colin powell is voting for barack obama - Page 2 - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

mary · 10-19-2008, 08:04 PM

Quote:

Give Obama his 8 (maybe 4, probably 8) and the pendelum will have swung back the other way.

This part I totally agree with. It wasn't four years ago that people were declaring the Democrat party to be dead too.

jthig32 · 10-19-2008, 08:06 PM

And Chum was probably right there, toasting his republican mates and declaring the demise of the Dems.

chumdawg · 10-19-2008, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

As to Chum, I never said he didn't give reasons. What I said was the bulk of his reasons were based more on negatives against his own party than anything else. And I stand by that

He did give reasons why he is voting for Obama. I can't imagine why you are ignoring those.

But to play your game, even if Powell's vote was strictly an inidictment of his own party, why does that hold less sway with you? This is a Republican--and an extremely well respected one, at that, a guy who has served in a Republican administration--who is telling you that the Republicans have it all wrong these days.

What would it take for you to say: "You know, I've always identified as a Republican, but these guys don't know their ass from a hole in the ground."

What would it take?

jthig32 · 10-19-2008, 08:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

He did give reasons why he is voting for Obama. I can't imagine why you are ignoring those.

But to play your game, even if Powell's vote was strictly an inidictment of his own party, why does that hold less sway with you? This is a Republican--and an extremely well respected one, at that, a guy who has served in a Republican administration--who is telling you that the Republicans have it all wrong these days.

What would it take for you to say: "You know, I've always identified as a Republican, but these guys don't know their ass from a hole in the ground."

What would it take?

It would take that actually being the case.

chumdawg · 10-19-2008, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

It would take that actually being the case.

Welcome to 2008, brutha.

chumdawg · 10-19-2008, 08:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

And Chum was probably right there, toasting his republican mates and declaring the demise of the Dems.

I did that in 1994, when the Dems were indeed dead, and Newt ushered in a Republican congress.

The pendulum has swung. Republicans are way out of style. There are three factions to the Republican party. One is the business conservatives, who prefer low taxes and no regulation. One is the "neo-con" militant faction, who prefers to spread American supremacy abroad. The third is the social conservatives, who want God and Jesus to rule this world.

It's a fractured party, which is why it will lose ignominiously in a couple weeks. The party itself can't figure out what it stands for, and people at large don't like much of anything it stands for.

That's how you fade into oblivion, and that's why the great majority of Republican candidates will lose their races this fall.

jthig32 · 10-19-2008, 08:43 PM

Fade into oblivion...until the next pendulum swing.

chumdawg · 10-19-2008, 08:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

Fade into oblivion...until the next pendulum swing.

It can take thirty years.

Mavdog · 10-19-2008, 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

I did that in 1994, when the Dems were indeed dead, and Newt ushered in a Republican congress.

The pendulum has swung. Republicans are way out of style. There are three factions to the Republican party. One is the business conservatives, who prefer low taxes and no regulation. One is the "neo-con" militant faction, who prefers to spread American supremacy abroad. The third is the social conservatives, who want God and Jesus to rule this world.

It's a fractured party, which is why it will lose ignominiously in a couple weeks. The party itself can't figure out what it stands for, and people at large don't like much of anything it stands for.

That's how you fade into oblivion, and that's why the great majority of Republican candidates will lose their races this fall.

as samuel clements siad, "reports of my death are greatly exaggerated".

the republican party will learn from their expected defeat this election, and just like the democrat party did in 1992 it will find a platform and candidate that will be competitive.

it may not be 2012, more than likely 2016, but it will put a ticket that better reflects the desires of the electorate.

chumdawg · 10-19-2008, 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mavdog

it may not be 2012, more than likely 2016, but it will put a ticket that better reflects the desires of the electorate.

I'll believe that the Republican party shakes off its far-right wing when I see it.

Murphy3 · 10-19-2008, 09:04 PM

It truly is a shame that so few people will be voting because they actually like a candidate... That truly is the sad thing. It is so easy to find reasons why someone isn't voting for McCain...and why someone isn't voting for Obama. It just sucks that this is the third presidential election in a row where there hasn't been a candidate worth voting for.

fluid.forty.one · 10-19-2008, 09:05 PM

it's not nearly as bad as it was in 2004 murph

chumdawg · 10-19-2008, 09:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Murphy3

It truly is a shame that so few people will be voting because they actually like a candidate....

You are way, way wrong on this one.

Murphy3 · 10-19-2008, 09:38 PM

No, I'm not. I realize that you're trying to justify your vote.. but neither candidate should be considered a strong candidate at all. If the democrats had a strong candidate, this thing would have been over as soon as the candidates were decided.

But, people are unsure of Obama at best.... The one thing that they are sure about is that he's not a Republican. The US is in a sorry position if this is the main calling card of a candidate.. the one reason why he will be elected is simply because he's not a Republican.. No, it's not because he's well liked.. sure, some like him. But, many with no party affiliation will be voting for him simply because they want change. You know that's true. You know that the reason why he'll win this election is because of that. Everyone knows this. He's not winning a huge percentage of people over. All he's had to do is not lose it. But hell, his background is so spotty that even that is iffy.

birdsanctuary · 10-19-2008, 09:38 PM

Can McCain get Tiger Woods or Michael Jordan to make a public endorsement...

or are they going to vote purely on the basis of race as well?

chumdawg · 10-19-2008, 09:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Murphy3

No, I'm not. I realize that you're trying to justify your vote.. but neither candidate should be considered a strong candidate at all. If the democrats had a strong candidate, this thing would have been over as soon as the candidates were decided.

But, people are unsure of Obama at best.... The one thing that they are sure about is that he's not a Republican. The US is in a sorry position if this is the main calling card of a candidate.. the one reason why he will be elected is simply because he's not a Republican.. No, it's not because he's well liked.. sure, some like him. But, many with no party affiliation will be voting for him simply because they want change. You know that's true. You know that the reason why he'll win this election is because of that. Everyone knows this. He's not winning a huge percentage of people over. All he's had to do is not lose it. But hell, his background is so spotty that even that is iffy.

I'd reckon that this attitude is exactly why the Republicans will lose disgracefully on November 4.

He IS a strong canddiate. Pretend that he's not all you want, and watch your congressional seats go to the other side.

fluid.forty.one · 10-19-2008, 09:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Murphy3

No, I'm not. I realize that you're trying to justify your vote.. but neither candidate should be considered a strong candidate at all. If the democrats had a strong candidate, this thing would have been over as soon as the candidates were decided.

just because people "shouldn't" think he's strong, doesn't mean they don't. There are a TON of people who love Obama... regardless of if you think they should or not.

Or even if they don't have good reason to.. they still do.

chumdawg · 10-19-2008, 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fluid.forty.one

just because people "shouldn't" think he's strong, doesn't mean they don't. There are a TON of people who love Obama... regardless of if you think they should or not.

Or even if they don't have good reason to.. they still do.

In fact, I'd say that the sole reason for Obama's lead in the polls is that intellectual people like the idea of voting for another intellectual.

And they also like the idea of voting against an anti-intellectual.

Call the electorate stupid, in a Rove-ian fashion, all you like, but the fact remains. People are smarter than the far-right-wingers give them credit for.

Murphy3 · 10-19-2008, 10:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fluid.forty.one

just because people "shouldn't" think he's strong, doesn't mean they don't. There are a TON of people who love Obama... regardless of if you think they should or not.

Or even if they don't have good reason to.. they still do.

I'm not saying that no one loves obama... I'm saying that this is not the reason he'll win the election.. saying that it's because he's not a Republican.. and that if he were a decent candidate, this election would have been a slam dunk.

Murphy3 · 10-19-2008, 10:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

In fact, I'd say that the sole reason for Obama's lead in the polls is that intellectual people like the idea of voting for another intellectual.

And they also like the idea of voting against an anti-intellectual.

Call the electorate stupid, in a Rove-ian fashion, all you like, but the fact remains. People are smarter than the far-right-wingers give them credit for.

You're full of yourself. That is idiotic to say the least. There are intellectuals on both sides. I'm not a far right ringer.. I'm not saying that people are stupid.. I'm saying that the group that will swing the election are primarily voting for Obama because he's as far away from Bush as they can get... not because of what Obama has done. If it were based upon what Obama has done, ...most people wouldn't even know his name.

chumdawg · 10-19-2008, 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Murphy3

I'm not saying that no one loves obama... I'm saying that this is not the reason he'll win the election.. saying that it's because he's not a Republican.. and that if he were a decent candidate, this election would have been a slam dunk.

If there are no surprises, Murph, this *is* a slam dunk. Not sure what you are getting at.

Flacolaco · 10-19-2008, 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

It can take thirty years.

After the impending Carter-esque administration, it won't take that long.

chumdawg · 10-19-2008, 10:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Murphy3

I'm not saying that people are stupid.. I'm saying that the group that will swing the election are primarily voting for Obama because he's as far away from Bush as they can get.

How is this different from saying that intellectual people will decide this election?

rabbitproof · 10-20-2008, 12:05 AM

http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=Nh_c5bbvmqc

shoot em up.

Silk Smoov · 10-20-2008, 12:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aquaadverse

Powell wouldn't be a good choice for President. He is Robin, not Batman. He was a poor Secretary of State, and his conduct afterward made me lose a lot of respect for him. Bush brought him on board to appease Europe. Smart, yes. Classy? Not so much.

I am pretty sure he was extremely classy until he backed Obama. Please dont try to smear what Colin Powell has done, because then it wouild become even more clear on discounting the military career of McCain, which means he pretty much has NOTHING to offer America.

Colin decided to back who he felt the best candidate would be. His reasonings are his, just like yours or mine. He was a great Secretary of State and when he left it the Bush Administration took a turn for the worse. I am not saying he was the reason for any success in the first term for Bush, but he is very essential to the country. Bush played him and lied to get him onboard to back the war. This was horrible and Colin decided to part ways in a respectable way, while the Bush Admin try to downplay it and tried to smear his name.

Colin's military career by far is better than McCain, so please dont go there with he is a Robin. If so, then you just said McCain is the butler for Batman and Robin.

rabbitproof · 10-21-2008, 09:58 PM

eric schmidt is coming out for obama:
http://rawstory.com/news/afp/Google_..._10202008.html

92bDad · 10-22-2008, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Murphy3

It truly is a shame that so few people will be voting because they actually like a candidate... That truly is the sad thing. It is so easy to find reasons why someone isn't voting for McCain...and why someone isn't voting for Obama. It just sucks that this is the third presidential election in a row where there hasn't been a candidate worth voting for.

I agree and disagree.

I agree that in Obama and McCain we don't have a candidate that we want to vote for, but rather one that we want to vote against.

As for the last two elections, I was honored and proud to vote for George W. Bush. He inherited a pretty messed up late when the Clinton camp tried their best to destroy this nation. Then when 9/11 happened, he stood in leadership and has been focused with the War on Terror ever since.

National Security is the most important issue that any President will handle and I am proud of the way President Bush has lead this nation. Saddly he has had to fight the political left every step of the way. The left has been so focused on power that they forgot how to unite as a team of Americans...rathe the left has split America and worked hard to tarnish the great work from President Bush and his appointed and elected leaders.

I know that many will disagree...and that is your right. I for one, am proud that I voted for President Bush and did so because I believe and trust the man as our President.

Now our choices are for a Liberal Republican or a NEO-LIB Radical Socialist Democrat. Thus the lesser of two evils is McCain by a long shot...but again, it's a vote against the other rather than for the one.