, but at least they have executive experience. Ronald Reagan, Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush were all governors. Vice presidents have also been elected like George Bush (papa)and Al Gore came close.

Obama has less experience than any major candidate that I can remember. Maybe that's why his candidacy is style over substance. He says vacuous phrases like "hope" and "change" which could mean anything; change in what direction?

His plan to keep America safe seems to be to cross his fingers and "hope."

R Scott R, are you really Rush Limbaugh? Tell the truth. Good judgment and who a president surrounds himself with can be just as important as "experience," if not more so. The "experience" angle is just an easy way to attack Obama, probably because the attacker could not come up with anything better.

How can you be sure Obama has good judgement if he has no track record. His pronouncements that he would meet with our enemies and attack our ally Pakistan show he does not have good judgement.

"The "experience" angle is just an easy way to attack Obama" -- yes, probably because it is so obvious.

No, I'm not Rush Limbaugh, although I listen to his radio show on occasion.

How can you be so sure that Obama lacks sound judgment? Simply because he wants to, oh my gosh, meet with our enemies?! Would it be better to just bomb them first and ask questions later? That sounds like a great foreign policy. It's been working wonders for us these last 7+ years.

"Would it be better to just bomb them first and ask questions later? That sounds like a great foreign policy. It's been working wonders for us these last 7+ years."

Whom are you refering to? Eighteen months passed between the threat of action against Iraq and the eventual action. Were you paying attention to what was happening during that period? Have we bombed Iran, or are we in fact talking to them? Have we bombed South Korea, or are we in fact talking to them? What other enemy nation (and there are many) have we bombed in the last 7+ years (beyond Afganistan, which most still agree was justified)?

Keep in mind, Obama is the one who said he would bomb Pakistan, an ally.

I was exaggerating for dramatic effect mysteryperfecta. The bottom line is I believe that our foreign policy has been disastrous under Bush, and electing McCain would be just like electing Bush again.

Pakistan is not an ally. They say they are, but so does the pusherman on the corner...

"I was exaggerating for dramatic effect mysteryperfecta."

No exaggeration, just a false premise.

The bottom line is I believe that our foreign policy has been disastrous under Bush, and electing McCain would be just like electing Bush again."

That's a more defenceable position, and you're entitled to it. Of course, it's also debateable. Relations have seemed to improved with Germany with Merkel and France with Sarkozy. But no doubt you're just narrowly focusing on Iraq and the Middle East.

Why would we bomb South Korea, for giving us Dragon Wars?

Oh wow you know exactly what I'm focusing on when it comes to my foreign policy views. That is amazing mysteryperfecta. No doubt you believe everything this administration tells you about how well everything is going in Iraq and the Middle East.

Also, we shouldn't be proud of ourselves when the countries with whom we have 'improved relations' are two of our major allies.

Not sure what video that "fool" posted on YouTube of Obama on Ellen...

But he was on Ellen once back then, and he was on again this past week. This past week, it was live via satellite. Dancing again.

Regardless, this voter would never, ever vote for Hillary Clinton. If she's the nominee, I will probably vote for McCain. And I am very against the war. But Hillary can't be trusted. Never could. At least with McCain you know what you're getting.

It's all up to Obama to save us from ourselves....

I'd rather take a crap shoot with Hillary than accept what McCain is offering.

" no Republican has been more firmly against torture than him."

Bzzzz! Wrong! Sorry, McCain threw that last shred of decency under the bus about three weeks ago.

Oh come on, we all know McCain has got to stretch his real views on things just a little to get that crazy Christian right to nominate him.

He's going to say whatever it takes because on a emotionally intelligent level, they can be just as myopic and religiously zealous as the crazy suicide bombers...

The sad thing is, like most things, they are behind the times and don't yet realize how technology "makes the world flat" (to quote Friedman) and those religious niche groups don't have the pull they once did.

I don't care what soundbite you dig up, No guy that was a prisoner in a Vietnam POW camp is going to really be okay with torture...

And McCain isn't a warmonger. He was never for the war, but he has a point that now that we've fucked things up so bad, we need to stabalize the region if it takes 100 years, because to leave with damage done as is could fuck things up for the next 1000...

That said, I still want Obama.

McCain as never for the war?

That is wrong.

McCain not only was for the war, but though we should have sent in another 150,000 troops.

McCain wasn't happy with the way the war was going because he though it wasn't BIG enough.

Same thing in Kosovo back in the day. McCain was against it only because he didn't like our methods - he wanted 100,000 boots on the ground instead of a targeted air campaign.

Vote for who you like. But please, get your facts straight.

"Oh wow you know exactly what I'm focusing on when it comes to my foreign policy views. That is amazing mysteryperfecta."

I'm just having a problem with your broad, melodramatic statements.

"No doubt you believe everything this administration tells you about how well everything is going in Iraq and the Middle East."

It's the first-hand accounts that are compelling.

"Also, we shouldn't be proud of ourselves when the countries with whom we have 'improved relations' are two of our major allies."

Rifts are mending. Besides, those were merely two examples. See, examples are what you give after making assertions. Note my examples of diplomacy with Iran and (that would be) North Korea. I know, I know, it's easier to snipe. Carry on.

And all of the first-hand accounts paint a rosy picture of Iraq? Surely not. I am not trying to argue that every single foreign policy decision made by this administration has been an unmitigated disaster mysteryperfecta. I don't blindly and irrationally hate Bush and Co. IMO though, the foreign policy mistakes far outweigh the successes.

"And all of the first-hand accounts paint a rosy picture of Iraq? Surely not."

I doubt all of them are; I haven't heard all of them. But I've heard a few from those without political party to prop up or tear down that are compelling.

"I am not trying to argue that every single foreign policy decision made by this administration has been an unmitigated disaster mysteryperfecta. I don't blindly and irrationally hate Bush and Co..."

I believe you, but you may want temper your rhetoric-- you sound exactly like what you've just denied. Can I assume, then, that you hope Iraq will be a success? That Iraq establishes a stable government, with the ability to defend itself, and becomes a much needed ally in the Middle East? Because that sure as hell would help Bush's legacy.

"IMO though, the foreign policy mistakes far outweigh the successes."

It all hinges on Iraq-- but that book hasn't been written. If it falls apart, then any foreign policy successes will barely register as footnotes.

Someone having serious problems with this administration's foreign policy does not mean that they blindly and irrationally hate said administration. Just as if you support this administration's foreign policy it doesn't mean you blindly and irrationally do so.

Of course I would prefer an Iraq success story over a tarnished Bush legacy.

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: