Forums dot lukpac.org

A place to discuss music and Mallard Fillmore
It is currently Sun Feb 18, 2018 5:08 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 9:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 7:08 pm
Posts: 7
Location: British Columbia
Image
As a Canadian looking in from the outside, and having a decent idea of who's in the race to run the World's most powerful economy... I'm reading Barak Obama's second book: The Audacity of Hope - and like what I have learned of the man thus far. IMO - he appears to offer the American people their best chance to shake off the slime of Bush and Co.

Any opinions from Americans on the new black hope?

Andrew D.
www.cdnav.com

_________________
"It's difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary or ego depends on him not understanding it."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 1:56 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2004 12:02 am
Posts: 235
I don't know a lot about him. He seems intelligent from what little I've read. But he has no chance of winning. Zero. I'm sure the GOP is just drooling about the prospects of using his name, race, and overseas childhood against him.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2007 10:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2003 4:19 pm
Posts: 1615
Meh.

_________________
"I recommend that you delete the Rancid Snakepit" - Grant


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2007 4:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 8:58 am
Posts: 333
Location: Parma, OH
czeskleba wrote:
I don't know a lot about him. He seems intelligent from what little I've read. But he has no chance of winning. Zero.


To be honest, I don't think Hillary does either. Regardless of how she polls with the left, she's just too polarizing a figure with the rest of middle America (i.e. those Midwest swing states that still matter + Florida). I'd almost go as far to say that Obama's personal charm and perception as an outsider might carry more weight with the *overall* electorate (save for the True-Believer righties or outright racists) than Hillary's calculated persona. I truly believe, electorally speaking, that Al Gore is still the best (currently) untapped wildcard. If anything, his stock has only risen since 2000 for a variety of reasons. Some of his own doing, and some due to his sitting bumbling foe from that election.

Truthfully...I'm really hoping that Gore does decide to run. IMO, he's still our best shot to beat an ever-increasing, fragmented and disillusioned conservative base. As a card-carrying leftie, he still appeals to me where it matters most - even if he isn't a textbook liberal on every issue.

Dave Modny


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Mar 18, 2007 2:46 pm 
Offline
Sellout
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2003 8:15 pm
Posts: 2209
Does anybody else dislike the sheer earliness of this contest?

_________________
-------------
"Fuckin' Koreans" - Reno 911


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Mar 18, 2007 9:05 pm 
Offline
Top Dog and Sellout
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 11:51 pm
Posts: 4584
Location: Madison, WI
Xenu wrote:
Does anybody else dislike the sheer earliness of this contest?


Can't remember where it was, but I recently read something about how early things are shaping up this time around. And stuff that's big news today will likely be forgotten in a few months, not to mention by the time of the election.

As far as Obama goes, I honestly don't know a lot about his stands on various issues, but I could have sworn I read something in the last six months that pretty much said he wasn't any great liberal shakes. At this point, neither he nor Clinton interest me that much. Not that I wouldn't vote for them if I had to, but they don't excite me.

Not sure if it will happen, but I think I'm with DRM on Gore. There was a pretty detailed piece in Rolling Stone a few months ago that made a pretty solid case for his running. It also pointed out that he could come into the race late in the game, avoid the early bickering, and still come out on top.

_________________
"I know because it is impossible for a tape to hold the compression levels of these treble boosted MFSL's like Something/Anything. The metal particulate on the tape would shatter and all you'd hear is distortion if even that." - VD


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 8:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2004 12:02 am
Posts: 235
David R. Modny wrote:
To be honest, I don't think Hillary does either.


Yeah, I certainly don't think Hillary has a chance either. She has been far too effectively demonized by talk radio for too many years. Middle America believes she is Queen Liberal despite her being one of the most conservative Dems in the field. And she really just lacks the charm and personal charisma to overcome that kind of demonization in the way her husband could. This is aside from the whole issue of being a woman and a senator, both of which are handicaps. And I think her Iraq stance is really going to hurt her with mainstream-to-liberal Dems. I would agree with you that Obama probably has a slightly better chance, but neither of them could realistically win unless the GOP nominates someone like Ann Coulter. It's disenheartening that two unelectable candidates are the frontrunners, although it is so early I guess being the frontrunner now means little.

Gore, well... I like his stance on most issues, but I am concerned about his woodenness and campaign abilities. The fact that he was not able to decisively beat a candidate as weak as W in 2000 is telling, especially given that he had the Clinton record to run on. And I'm concerned that for middle America he now has the taint of "loser" on him. It's been 40 years since either party has given a losing candidate a second chance at a Presidential nomination. Out of the existing field, Bill Richardson seems the most viable candidate, but I wouldn't mind if someone else entered the race.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2007 11:31 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 8:58 am
Posts: 333
Location: Parma, OH
czeskleba wrote:


Gore, well... I like his stance on most issues, but I am concerned about his woodenness and campaign abilities. The fact that he was not able to decisively beat a candidate as weak as W in 2000 is telling, especially given that he had the Clinton record to run on. And I'm concerned that for middle America he now has the taint of "loser" on him. It's been 40 years since either party has given a losing candidate a second chance at a Presidential nomination. Out of the existing field, Bill Richardson seems the most viable candidate, but I wouldn't mind if someone else entered the race.



My feeling is that Gore could be the exception to that rule. By capturing the popular vote, and having the election decided the way it was, many people still think of him as the real winner who fought valiantly until the end, only to have the election snatched away by the partisan courts. Furthermore, he gave that heartfelt concession speech that warmed the hearts of the same soccer moms who previously were "frightened" by the mere sight of him pounding his fist into his hand during the debates. The fact that he's successfully yucking it up at the Oscars and on SNL, while slowly and deliberately cultivating a rock star persona with his environmental work, all adds up to the humanizing factor and image makeover that he sorely needed. These days, he looks positively magnetic compared to someone like, say, John Kerry. Maybe not completely immune from the usual hit and run tactics of the Freepers, but definitely stronger than he was 8 years ago. Finally, the sheer ineptitude of Bush, coupled with the now obvious puppet relationship of the Rove/Cheney---->Bush model, only helps his standing in people's minds as to who the real piece of "wood" actually was. Does he pander to the right a bit? Probably. But, he does have his feet grounded in enough progressive issues -- and the financial ways and means to actually run a decent campaign -- to appeal to me.

Also, in my opinion, it was really Gore's not-so-subtle rejection of Clinton's endorsement (and wholesale legacy) during the campaign season that cost him the election. Had he let Clinton stump for him in his home state of Tennessee, that alone probably would have pushed him over the hump. Again I feel, electoral vote-wise, he'd only gain ground this time around in those 10-12 states that actually matter.


Speaking of dark horse candidates, there is one on the other side of the aisle that truly has me scared - (fmr.) Sen. Fred Thompson.

He's got all the makings of someone that the electorate could latch on to. 1) He's a hard core social rightie. Just the kind of conservative messiah that the Fundies and such are looking for to help deliver them. 2) He presents himself as a pragmatic Everyman. That good 'ol boy mentality that always sits well with the more moderate folks, regardless of his or their stance on key issues (e.g. the war). 3) Most importantly, feeding into our twisted celebrity culture, he's a recognizable face...an actor. The type of guy that appeals to a certain kind of lazy "independent" voter. Folks with no real ideology of their own, or knowledge of which ideology belongs to which candidate, yet pliable enough to vote for the "tough guy" they remember from some Grisham adaptation or TV's Law and Order. The kind of voter, as recent polls would have us believe, that claims to value "character" more than a political stance. People weaned on a diet of reality TV and often immune to the distinction of fact vs. fiction.

As far as I'm concerned, he's a real political snake. Be very afraid if he decides to run. He could be a wild card.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 07, 2009 1:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 7:54 pm
Posts: 736
bump


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Sat Feb 07, 2009 2:23 pm 
Offline
Top Dog and Sellout
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 11:51 pm
Posts: 4584
Location: Madison, WI
czeskleba wrote:
I don't know a lot about him. He seems intelligent from what little I've read. But he has no chance of winning. Zero.


Hehe.

_________________
"I know because it is impossible for a tape to hold the compression levels of these treble boosted MFSL's like Something/Anything. The metal particulate on the tape would shatter and all you'd hear is distortion if even that." - VD


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 3:38 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2004 12:02 am
Posts: 235
When you're a pessimist you're always either right or pleasantly surprised.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group