THE PACK Message Boards

yes, it is how we predicted, my insight of the candidates has changed as well since 2007

-I am more Obama friendly now and i would not mind him being president

-McCain is still my main man but he disappoints me, he was supposed to be a moderate conservative but apparently that is not good enough for his party so he had to "bush" up his image just to attract the hard line republicans to give him money, but with the side-effect of messing with the moderate and liberal republicans like me, but on the other hand Hillary supporters are showing a sad affair, around 20% said they would vote for McCain instead of Obama in a recent pulling

this shall be a interesting election

I think the 20% of Hillary Supporters who said they'd vote for McCain in the general election are part of Operation Chaos.

That's bullshit. They wouldn't DARE risk voting McCain in. And don't forget, many of Hillary's so-called supporters were Republicans in disguise.

And yes, i was going to allude to Operation chaos.

*nods* I know I've said it before, but I think the Republicans have already thrown in the towel on this one. Bush and Cheney did everything humanly possible to rape the country and the political party, so all they can really do now is let somebody they wouldn't have trusted anyway like McCain exhaust himself in a failed campaign and reduce the chances of him running in the future. Limbaugh, I get the sense, will be brushed off as party collateral as well; if Operation Chaos does fall under treason, it might momentarily draw attention away from Bush / Cheney long enough for them to sweep everything under the proverbial rug that they haven't already.

And yes, most of Hillary's supporters that said they would vote McCain were part of Limbaugh's Operation Chaos.

It's already over. The McCain campaign is just a great big distraction.

Naaa... It won't be OVER until sometime after November 4th.

idk, this is going to be a tough race and many people are going to want a revote and that will screw a lot of voters up on their choice and both parties are going to acuse one another for the problems. Though some of the voting wil be frauds pr fixed. Watch the movie "Hacking Democracy", it shows if Americans are really getting cheated out of the voting from the past and if it's possible in the future for the election to be fixed.

p.s. in one photo, Obama is seen not saluting the flag and people thought he was denying America, but that's because somebody cued them to early to salute during the wrong song.

RedEye wrote:Naaa... It won't be OVER until sometime after November 4th.

Well not literally, but now that it's become common knowledge that McCain was one of Bush's #1 fans, he's essentially become the proverbial fish in a barrel. I knew the Republicans were scared of Obama when they took a stab at him in January and blamed the Clinton regime, and I knew the Republicans were scared in general when they got their meat puppet Rush Limbaugh to prolong the Democratic nomination.

That's what Operation Chaos was really supposed to do: to get the Democrats to piss money away on each other and let McCain take potshots at the Democrats with a lesser chance of them answering back. Now the McCain campaign's only purpose is to screw up the works for the Democrats as much as possible before their inevitable reelection; he's the guy Bush and Cheney pushed out into the spotlight to give America a song and dance while they're cleaning out their offices and (I would wager) waiting for their U.A.E. green card equivalents.

It honestly will not surprise me if McCain, during a debate between he and Obama, drops the "N" bomb live on camera. That's because McCain has very little to offer America except for hatemongering and the same song and dance propaganda B.S. Bush has been giving the country for the past eight years. He can't even rely on that "the Democrats are no better" crap like Bush got in on because, this time, there is an honest to God push to get this candidate into the White House.

So that's all the McCain campaign is: a great big distraction and an excuse to get the Democrats to piss money away on an election campaign that might've otherwise been spent fixing the country.

Black_Claw wrote:p.s. in one photo, Obama is seen not saluting the flag and people thought he was denying America, but that's because somebody cued them to early to salute during the wrong song.

Or just a well timed snapshot from a moment at which Obama was slower to stand than the people around him. Like I said, the Republicans have been afraid of Obama since he threw his hat into the ring at the beginning of the year and have been on the horn for FOX News to dig up whatever dirt they can find on him. He doesn't have much, however, in the way of actual hard dirt (they tried his connections to a nuclear power company and a slum lord already, but the general public didn't give a crap), so instead they're nitpicking about patriotism with comments by his wife or his preacher taking center stage.

It's desperation. They've already tried everything they had on him, so now they're hovering around him waiting for him to say or do something that they could interpret the wrong way. It's sad, really, but I suppose it's because they know that if the Bush records do fall into the hands of a Democratic president, they're screwed too.

I was just over at the Daily Kos, and saw the electoral map.
It was astonishing.
A few days ago I was down in Roseberg for the Douglas County Democrats meeting. Let me tell you, folks, those ruggedly-independent farmers, lumbermen and river-runners want McCain's glutei maximii on a silver platter. They were bandying about terms like "Kick butt" and "Fifty Blue states." And what I just saw a few minutes ago on the Daily Kos is a fair step towards that reality.
We've turned six Red States purple: Iowa, Colorado, New Mexico (I know it's a Dem governor; the people are Repubs), Missouri, Pennsylvania (where I personally know of "Hang that darkie from a tree!" racists live) and Ohio.
Currently, Barack only needs 66 electoral delegates. McCain needs 156 — more than twice as many as Obama needs. And every time he opens his mouth, McCain says something screwy and drives more people away from his camp.

Ahhh. Sorry dude. You're wrong about Colorado. This is without a doubt a VERY red state.

It depends on where you look actually. Colorado does have a lot of mountain communities that are predominantly red, but according to all my friends from high school that relocated there after graduating, Denver's population is predominantly made up of people born in other states who relocated there for work or school. That combined with the Bush regime driving out the moderates and driving their credibility straight down into the ground has made Denver more of a middle ground for politics.

It really depends on who you ask and where; even the reddest of all the red states have their blue zones and vice versa. Given the right location, you could even get someone to tell you that my home state of Massachusetts is traditionally Republican (and I'm sure Matt is laughing his tail off at that kind of claim). Obviously that isn't true, but if you ask someone in Ipswich, Manchester, or some other North Shore La-De-Da bedroom community, that's what they'll tell you.

All you have to do is listen to talk radio out here ( there's RARELY an example of anyone who supports democratic causes save for Air America, which is near bankrupt by the way ) All the super-christians moved out here when focus on the family moved its headquarters to colorado springs. Here, there's a church on every other corner. On one street there's actually four. One for each corner ( and yes I AM saying christians tend to vote republican )

MattSullivan wrote:All you have to do is listen to talk radio out here ( there's RARELY an example of anyone who supports democratic causes save for Air America, which is near bankrupt by the way ) All the super-christians moved out here when focus on the family moved its headquarters to colorado springs. Here, there's a church on every other corner. On one street there's actually four. One for each corner ( and yes I AM saying christians tend to vote republican )

A church on each corner? Sheesh: there go the property values...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxn5Qh1YW8M&amp

the easy solution for any election

That's the sad fact about elections; you don't know who will win, but darn-all you sure know who's gonna lose...

Everybody!

Hmmm. I have a question.
Should experience be a major factor in deciding on the next president? I've asked this question many times and most people tell me, "When it comes to running our country? Hell yes it should!"
Now, after reading some of these post, I'm curious about your opinions. I want to know specifically, straight forward why you do or do not think experience should be a deciding factor.

I personally hope that, through some cosmic joke, that 1% of the vote for fictional characters like Mickey Mouse.....winds up being a sizable percentage this time

Sioux wrote:Hmmm. I have a question.
Should experience be a major factor in deciding on the next president?

Considering what "experience" has gotten us so far...

No.

Actually believe it or not the property values are pretty high around those churches because meddling super-christians live there and they won't hesitate to call the cops on a person who doesn't look like they "belong"

Sadly so. Property can be cash valued up in the stratosphere, though; and still be worthless as a residence.
As you pointed out.

Set wrote:

Sioux wrote:Hmmm. I have a question.
Should experience be a major factor in deciding on the next president?

Considering what "experience" has gotten us so far...

No.

My sentiments exactly.

In all reality, Presidents never make their decisions alone -- they have a whole cabinet of people, including a congress and judicial court that are required to back up and support whatever decision the president makes.

In my veiwpoint, your choice between Obama and McCain (where both of their qualifications are disputable) should not be about 'experiance' but whether or not they will enact policies that you agree with. We're a representative democracy afterall.

(I'd elaborate, but I'm afraid I might start spewing liberal idealogies at any moment. ; P )

Sioux wrote:Hmmm. I have a question.
Should experience be a major factor in deciding on the next president? I've asked this question many times and most people tell me, "When it comes to running our country? Hell yes it should!"
Now, after reading some of these post, I'm curious about your opinions. I want to know specifically, straight forward why you do or do not think experience should be a deciding factor.

Depends on what kind of experience you're talking about. Hypothetically, which would you prefer: Someone with no experience working with the system, or someone that only knows how best to twist the system to their own personal interests?

I hope that wasn't a difficult question for you. Yes, I do wish Obama had more experience in politics than he does, but at the same time, I appreciate that he's too green to be as dirty as what we're accustomed to. That makes him sort of a middle ground for me; he's educated enough to know how the system works, but inexperienced enough to not know too many ways to abuse it.

I wonder: does the idea of "Mr. Deeds goes to Washington" stand a chance in this modern world? At least experience tells you where some of the bodies are buried...hopefully not your own.

Fact is, we got this way by sitting back and letting "Sam" do it. Democracy (the system, not the party) is a very "hands on" sort of enterprise, and we've been asleep at the switch for a very long time. A lot of what we got is our own fault, because we were too busy doing other things...the country can take care of itself.

Right. And that's chocolate in those eggs the easter bunny lays.

We have extremes: the Republican and Democratic parties. What we don't have is a center. The great oak of state is hollow.

We can fix it (maybe), but we're going to have to make a focused attempt to do so. Bush wasn't bad--he was just incompetent. He was a good rancher, but the United States is not a ranch. We voted him into office, and we got what we deserved...all of us! That's the wonder of our Government; we get what we deserve.

If we want better, we must deserve better. Period. Otherwise, we'll get our just deserts. Obama started out transparent, but he's become a bit cloudy by now. Mc Cain started out opaque, and he's managed to stay that way. Even his enemies admit he hasn't changed. Dammit.

This is going to be very interesting...like watching an earthquake...from your front room window.

I'm too young to speak from experiance here, but isn't this election campaign supposed to have the biggest youth (18-29yo) turn out in regards of interest and participation?

outwarddoodles wrote:I'm too young to speak from experiance here, but isn't this election campaign supposed to have the biggest youth (18-29yo) turn out in regards of interest and participation?

That's what I'd heard as well. That's the only good thing that came out of all this time under Bush: it got people interested and involved in the government again.

I second what Howlizter said a few weeks ago.


Modern politics sucks, the parties are a joke, and you're not voting for who you think you're voting for when you vote. You're actually voting for whatever corporations or special interest groups paid for that candidates...."campaign". Now, whether said candidate had a little left over after paying for the campaign bill, well...that can't very well be blamed on those groups, now, can it? I mean, it's not like they'd intentionally line anyone's pockets with money by donating more money to a campaign than it might actually require to run...heck, all they were trying to do was make sure there was enough money in case anything unforeseen came up.

If you don't think that happens, you need to be a little more realistic. Corporations and special interest groups might not be able to give "gifts", persay, but they find their ways to make their goals worthwhile for a political candidate to push for them.

This is why I don't vote. I refuse to budge on my principals, and won't vote for anyone who I don't feel like I can trust. To the winds with this "well, then you should just choose which one you dislike less." garbage, because I don't see any particular reason why I should be expected to go against what I believe and throw in behind a candidate that I don't believe in. I have a strong dislike for liars, and even stronger dislike for hypocrites, and won't show my support to anyone who is either.