[VidaRed]

Originally Posted by ILBB15

[MufcAgs23]

If Hillary couldn't satisfy her husband, how is she going to satisfy a country.

She's a tit, and the country is going to hell if she attains the office.

[Nick 0208 Ldn]

Millionaire Mitt Romney has dropped out of the race to win the Republican nomination for the White House, taking a swipe at Europe as he did so.

The decision to stand aside makes Arizona Senator John McCain the all-but-certain nominee of his party for November's presidential election.[/

The Democratic nomination is being fought out between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

Former Massachusetts governor Romney made his announcement in a speech to the Conservative Political Action Conference.

Mr Romney said: "I must now stand aside, for our party and our country.

"If I fight on in my campaign, all the way to the convention, I would forestall the launch of a national campaign and make it more likely that Senator Clinton or Obama would win.

"And in this time of war, I simply cannot let my campaign be a part of aiding a surrender to terror."

He added: "This is not an easy decision for me. I hate to lose."

Mr Romney, a Mormon, also warned that America must not end up as "the France of the 21st century - a great country but not a world leader".

And he addressed what he saw as Europe's problems as he called on the United States to approve a constitutional amendment that would ban gay marriages.

He said: "Europe is facing a demographic disaster. That's the inevitable product of weakened faith in the Creator, failed families, disrespect for the sanctity of human life, and eroded morality."

Mr Romney lost 14 of 21 states on Super Tuesday, the biggest day of US presidential voting ahead of November's election.

Mr McCain enjoyed coast-to-coast wins and cemented his position as frontrunner.

Mr Romney had vowed to fight on after Super Tuesday, but he and his campaign advisers discussed the situation on Wednesday.

He has been helping to bankroll his campaign using his own personal wealth.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/...304526,00.html

[Grinner]

Ha ha.

How much coin did the mannequin drop?

More votes for Huckabee now. If he eventually runs with McCain, at least it'll make things easier for Repubs when voting in November.

[FresnoBob]

Originally Posted by MrMarcello

Is that for residence claim or office claim, because we all know Hillary didn't "qualify" for NY senate run in reality.

The word used in the Amendment was "inhabitant." In contemporary context, that would mean either a resident (taxpayer, primary residence, qualified for in-state tuition, registered to vote there, etc.) or officeholder from that state.
Hillary would be considered a New Yorker even though she just made a short visit there after Bill moved out of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue so that she could be crowned "Senator" and move back to her actual residence of Washington D.C.

[FresnoBob]

Originally Posted by Grinner

Ha ha.

How much coin did the mannequin drop?

More votes for Huckabee now. If he eventually runs with McCain, at least it'll make things easier for Repubs when voting in November.

Huckabee? Sorry, but as a GOP voter for the past 37 years, I still prefer to vote for people who are not "creationists" who totally reject the concepts of evolution. This is even before we get to the Bible vs the Constitution (and separation of church and state) problems he presents.

[Grinner]

Originally Posted by FresnoBob

Huckabee? Sorry, but as a GOP voter for the past 37 years, I still prefer to vote for people who are not "creationists" who totally reject the concepts of evolution. This is even before we get to the Bible vs the Constitution (and separation of church and state) problems he presents.

Yes, but your party's base loves his wacky beliefs and they sure as shit aren't going to vote for McCain in November despite his pitiful attempts to pander to them.

[FresnoBob]

Originally Posted by Grinner

Yes, but your party's base loves his wacky beliefs and they sure as shit aren't going to vote for McCain in November despite his pitiful attempts to pander to them.

I worked as an inspector at a precinct here in Fresno on election day. There were a large number of younger voters showing up, along with some minority folk I hadn't seen around much (this was my neighborhood and my home precinct was voting at the same location) and more than a few women who, although registered GOP, wanted to vote in the Democratic Primary.

With McCain now basically assured of the Republican nomination, his real test is whether he can convince the religious right to support him (considering the alternatives) without totally alienating the moderates, undecideds, and non-partisan voters.

On the Democratic side, there are a lot of currently energized voters who might not be so enthused if "the other candidate" takes the nomination. I doubt seriously that the women cross-over voters (from GOP/nonpartisan) will stick around to support Obama at the expense of McCain, while the African-Americans proudly supporting Barak might not show up in November to send Hillary to the White House. If the two frontrunners get really nasty with each other as we head toward Denver in August, each risks alienating a necessary constituency if either wishes to change ownership of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Amazing--considering the ineptitude of Bush over the last 7+ years, the Democrats still aren't a lock to carry the general election.

[Red Dreams]

Originally Posted by FresnoBob

I worked as an inspector at a precinct here in Fresno on election day. There were a large number of younger voters showing up, along with some minority folk I hadn't seen around much (this was my neighborhood and my home precinct was voting at the same location) and more than a few women who, although registered GOP, wanted to vote in the Democratic Primary.

With McCain now basically assured of the Republican nomination, his real test is whether he can convince the religious right to support him (considering the alternatives) without totally alienating the moderates, undecideds, and non-partisan voters.

On the Democratic side, there are a lot of currently energized voters who might not be so enthused if "the other candidate" takes the nomination. I doubt seriously that the women cross-over voters (from GOP/nonpartisan) will stick around to support Obama at the expense of McCain, while the African-Americans proudly supporting Barak might not show up in November to send Hillary to the White House. If the two frontrunners get really nasty with each other as we head toward Denver in August, each risks alienating a necessary constituency if either wishes to change ownership of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Amazing--considering the ineptitude of Bush over the last 7+ years, the Democrats still aren't a lock to carry the general election.

I 'hate' Hillary......McCain is the only decent candidate the GOP has put up this year...even if he is 8 years too late......

I and many like me believe McCain is a better candidate than Hillary...but if she ends up our candidate.....I and others like me would hold our nose and vote for her...simply because Bush has scared the hell out of us voting for the GOP.....maverick or not the religious right will wear down McCain....then it will be 'here we go again.'


...it will be a Democrat President...even if we Dems will try to shoot ourselves in the foot as we always try to do...

[MikeUpNorth]

Originally Posted by Nick 0208 Ldn

And he addressed what he saw as Europe's problems as he called on the United States to approve a constitutional amendment that would ban gay marriages.

He said: "Europe is facing a demographic disaster. That's the inevitable product of weakened faith in the Creator, failed families, disrespect for the sanctity of human life, and eroded morality."

What a nut job, thank goodness he's dropped away. How someone who is a member of an officially racist 'religion' (business) and a confessed homophobe manages to get any support to run for President amazes me.

[Grinner]

Barack Obama doesn't support gay marriage either, you know.

[MikeUpNorth]

Originally Posted by Grinner

Barack Obama doesn't support gay marriage either, you know.

I stated earlier in the thread that there appears to be no one I would consider worth voting for.

[mu77]

Originally Posted by MikeUpNorth

What a nut job, thank goodness he's dropped away. How someone who is a member of an officially racist 'religion' (business) and a confessed homophobe manages to get any support to run for President amazes me.

but as the gov of taxacusetts he was a libby. he's a politician from the get go. says what will get him elected. two faced as they come.

[ooeat0meoo]

Originally Posted by MikeUpNorth

What a nut job, thank goodness he's dropped away. How someone who is a member of an officially racist 'religion' (business) and a confessed homophobe manages to get any support to run for President amazes me.

It's all in the power of the local pastor and the tv. Too few people know what it is to trust their own insticts and judge a person on merit.

[Plechazunga]

Originally Posted by MikeUpNorth

I stated earlier in the thread that there appears to be no one I would consider worth voting for.

What's wrong with Hillary?

[Red Dreams]

Originally Posted by Plechazunga

What's wrong with Hillary?

she is Bush in a skirt...


or a pantsuit.....

[Plechazunga]

What utter bollocks

Look at what the Clinton administration did, or tried to do, in office. Look at what she did and tried to do within it.

[Red Dreams]

Originally Posted by Plechazunga

What utter bollocks

Look at what the Clinton administration did, or tried to do, in office. Look at what she did and tried to do within it.

....the Clintons are not liberals....


...what disturbs me about Clinton is she is bought and paid for...I dont care what she paints herself to be....


...and her votes re the war tell us she is a 'politician' in the worst sense....

[Cal?]

Originally Posted by Red Dreams

she is Bush in a skirt...


or a pantsuit.....

She could be Bill in a pantsuit, but surely not Bush...

[Cal?]

Originally Posted by Red Dreams

it is simply a delegate race.

without superdelegates Obama is ahead after Super-Tuesday.
so if Obama or Hillary end up with the magic number needed to get a simple majority, the super delegates wont matter.

the only case I see an overide of this is if the 'big wigs' in the party decide is if they decide the candidate cannot win an election....especially when it is so close in terms of delegates as it is now....

According to the CNN: http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/pri...s/scorecard/#D

Hillary is marginally ahead in terms of pledged delegates... anyway, are you sure there are enough delegates left for either to get to the magic number without superdelegates?

[MikeUpNorth]

Originally Posted by Plechazunga

What's wrong with Hillary?

She is probably who I would vote for if pushed. However, her Iraq strategy seems naive, short-sighted and sensationalist to me.

I have no real issue with her record on voting in the Senate on Iraq as, unlike most people, I don't mind politicians changing their minds. People tend to see this as a sign of weakness or indecision in a politician, but I prefer to view it as a willingness to re-evaluate opinions and decisions based on changing evidence.

[Plechazunga]

Originally Posted by Red Dreams

....the Clintons are not liberals....


...what disturbs me about Clinton is she is bought and paid for...I dont care what she paints herself to be....


...and her votes re the war tell us she is a 'politician' in the worst sense....

Health Care Reform Plan
Family and Medical leave act
Gays in the armed forces
Brady Bill
Low Income Tax Credit
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act

Not exactly Karl Marx, but all those bills and initiatives were aimed at improving working people's lives, ending discriminatory practices, or at least pissing off the NRA.

Foreign policy was less obviously liberal, especially the cynical cruise missile attack on Afghanistan which was pretty much entirley for purposes of domestic politics. Still, with hindsight it looks less controversial... and on the other hand, Clinton came in on Kosovo and pushed as hard for a Palestinian state as any US president has. Plus he visited Viet Nam and pushed for European integration. Hardly fucking Nixon was he?

[Frosty]

I really don't like Hillary though. Does America really want another potentially 8 years of the Clintons? The idea of two families dominating the White House for up to 28 years doesn't fill me with joy.

[spinoza]

Originally Posted by Plechazunga

Health Care Reform Plan
Family and Medical leave act
Gays in the armed forces
Brady Bill
Low Income Tax Credit
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act

Not exactly Karl Marx, but all those bills and initiatives were aimed at improving working people's lives, ending discriminatory practices, or at least pissing off the NRA.

Foreign policy was less obviously liberal, especially the cynical cruise missile attack on Afghanistan which was pretty much entirley for purposes of domestic politics. Still, with hindsight it looks less controversial... and on the other hand, Clinton came in on Kosovo and pushed as hard for a Palestinian state as any US president has. Plus he visited Viet Nam and pushed for European integration. Hardly fucking Nixon was he?

Welfare reform

[spinoza]

Originally Posted by Red Dreams

...what disturbs me about Clinton is she is bought and paid for

By whom?

[Plechazunga]

Originally Posted by Frosty

I really don't like Hillary though.

She's not exactly a cuddly personality, but on the other hand, too much importance is attached to likeability in politicians. She's highly intelligent, she's capable, she's reasonably experienced, and she has a history of at least giving something of a shit about flagrant inequality, whether of wealth or respect or access to medicine.

Anyway, apparently she can be pretty charming when it's required to build bridges or get her way, she's worked well with Republicans in the senate. Plus, she'll have Bill... everybody loves Bill, apart from all the people who'd love to kill him.

Does America really want another potentially 8 years of the Clintons? The idea of two families dominating the White House for up to 28 years doesn't fill me with joy.

I admit that's not ideal. But I'd rather see a good president there than not see a dynastic succession. And I'd rather see a Clinton dynastic succession than a Republican non-dynastic succession.

Originally Posted by spinoza

Welfare reform

True. But a lot of people on the left agreed that it had to be done, welfare was bloated and out of date, and reforming it hasn't increased poverty, even if you can't prove it's decreased it.

And I'm not claiming the Clinton administration was pure of heart or very left-wing... it was a centrist administration. In US politics these days, that means pretty radical.

[Red Dreams]

Originally Posted by spinoza

By whom?

I am refering to 'pac' money..........