I want to respond, but work calls and I don't think this is the right thread. I will start a thread after the game.
My understanding is that he stands by his past position. If you have information to the contrary I'd love to see a link. I'd be happy to be wrong about this.
Another typical lie from you and one you continue to repeat no matter how often it's debunked. I said that if the exit polls were true Kerry would receive the biggest mandate since Reagan. That is a fact. Feel free to search for it and post my actual words. I know you won't as they will prove you to be a liar yet again. You love to talk about my record of predictions (though you've never shown even one where I was actually wrong) but you go poof whenever I bring up your hilarious prediction that Orlando Sanchez would be Houston's mayor (LMFAO) and that "Jesse Jackson's puppet" Bill White was circling the drain.
That was 1992. We weren't in the dark ages and acting like beasts at that time. I don't think many other people held that opinion about AIDS victims then. If he changed that's great, but it is still odd that his approach would have ever been to isolate the AIDS victims.
HO HO HO, the sage soothsayer's advice once again goes t*** UP. Similar to your 2004 Election Day FOLLY, once agin, in a time span of LESS THAN 24 HOURS, your electoral prediction was proven DEAD WRONG. A blowout for Obama? Maybe the wheels on his media hype-machine bandwagon had a blowout. LOL. Gawd you're bad at predicting elections. Real bad. Every time you open your trap to make a prediction, literally in a matter of hours, you are proven to be 100% wrong. HO HO HO CONQUERED (or Concord? LOL)
I've seen four major theories so far: 1. The women vote. The "tear" moment yesterday was calculated and planned to appeal to women - that part I suspected. A major criticism was that Hillary wasn't human while Obama was. That was to address that. It may just have worked perfectly. Exit polls showed that women of all ages flocked towards Hillary in far bigger numbers than Iowa. I think this definite has merit and had a large impact. 2. More independents went to the GOP primary for McCain than expected, meaning less went to Obama. I don't know what was expected, so I have no idea if this is the case or not. But pollsters adjust their numbers to reflect what they believe the voting pattern will be, so maybe they didn't adjust well. 3. Obama arrogance or over-confidence. NH is known for liking the underdog, and maybe Obama got a bit complacent and all the negative coverage of Hillary made her into an underdog. From a rational standpoint, it doesn't make sense that voters think of things that way in my head, but I don't know much about the NH mindset, so I don't really have an opinion one way or another. 4. The "Bradley Effect". I hadn't thought about this but just read it somewhere. Apparently this is the name given to the idea that black candidates tend to poll a few points higher than their final turnover because people want to appear progressive to pollsters and say they'll vote for the black guy/girl but don't. In Iowa, it would have been minimized because it was an open caucus instead of a secret ballot vote. I don't think of Obama as the "black candidate", so I don't know what to think of this one. It's an established trend in the past, but I have no idea if it played a role here. If it did, that's a bad sign for Obama going forward because it means he'll generally underperform the polls. The other impact here is how this shapes the black vote - if much is made of this, does it cause a frustration amongst minority voters that Iowa was just an illusion and does it depress black turnout (or do they go back to the Clintons, who have great standing with them). All in all, I have no idea what happened - but there are 10 days or so until Nevada now. Obama needs to hope he still gets the Culinary Workers endorsement tomorrow, which was assumed to be a given. They are oddly a hugely powerful union out there for some reason.
Lets not imply I eat what liberal media feeds me. You said it yourself with "hype EVER". Whether its undeserved or not (which I MYSELF said some of its undeserved), he's still getting it. That's just acknowledging the fact like you just did. Whether or not you give the sources of it crediblity, thats up to the individual. But thanks for shedding some light on the manipulative media machine... Obama has an obvious first-ever quality, As does Hillary have one.... in that regard they are both even... If any were to outright win the presidency, in a HISTORICAL sense its unprecedented they'd be voted into the most powerful position in the U.S. That's just stating the obvious... Besides a great health care plan (not to her discredit), for such a rare candidate herself as Hillary is, her potential POSITIVE effect isn't projected as far reaching as Obama's.
hype? yeah, George Will is a liberal media clown hypester. You betcha. Mmm-hmm. T_J, any way you guys could capture G-Will and waterboard him until he toes the extreme right party line for you?
What do you guys think of the claims that Obama attends a black "racist" church? Has that been discussed on this bbs? If so, can someone link me to it? Major, I'd also like to hear your stance on this.
Not a fan of Obama but I think the Church is really more guilty of being ethnocentric than racist. I really don't see a problem with that. They're focused on the black community. BTW, heres the link to their website http://www.tucc.org/about.htm
If you want to find out for yourself about his church, the Sunday Morning service is broadcast on the Web daily at noon. Here's the link: http://viewers.streamingfaith.com/v...p=&networkID=1058&WMP=1&WMPv=6&RPIE=0&RPNAV=1
This is the issue that sinks him in the General, should he turn his campaign around and actually make it. There is a LOT of very damaging information here.
Well, if you can't embrace a "ni hao ma" from a Black kid in NYC subway, you can't really blame them for wanting to keep ethnocentric.
I don't believe so. The only way people will look at that differently is if they were already prejudiced aginst him from the start. I don't have a problem with the fact the Church is focused on the black community. conservatives keep saying that the black community should take care of itself and not depend on the gov't...well, isn't this Church simply doing that? I'm voting Huckabee, and I would actually rather have Hillary over Obama, but this is a non-issue to me.
I think its a good thing that they're focused on their own community. Most Asians and Caucasians don't understand the needs of the black community and vice versa. Churches are usually more in tune and we really shouldn't fault them for concentrating on it.
That's why we need more "ni hao ma" to each other in this country, and learn not to suspect the ulterior motive behind the "ni hao ma" by a non-native speaker of "ni hao ma." Just sayin'
