The Liberal Thread #2 - No Debate Please

[JARNJ3]

So you're ok with her essentially calling Obama chicken for not debating for the 19th time?

Yes. Does that make me a bad person? I think that issue is soooooo overblown.

 

[punkin]

Should Obama win the nom - its going to take me some time to come to terms with that. I just don't "like" him. I think he's all words and no action (in his Federal career). Others, including yourself - say I'm wrong. I just don't see it.

That being said - I probably will hold my nose and vote for him and hope he wins (if only to save the Supreme Court). I still fear what the Republicans will do to him in the general election. The Clintons have gone easy on him - in my opinion.

You know, I don't dislike him. He seems like a very nice guy and an extremely gifted speaker. I just think that Clinton is a better candidate in every way that I consider important.

 

[Honu]

Yes. Does that make me a bad person? I think that issue is soooooo overblown.

No. HRC has made some really bad decisions in this campaign though, that honestly don't speak well of her management skills.

If you're going to go negative, you need to actually have something that people will react to. Not debating her for the 19th time is hardly controversial and it makes HRC look desperate and whiny for not getting her way. Trying to reinstate the delegates also looks desperate. IMO that is why her numbers are dropping off. People don't admire someone they think will do anything to win.

 

[wvrevy]

Exactly - I didn't know what to respond to wvrevy's reply to me - but this represents my thoughts as well.

wvrevy - no offense - I just don't think we're likely to change each other's minds - I think we're also coming from different places.

I happen to like Senator Clinton a lot. She is my choice for president. There really isn't anything anyone can say to make me change my mind. So I probably should refrain from trying to change yours or anyone elses!

Should Obama win the nom - its going to take me some time to come to terms with that. I just don't "like" him. I think he's all words and no action (in his Federal career). Others, including yourself - say I'm wrong. I just don't see it.

That being said - I probably will hold my nose and vote for him and hope he wins (if only to save the Supreme Court). I still fear what the Republicans will do to him in the general election. The Clintons have gone easy on him - in my opinion.

1 - I answered the question above. I simply expect her to fight for the nomination, but to fight CLEANLY.

2 - I'm not trying to change your mind. But not everyone that might be reading this has already made UP their minds. I want them to know the facts, not believe attack ads and other nonsense.

3 - To wit, this nonsense about Obama being all talk. It simply isn't true. Over the length of his career - on ALL levels, which is a longer record of public service than Hillary's - he has done the things he said he would do. The "lacks experience" stuff is complete bunk. As for personal likes and dislikes, there is nothing anyone can do about that.

4 - Do the Clinton's have a history of going easy on anyone? Has it occurred to you that it's just tough to attack someone that doesn't hide things like past drug use?

 

[punkin]

3 - To wit, this nonsense about Obama being all talk. It simply isn't true. Over the length of his career - on ALL levels, which is a longer record of public service than Hillary's - he has done the things he said he would do. The "lacks experience" stuff is complete bunk. As for personal likes and dislikes, there is nothing anyone can do about that.

Barak has not been very forthcoming about his exact goals and the steps he plans to take to reach them. Change and Hope are all very well, but I really think Hillary's plans are a lot more fleshed out.

 

[wvrevy]

Barak has not been very forthcoming about his exact goals and the steps he plans to take to reach them. Change and Hope are all very well, but I really think Hillary's plans are a lot more fleshed out.

And see, that is simply wrong. Gus plans are easily accessible through his website, and he has repeatedly outlined things duerung the debates. All of that information is out there and very easy to find, so I can't understand how this talking point isn't dead yet.

 

[punkin]

And see, that is simply wrong. Gus plans are easily accessible through his website, and he has repeatedly outlined things duerung the debates. All of that information is out there and very easy to find, so I can't understand how this talking point isn't dead yet.

You can tell me all you want that "that is simply wrong" but based on my research, I find his plans vague. That is my opinion and not a talking point.

 

[wvrevy]

You can tell me all you want that "that is simply wrong" but based on my research, I find his plans vague. That is my opinion and not a talking point.

In what way is his health care plan, for example, more vague than hers?

 

[Laugh O. Grams]

You can tell me all you want that "that is simply wrong" but based on my research, I find his plans vague. That is my opinion and not a talking point.

If you're truly interested in seeing Obama's plans for everything from education to the economy. I'll take the time to go to his website and paste all the links to his fact sheets in every incredibly coma inducing detail. I know that some people are having troubling finding them in full. Just give me the word...

 

[DISUNC]

You're proud of the negative ad tactics?

hate to tell ya, but Obama is not excatly a in misleading ads!!

Check out

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/theyve_got_you_covered.html

 

[lilyv]

Still waiting for Hillary's tax returns. Any reasonable explanation of why they are being withheld?

 

[MassJester]

Still waiting for Hillary's tax returns. Any reasonable explanation of why they are being withheld?

Just a guess, but maybe they haven't been completed yet?

 

[DISUNC]

Still waiting for Hillary's tax returns. Any reasonable explanation of why they are being withheld?

She dont have too! Obama is the ONLY one calling for them. She says she will release them if she becomes the nominee!

 

[lilyv]

Just a guess, but maybe they haven't been completed yet?

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/15/opinion/15fri1.html?em&ex=1203224400&en=81939ea581d561d4&ei=5087

Of the leading contenders, so far, only Senator Barack Obama has released his full income-tax returns — a level of disclosure once routine for candidates after the political corruption of Watergate.
.....Release of the tax returns should not be made conditional on winning the nomination, as Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton has made it. Both Senator John McCain, the Republican front-runner, and she owe it to their parties and to voters to promptly make available their Internal Revenue Service filings, and to respond to any questions about them.
.....The reluctance of Mrs. Clinton and Mr. McCain to reveal more about their finances ill-serves voters and the nominating process of both parties. It also sets a terrible precedent for future campaigns for important posts at the national and state level.


I am dismayed that Senators McCain and Clinton have established the exact same policy.

 

[Planogirl]

When will some of you Obama supporters accept that not everyone is going to like him as much as you do? If I'm misreading some of these posts I apologize but they come off sounding like some of you are determined to turn everyone against Hillary and that just isn't possible IMO. We all have our viewpoints and our own way of interpreting things and opinions will vary even when it comes to Obama.

I will also vote for him when push comes to shove but not with the enthusiasm I see from some. I don't believe that that will change.

 

[Laugh O. Grams]

When will some of you Obama supporters accept that not everyone is going to like him as much as you do? If I'm misreading some of these posts I apologize but they come off sounding like some of you are determined to turn everyone against Hillary and that just isn't possible IMO. We all have our viewpoints and our own way of interpreting things and opinions will vary even when it comes to Obama.

I will also vote for him when push comes to shove but not with the enthusiasm I see from some. I don't believe that that will change.

I can easily see why so many like Clinton for president and would proudly vote for her in the general election. I simply like Obama a bit better. I don't understand why so many are getting so personal. Either way, we have two fine candidates and both will bring a change in policy to Washington come 2009. I just believe that Obama will also bring a change in politics that we desperately need as a nation that Hillary, with her long history inside the beltway, simply cannot.

 

[Planogirl]

I can easily see why so many like Clinton for president and would proudly vote for her in the general election. I simply like Obama a bit better. I don't understand why so many are getting so personal. Either way, we have two fine candidates and both will bring a change in policy to Washington come 2009. I just believe that Obama will also bring a change in politics that we desperately need as a nation that Hillary, with her long history inside the beltway, simply cannot.

I don't see the reason for the personal bit either. I like Hillary better and you like Obama better. I won't try to change your mind but will respect that you've made a different choice. It's all good (or at least should be).

 

[Laura]

I don't see the reason for the personal bit either. I like Hillary better and you like Obama better. I won't try to change your mind but will respect that you've made a different choice. It's all good (or at least should be).

They're both good choices, they're both good candidates and they both would make great Presidents.

 

[wvrevy]

hate to tell ya, but Obama is not excatly a in misleading ads!!

Check out

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/theyve_got_you_covered.html

Hmmm...I really want to make a comment about arguing semantics with a Clinton, but must refrain.

From the article: ""I don't know of anyone who studies this issue that would consider his plan to be universal coverage. You might call it universal access to coverage ... but the distinction Clinton is drawing here is correct."

Again - and I seem to be pointing this out on several threads today - the difference is that Obama's plan offers everyone the opportunity to have coverage, while Hillary's forces it on everyone. But the real difference is that his plan is achievable in today's political environment. Hers simply isn't.

I can easily see why so many like Clinton for president and would proudly vote for her in the general election. I simply like Obama a bit better. I don't understand why so many are getting so personal. Either way, we have two fine candidates and both will bring a change in policy to Washington come 2009. I just believe that Obama will also bring a change in politics that we desperately need as a nation that Hillary, with her long history inside the beltway, simply cannot.

There is nothing "personal" about pointing out differences in the two candidates, and in my opinion, the continuing "win at all costs" attitude from Hillary's campaign combined with the "only the states we've won really matter" comments from her staff are not only detrimental to the party but a crucial difference between them.

 

[wvrevy]

They're both good choices, they're both good candidates and they both would make great Presidents.

See, I see this as another difference. I think one would make a very good president.

The other could be a great one.