I think the parties should do it the way they used to...which was to have delegates VOTE for a VP. But I'm sure neither McCain nor Obama would like the results much.
Uh.... Isn't this exactly what you complained about before (see the link in my signature)? To everybody else, please stop feeding the freekin trolls.
If not for Edwards, Obama would have put Clinton away earlier by winning New Hapmshire and Iowa. http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/08/why-howard-wolfson-is-out-of-job.html
The beauty of the Iowa caucus was that your 2nd choice mattered due to viability issues in how the caucuses were run. So there was lots of polling on 2nd place choices. Hillary was a distant third there. At the time, the election was a referendum on Clinton - you first decided whether you liked her or not. If you didn't, then you picked between Obama and Edwards. Most Obama supporters had Edwards as their 2nd choice and vice-versa.
So let me get this straight? I'm voting McCain over Obama because I support his energy policy(domestic drilling, nuclear power, coal, wind, solar, and investment in alternative sources), his Iraq war policy(supported the surge which has worked), his tax policy(keep taxes low and don't redistribute wealth), and his choices of Supreme Court justices, but secretly what that really means is I just don't want to vote for a black guy?
I think most of us in here, regardless of political persuasion, disagree with the Dubious assertion stated so bluntly and all-inclusively. However, the kernel of truth is that there will always be a segment of society who will not vote for a person based on the color of their skin. I believe in his heavy handed, all-or-nothing way, this is the point Dubious tried to make. But the same can be said that their will always be a segment of society who will not vote for a woman, or an Irishman, or a Republican, or on and on.
Bigtexxx definitely has posted blatantly racist posts before. This is what bigtexxx wrote about a group of middle eastern men who were falsely reported as a terrorist threat on the restroom. These are the words that bigtexxx used http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=81229&page=2&pp=20&highlight=group+arabs+beat-down He spoke not about these particular men, but Arabs in general, and so his defense of saying it was just to describe those men doesn't make sense. Furthermore bigtexxx doesn't use Caucasian or white to describe other groups when talking about them. He goes in the post to talk about how he doesn't care if it's profiling or not. There is no doubt that bigtexxx is guilty of posting racist material on this bbs.
You are correct -- over 90% of blacks voted for Obama. Was that because they won't vote for a white person?
Obama needs to fight back. Dukakis, Gore and Kerry all ran campaigns as reasonable nice guys. It didn't work for them and it won't work for Obama. The public wants to see that the Democrat is tough enough to handle foreign policy and also to push through laws like universal health care. I think this could get down to an incident or two at the debates. I expect McCain to try some sort of trick or two. I hope Obama doesn't just go to his nice guy instincts. It is tough for Obama with having to guard against the angry black man thing while everyone will excuse McCain an outburst or two due to his age and his ptsd from torture.
I am about to say that. 90% of blacks voted Obama in the primary and I think the ratio will be similar in the general. You can't say all of them are voting for the issues. It is a fair game, people.
yeah, you're right, those blacks never ever voted for a white person, for president, we always vote for the black candidate what's even more ridiculous is we had a black democratic presidential candidate just 4 years ago, who black people didn't support but who gets called a leader in the black community anyway
I'll agree with that. In fact, I've often referenced the "Bradley effect" in various threads on this forum. It has to be a real concern for the Dems because you could take most of these polls and it's possible that an additional 5-10% of those surveyed are lying about their intention to vote for Obama. But this assertion(and it's prevelant in the mainstream media) that there are a vast number of McCain supporters who are only backing him because Obama is black is insulting and untrue. It's a percentage, but a small one at best. Obama IS fighting back. He's airing negative ads all over the place. Several of which are distorting McCain's record. He's also been negative on the campaign trail. Remember him saying that McCain and his supporters "take pride in being ignorant" over the inflated tires debacle? Or saying the GOP would try to make people afraid of him because he doesn't look like those other guys on the dollar bills?
We have a choice between the same party that brought us a crippling energy dependency, an overwhelming deficit, a failed credit market, an incompetent war effort, and a worldwide joke as an image of leadership ... and a guy who looks like he might actually bring some real intelligence and consideration to the office. Why is this even close?
The ignorant mark, wasn't an attack it was a defense against McCain using their own ignorance on the issue to attack Obama. Obama merely made an astute observation about the McCain attack. I agree with you that the number backing McCain for purely racial reasons is a small percentage. But the percentage who unconsciously allow race to influence their judgement about lies and rumors spread about Obama might be slightly larger.
