act smiley Posted 6 September 2008 Posted 6 September 2008 Obama and McCain are far preferable to either VP candidate from what I've seen to be honest. Also, whats with all the talk of Palin being hot? Her eyes are freaky, I'd rather get into bed with Michael Palin.
Alexikokopops Posted 6 September 2008 Posted 6 September 2008 Sarah Palin is almost so ridiculously terrifying that it makes me think the Republicans are trying to lose. I don't understand how anyone can back a woman who is so clearly and plainly hypocritical and self serving. And her attempt to ridicule community workers was nothing short of disgraceful. Absolute disgusting. These are people who bend their backside just to make the country livable. Doing hours of thankless work, just so some silly senator can disrespect them and spit at their face. At least, Joe Biden knows his stuff. I forgot about that, that really annoyed me I've been too wound up/terrified by Palin to really take into account what McCain's up to.
Thracian Posted 6 September 2008 Posted 6 September 2008 Whichever candidate the BBC favour is the one I'd avoid.
Koke Posted 6 September 2008 Posted 6 September 2008 I forgot about that, that really annoyed me I've been too wound up/terrified by Palin to really take into account what McCain's up to. That offended me. It really did. She just insulted every decent hardworking social servant, not only in the USA, but in the whole world, including myself. Disgusting.
jonno24 Posted 6 September 2008 Posted 6 September 2008 I would personally vote for Mcain,Palin because they have the experience and determination to stop the terrorist threat. Albeit which we put in power,armed in the first place. It seems to me (and it is not a critisism) that people seem to be saying they will vote for Obama because he is black and not because he has the experience to take america forward. People also seem to be wanting to vote for him because Bush (who is a twat) is a republican and they seem to think that Mcain is the same as Bush. I dont think that people can honestly say that they would vote for Obama because he is a democrat. And like i said (bush is a twat) But the fact that Mcain is in the same party as bush i feel will influenced peoples decision. But i hope the American people do the right thing whatever the result.
Jordan Posted 7 September 2008 Posted 7 September 2008 I don't think I can get involved in this discussion without writing way too long of a post, but I am more confident that Obama can deal with my nation's problems both at home and abroad than McCain.
Babylon Posted 7 September 2008 Posted 7 September 2008 I don't really mind... I just wish it was over with. I'm sick and tired of it being headline news EVERY day for the last year.
FilboFox Posted 7 September 2008 Author Posted 7 September 2008 You sound like you just go on the celebrity/personality status, surely Clinton's policies were nearer to Obama's than the Republicans yet just because they throw in a completely unknown, untried, inexperienced 'foxy woman' you change your mind.No wonder the worlds in a mess. Yeah... probably do go on celebrity status now cause I really am not fussed about their policies. Clinton, I wanted to win because it would have been good to see a strong political woman as President... it's about time and I think that she was the best candidate out of all of them. Had she won, I think McCain would have had a LOT to do to beat her... Obama is easier to attack because of his inexperience. That said, I'm like many other Clinton supporters in that I don't think that I could have voted for Obama because he beat Clinton... that is the wrong thing to do if you an American Democrat I know, BUT, I'm not an American and never will be... so I'll just stick to celebrity-ness cause either way, it doesn't affect me.
FilboFox Posted 7 September 2008 Author Posted 7 September 2008 Your fascination with Mrs Clinton is just a little perturbing. Just because her hubby puts it about a bit, doesn't mean you're in with a shout with her. As for me... Obama wouldn't get my vote. How does what I have written show that I am fascinated with her? I just said that I would have voted for her. Bill has nothing to do with it.
FilboFox Posted 7 September 2008 Author Posted 7 September 2008 Sarah Palin is almost so ridiculously terrifying that it makes me think the Republicans are trying to lose. I don't understand how anyone can back a woman who is so clearly and plainly hypocritical and self serving. And her attempt to ridicule community workers was nothing short of disgraceful. Absolute disgusting. These are people who bend their backside just to make the country livable. Doing hours of thankless work, just so some silly senator can disrespect them and spit at their face. At least, Joe Biden knows his stuff. I don't think she was trying ridiculing community workers... she just said that what she did was like a community worker but with actual responsibilities. Her jab was at Obama who was claiming she had no experience and as he was a community worker, she had done just as much, if not more... Granted, it is rather offending to community workers but I don't think that she meant it that way. You could look at it from either side though... I can see why she is dislikable to many.
Webbo Posted 7 September 2008 Posted 7 September 2008 Yeah... probably do go on celebrity status now cause I really am not fussed about their policies. Clinton, I wanted to win because it would have been good to see a strong political woman as President... it's about time and I think that she was the best candidate out of all of them. Had she won, I think McCain would have had a LOT to do to beat her... Obama is easier to attack because of his inexperience.That said, I'm like many other Clinton supporters in that I don't think that I could have voted for Obama because he beat Clinton... that is the wrong thing to do if you an American Democrat I know, BUT, I'm not an American and never will be... so I'll just stick to celebrity-ness cause either way, it doesn't affect me. What experience has Hillary Clinton got apart from being married to a former President? I'm a top notch painter and decorator, the only thing my wife can paint is her toe nails.
Ultra Posted 8 September 2008 Posted 8 September 2008 This is the best couple of candidates the US has put up in some time. I'm instinctively a touch left-wing but at the same time don't like the way left-wing governments enforce the power of central government. Also dead cynical. So it's a bti confusing for me.McCain is an honourable man with a sense of humour who's been forced to sound a little more right-wing recently to make sure he gets the support of his republican base. Usually he's a centrist in most matters, and mostly beyond petty politics, quite happy to work with both parties. The fact that he was considered as one of John Kerry's (the democrat for those with short memories) candidates for his vice-president should tell you something about him. As for Palin, she's not the type of woman I'd enjoy talking to, and most of her personal views are exactly the opposite of mine, but I don't really care. She's not imposing those personal beliefs on others, which I like, and like McCain, she seems driven by a sense of fairness and a desire to curb government interference where its not necessary. Oh really? Isn't this the same person who wants to criminalise abortion and everyone involved in it? The same person who, like most in her party, vociferously opposes gay rights? The same woman who supports the war in Iraq and is sending her son to fight there? The same member of a party whose simultaneous obsessions with global warmongering and tax-cutting for the rich has wrecked the US economy and put the country into incalculable debt? The same governor who is the subject of sleaze allegations in her state? I don't see any "sense of fairness" in those positions. She's just the US equivalent of Ann Widdecombe - albeit with one hell of a makeover..
Koke Posted 8 September 2008 Posted 8 September 2008 I don't think I can get involved in this discussion without writing way too long of a post, but I am more confident that Obama can deal with my nation's problems both at home and abroad than McCain. Please do write a long rant.
FilboFox Posted 8 September 2008 Author Posted 8 September 2008 What experience has Hillary Clinton got apart from being married to a former President?I'm a top notch painter and decorator, the only thing my wife can paint is her toe nails. If you are even going to try and argue that, you clearly know nothing about the race for President... it is very VERY widely accepted that Hillary has experience... it's what she based her entire campaign on, and don't you think Obama would have picked up on it if she hadn't got experience!?! Yes, she was a former President's wife and as first lady she had a lot of responsibilities (Bill Clinton even said "two for the price of one" and that they were almost "co-presidents") plus being around the places where she saw how things were run. Does your wife go to work with you? Also, she has been senator of the New York state for the past 8 years and has experience in policies and in dealing with such matters! How then, can you say that she is inexperienced, or more so, question her experience??!?!
lookwhaticando Posted 8 September 2008 Posted 8 September 2008 Is this the same 'experience' that footballers have as soon as they hit 30? It's all so easy these days. Obviously it's different for politicians, they have to hit 50 before they can be 'experienced'.
Flynny Posted 8 September 2008 Posted 8 September 2008 Oh really?Isn't this the same person who wants to criminalise abortion and everyone involved in it? The same person who, like most in her party, vociferously opposes gay rights? The same woman who supports the war in Iraq and is sending her son to fight there? The same member of a party whose simultaneous obsessions with global warmongering and tax-cutting for the rich has wrecked the US economy and put the country into incalculable debt? The same governor who is the subject of sleaze allegations in her state? I don't see any "sense of fairness" in those positions. She's just the US equivalent of Ann Widdecombe - albeit with one hell of a makeover.. 1. What bollocks. "When asked what she would do as governor if Roe v. Wade were overturned, she responded "it would not be up [to me] to unilaterally ban anything. It would be up to the people of Alaska to discuss and decide how we would like our society to reflect our values." I don't see her wanting to impose her own will on anyone here. 2. "Vociferously opposes gay rights?". I'm sorry, did she campaign for governor in a placard with "Burn the Fags" written on it? She opposes gay marriage, which is quite different. Still a little intolerant, sure, but hardly what you've stated. 3. Supports the war in Iraq? In what way? What credible politician is against in anymore? It's as close to political concensus as you'll get at the minute. 98% of politicians will either say "I thought it was right at the time, it wasn't, but we need to finish the job" or "I told you so, but we need to finish the job". As for SENDING her son? What?! He's an adult, he can do what he likes. Last I checked a kid was allowed to join the army without it reflecting badly on his parents. 4. Her being a Republican has little to do with anything. Personally I very much doubt she'd do the same. Read about her more, she's pretty capable and sensible. 5. Most politicians are under investigations for stuff like this. The word "Sleaze" is massively overstating it, too. Let me put this straight: I don't like her. She is a lot of things I dislike, especially religious. (ooh err), but I see no reason to think that this is going to lead to policy decisions on her part that will take American backwards. What I do see is a capable and determined woman who isn't in politics for popularity and is in no sense a tool of the Republican party as is Bush. Neither of these two Republican candidates are neo-conservatives, a fact that fills me with relief.
Ultra Posted 8 September 2008 Posted 8 September 2008 1. What bollocks. "When asked what she would do as governor if Roe v. Wade were overturned, she responded "it would not be up [to me] to unilaterally ban anything. It would be up to the people of Alaska to discuss and decide how we would like our society to reflect our values." I don't see her wanting to impose her own will on anyone here.2. "Vociferously opposes gay rights?". I'm sorry, did she campaign for governor in a placard with "Burn the Fags" written on it? She opposes gay marriage, which is quite different. Still a little intolerant, sure, but hardly what you've stated. 3. Supports the war in Iraq? In what way? What credible politician is against in anymore? It's as close to political concensus as you'll get at the minute. 98% of politicians will either say "I thought it was right at the time, it wasn't, but we need to finish the job" or "I told you so, but we need to finish the job". As for SENDING her son? What?! He's an adult, he can do what he likes. Last I checked a kid was allowed to join the army without it reflecting badly on his parents. 4. Her being a Republican has little to do with anything. Personally I very much doubt she'd do the same. Read about her more, she's pretty capable and sensible. 5. Most politicians are under investigations for stuff like this. The word "Sleaze" is massively overstating it, too. Let me put this straight: I don't like her. She is a lot of things I dislike, especially religious. (ooh err), but I see no reason to think that this is going to lead to policy decisions on her part that will take American backwards. What I do see is a capable and determined woman who isn't in politics for popularity and is in no sense a tool of the Republican party as is Bush. Neither of these two Republican candidates are neo-conservatives, a fact that fills me with relief. Sorry, but Palin IS a neo-conservative - otherwise she wouldn't be on the ticket, simple as. And given McCain's age and health record, there's a strong chance that at some stage in the term of office, the power would pass to her. The thought of someone who has only ever ONCE travelled outside the USA, and with such a gung-ho approach to foreign affairs, having a finger on the nuclear button should be enough to terrify us all.
Webbo Posted 8 September 2008 Posted 8 September 2008 , and with such a gung-ho approach to foreign affairs, . Examples please.
Flynny Posted 8 September 2008 Posted 8 September 2008 Sorry, but Palin IS a neo-conservative - otherwise she wouldn't be on the ticket, simple as.And given McCain's age and health record, there's a strong chance that at some stage in the term of office, the power would pass to her. The thought of someone who has only ever ONCE travelled outside the USA, and with such a gung-ho approach to foreign affairs, having a finger on the nuclear button should be enough to terrify us all. Thats not true at all. She's more of a Reagan than anything, she's been picked to appeal to hardworking families because despite his pandering to them, McCain would normally have won some of the voter's Obama's focusing on- educated centrists. Do you even know what a Neo-conservative is or are you just tarring all Republicans with the same brush (again)? What are you basing her "gung-ho approach to foreign affairs" on? She doesn't have an approach! She's governor of Alaska!
Zingari Posted 10 September 2008 Posted 10 September 2008 Obama may have shot himself in the foot with a careless 'Lipstick on a pig': remark http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na...0,4703724.story
stez Posted 10 September 2008 Posted 10 September 2008 Obama may have shot himself in the foot with a careless 'Lipstick on a pig': remark http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na...0,4703724.story i heard that on radio5 and it sounded like he wished he'd not started saying it half way through. he made a stirling defence later on though.
Flynny Posted 10 September 2008 Posted 10 September 2008 "Lipstick on a Pig" was what the Obama crowd were chanting at Hilary back in the Primaries was it not?
DJ Barry Hammond Posted 10 September 2008 Posted 10 September 2008 I worry that whatever the result of this pole - America will shock us and vote for the other candidate, a bit like how i thought about the Bush / Al Gore election. When I heard some of the policies for both sides I thought - who would vote for Bush - sadly for the world and America, enough to get him elected...TWICE! (should i put aledgedly?) I get the feel the Obama would be good for the US in repairing foreign relations and re-establishing people's respect for America - and this is not done on a policy basis, more of feeling, possibly associated with a young black man leading America - had you said this 30 years ago, no-one would have beleived it. And the 'lipstick on the pig' stuff 1.) It was almost delivered like a true comedian - his mistake was adding 'it's still a pig' he should of just smiled and gestured it, leaving the auidance and watching public to get the joke. 2.) Channel 4 news showed other bloke (I can only think of Palin - not good for the old geezer huh! INSERT - McCain, that's it - think Chips!) saying the exact same thing about Hillary. They also raised some questions about Palin's personal and govermental dealings, all quite interesting! Now if it was John Clease and Micheal Palin up for nomination - I'd be voting for them!
Flynny Posted 11 September 2008 Posted 11 September 2008 I worry that whatever the result of this pole - America will shock us and vote for the other candidate. The thing is, if you're an American you'd not be shocked at all. Obama has gained celebrity status worldwide for his quick rise and his inspiring backstory, but McCain's been well known in the US for more than 30 years. Like I said before, I don't see a need to worry here, they're the two best candidates in the same race for President in years and years.
Koke Posted 30 September 2008 Posted 30 September 2008 As Kathleen Parker nicely put it "” If BS were currency, Palin could bail out Wall Street herself.” Sarah Palin is completely out of her depth.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.