OBAMA IS THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE. HURRAY.

author=Erave link=topic=1254.msg19285#msg19285 date=1212858528
I doubt that people like that are less than 2%. At least I hope. The major problem for Obama is his foreign policy positions which just come off as extremely naive and weak. Also, all the disgruntled Clinton voters that are going to McCain.

His foreign policy comes off as naive? You know what sounds naive to me? A do nothing policy that says we pretend our enemies don't exist. We have tried this hardline stance with a country that is virtually right next door to us: Cuba. It's communist partner and strongest backer, the Soviet Union, fell in the late 1980's (in a lengthy process in which there WAS diplomacy involved. But... but... but! I thought Neo-cons didn't negotiate! Reagan, did you let down the faithful?!). But guess what? Cuba is still communist because we blacklisted them. They finally had a regime change (albeit a minor one), and they are starting to make small, but significant changes. Guess what? We still refuse to talk to them. This "preconditions" theory is B.S. That is what diplomacy is for.

Bottom line is if we're not talking and pushing our agenda, there can be no negotiations. Which means no concessions. Which means Iran and places like it have no reason to listen to us, and also means we get nothing in return. Our alternative? Have an angry, old Vice-President sit on a battlecruier outside of Iran and threaten them. Classy.

Doing nothing and expecting results, now THAT is naive.

(Also, it would be easier to name a list of Presidents who refuse to talk to rogue nations than list the great majority of them that have. Don't listen to this revisionist history that says we ignore those we don't like. It's BS and just an excuse to do whatever we want to do.)

author=Erave link=topic=1254.msg19328#msg19328 date=1212900350

author=harmonic link=topic=1254.msg19297#msg19297 date=1212862364
Good point, ST.

We need an internet voting system or something. Then Obama would win 99 to 1.

Press F5 and vote again!

Barack Obama 1,089,768,789 votes
John McCain 153

Now, those are the kind of stats i like to see. ;D

Did the front runners for Dems and Reps pick VP running mates (or whatever they call 'em down south o' the 49th)?

I don't even know why I asked because I don't recognize any of those names (except Hillary).

Also, when I scanned the list, Chuck Hagel looked like Criss Angel, and I thought that would be awesome.

author=Karsuman link=topic=1254.msg19376#msg19376 date=1212946046
Edit: Some names floating for Obama:

Joe Biden
Tom Daschle
Chris Dodd
Wesley Clark
Jim Webb
Chuck Hagel
Bill Richardson
Harry Reid
John Edwards
And, of course, Hillary Clinton.

THE STARSCREAM REPORT ON VEEP PROSPECTS

Tom Daschle has never been a serious choice. Despite being the sitting Senate majority leader in 2004, he lost his re-election bid to a Republican house member. He's an early Obama supporter (Obama's Senate staff was in part borrowed from Daschle's), but he's a poor campaigner and adds nothing to Obama record. Remember the last state to vote in the primaries, South Dakota? That is Daschle's home state and they were supposed to win by 15%. They lost. Cabinet position? Maybe. VP? Very unlikely.

Harry Reid also has no chance and is rarely even mentioned. Him and Pelosi are spearheading a congressional effort even less popular than Bush himself, if that were possible.

Chuck Hagel is a REPUBLICAN and is very unlikely to be the running mate. His is a strong Obama supporter, however and has been mentioned as a cabinet position a 'la Bill Cohen in the Clinton administration.

John Edwards doesn't add a whole lot to the ticket except being a white man. Their platforms are essentially identical. Edwards is also known as a poor campaigner and didn't even help Kerry carry his home state.

We all know about Clinton; I would prefer she was not on the ballot. (My wife is refusing to vote if Clinton is the VP nominee -- she's a lifetime Republican willing to cross the aisle for Obama otherwise.)

Jim Webb is considered a strong choice because of his heroic military background, his past life as a Republican under the Reagan administration and his record of bi-partisan ship. Virginia has two other top VP choices: Mark Warner, one of the most popular governors in VA history, who is running for the Senate currently, and his cherry-picked successor, Tim Kaine, the current governor. VA has a strange law where you cannot serve in consecutive terms. Pretty much all their major elected officials are Democrat now, which is why some folks think VA will swing to the Democrats in November (combined with Obama's great showing there).

Chris Dodd and Joe Biden are just really awesome old senators but I don't think they would help Obama much. Joe Biden has a lot of foreign policy experience, but I think we all know the only "foreign policy" Americans care about is military service. How crashing your plane in the middle of the enemy base is considered better foreign experience than years of diplomatic efforts, I'll never know. But them's the dice.

Bill Richardson would be one of my top choices. He's a really awesome governor from a western state who is a former Clinton supporter (though they call him Judas now). Him switching to Obama showed he has cajones even if he can't debate with a darn. He was the former U.S. ambassador to the U.N. and is routinely expected to negotiate with foreign nations, especially when hostages are involved. He was also Clinton's energy secretary and a pretty successful Congressman as well. Oh, and he's latino -- get out the minority vote!

My favorite pick, however, would be Wesley Clark. He is a pretty badass dude, and also the most decorated U.S. soldier since Dwight Eisenhower. We as wounded in battle several times I have been insured that, instead of crying, he roundhouse kicked some Vietnamese. He is the former Supreme Commander of the NATO forces. I mean, you have to be pretty awesome to get a title like Supreme Commander. Despite his military service, he is actually a smart guy -- he got his master's in Economics from Oxford and was a Rhodes Scholar. He was who I was supporting in 2004 but he got in too late to have much of an impact.

Other top-tier potentials Karsuman didn't mention:

Kathleen Sebelius, the popular Democratic governor from a very Republican Kansas state. Remember, the state where they want to teach creationism?

Janet Napolitano, another popular female Democratic governor who has done well in traditionally conservative Arizona. AZ's demographics have changed a lot in the past few years and she could even put McCain's home state into play.

Claire McCaskill, for some reason, is often speculated. She, like Hillary or Obama, is only a junior Senator and she doesn't have much political experience outside of local MO politics. She's also a bit of a ditz sometimes.

God I have no life.

John McCain should be vice president!

I love being an Aussie when I comes to this type of thing. We aren't pressured into voting and if we do screw up and get a bad PM, well, if they don't make us happy they won't last long.

And we only really have two candidates, as it were.

It is a historic year for American politics... ...

But I don't have that informed of an opinion on all this. I privately reveled a bit when Hill-dog finally caved in, maybe because I hate women, I don't know.

But between Obama and McCain (whose name merits a series of 22-minute action-packed television episodes, with car chases and explosions), I don't have a favorite. I will say this: the campaigns thus far only resemble politicking as usual, for all of this hoopla about times changing and signs of Aquarius and whatever.