The Liberal Thread #2 - No Debate Please

[MerryPoppins]

I know my example was "over the top". It was meant to be. But I was making a point. I think to a degree it does matter. In all honesty, I don't really care if it matters to you or not.

Okay, I'll buy it. I am in a way "judging" the spouse. But only in a limited way. I'm not about to tear them apart and find all their faults. I just want to see what type of personality and decide if I'd want him/her to represent my country as First Lady. Most candidates spouses have passed my "judgement" with flying colors. But I might someday decide not to vote for someone because I don't like the spouse...if that tips the scale between two candidates I like.

We all use our own checklist to choose the person we plan to vote for. Some just choose the person they like the most. Others go just by issues. Still others want someone with experience. Others care about what race. Or what sex. I could go on and on. Most will use a combination of the above. Some of these are non-issues for me and I would personally not use to make an important decision. Many I personally find "wrong" or even disgusting. But there is no one way to decide how to vote. We're free to decide in the way that works for each of us, personally.

So let's agree to disagree. We won't change each other's minds. You use your methods and I'll use mine. We'll both be happy.

 

[wvrevy]

Actually, I've been married 20 years. I am not President of the United States. Of course, my spouse has influence on me in regards to our personal life. But that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about public policy. We're talking about submitting budgets to Congress. We're about negotiating treaties. That's vastly different from our "hi honey, how was your day".

And I'll stand by my statement: In regards to public policy, you have no idea if the spouse is an active participant or a passive observer and neither do I.

We'll just have to agree to disagree, then. As president, your job pretty much is your life, and the number of people you can actually talk to about things going on - and trust not to run to the press or store things away for their book deal - can easily be counted on one hand. Your spouse would be one of those select few. I can't imagine a marriage - at least a good one - where you wouldn't discuss things - tough decisions - with your spouse, in that context. Not asking them to make decisions, obviously, but just using them as a sounding board.

 

[Reflection]

Just got online after watching the last 45 minutes of teh debate (I had to work late tonight). Anyone up for a 'debate analysis' from the Dis political team?

 

[eclectics]

I thought it went well for both of them, for the most part. No huge surprises and mostly civil. I'm a bit puzzled by Hillary's wrap up comments. It almost.... just almost sounded a teeny bit like a concession speech. Unless of course, I'm reading way too much into her wording.

 

[DISUNC]

agggggggggggggggg I missed the end! Stoopid work!

But from what I saw I really didnt learn anything new or different

 

[Reflection]

That was my thought too, Eclectics, that she is setting the stage for a possible concession.

I'm glad that the tone overall was civil and recognition from both of them that the party needs to pull it together to win in November.

 

[MassJester]

I thought it was unexciting.

 

[DISUNC]

I thought it was unexciting.

me too! Nothing new here.

I mentioned on the "clinton" thread....Obamas "W' moment, where he mispronounced "Taliban"...he said "Tal-E-ban" Took me a second to figure out what he meant!

 

[MassJester]

me too! Nothing new here.

I mentioned on the "clinton" thread....Obamas "W' moment, where he mispronounced "Taliban"...he said "Tal-E-ban" Took me a second to figure out what he meant!

What a scathing indictment on the debate if that's what you remember.

 

[DISUNC]

What a scathing indictment on the debate if that's what you remember.

Nah! I just missed some of it, I am at work. But just from what I saw...same old stuf!

 

[wvrevy]

Keith Olbermann is saying the same thing about it being a prelude to a concession. I don't know that I agree, but I'll cop to not being sure about that.

I will say that I'm happy to have been wrong about the tone, for the most part. Other than the one line - which she got loudly BOOED for !!! - she mostly took the high road. Oh, they both got in a few shots here and there. But she didn't attack the way I expected, and she should get credit for that!

 

[MassJester]

I don't see "concession" in Clinton's talk at all--looks to me if she's in it to win. There's no need for her to consider conceding before the next round.

 

[chris1gill]

Keith Olbermann is saying the same thing about it being a prelude to a concession. I don't know that I agree, but I'll cop to not being sure about that.

I will say that I'm happy to have been wrong about the tone, for the most part. Other than the one line - which she got loudly BOOED for !!! - she mostly took the high road. Oh, they both got in a few shots here and there. But she didn't attack the way I expected, and she should get credit for that!

I agree, I expected her to go negative and am glad she didn't.

Quite on the contrary, about 25 minutes after the debate her campaign manager sent out an email saying her last spiel at the end is why she had just taken the reign's and will be the next President.... So apparently there was no tone of concession meant if one thought they might have heard that

 

[eclectics]

I agree, I expected her to go negative and am glad she didn't.

Quite on the contrary, about 25 minutes after the debate her campaign manager sent out an email saying her last spiel at the end is why she had just taken the reign's and will be the next President....So apparently there was no tone of concession meant if one thought they might have heard that

Interesting though that her campaign found it neccessary to send out an email specifically about her closing remarks. I guess I wasn't the only one to think it.

 

[chris1gill]

Interesting though that her campaign found it neccessary to send out an email specifically about her closing remarks. I guess I wasn't the only one to think it.

What were you thinking? That it wasn't a concession or that she had just taken the reigns and would be the next President?

 

[JARNJ3]

I agree, I expected her to go negative and am glad she didn't.

Quite on the contrary, about 25 minutes after the debate her campaign manager sent out an email saying her last spiel at the end is why she had just taken the reign's and will be the next President.... So apparently there was no tone of concession meant if one thought they might have heard that

There's no way she's going to concede before the next two races are over. She has a legitimate chance at winning those.... maybe not by a large percent - but still ........ there's a shot. And if even if she ends up losing - right now she's being a great role model for the girls in this country - maybe one day - they can dream about becoming president........

I didn't see a concession as much as I saw - a "hey if I let me show that if I do end up losing this thing, I can support my party's nominee" moment.

Let's face it - for a while - a lot of her supporters will not run to Obama with open arms...... I think eventually they will get there - but not right away.....

 

[wvrevy]

Holy crap!

Hillary's big applause line at the end? Guess what? It's not her line!

John Edwards spoke almost those exact words in a debate back in October. Keith Olbermann just broke that little bit of news.

 

[chris1gill]

There's no way she's going to concede before the next two races are over. She has a legitimate chance at winning those.... maybe not by a large percent - but still ........ there's a shot. And if even if she ends up losing - right now she's being a great role model for the girls in this country - maybe one day - they can dream about becoming president........

I didn't see a concession as much as I saw - a "hey if I let me show that if I do end up losing this thing, I can support my party's nominee" moment.

Let's face it - for a while - a lot of her supporters will not run to Obama with open arms...... I think eventually they will get there - but not right away.....

I didn't hear any sort of concession there myself, but some of the commentators thought perhaps there was a hint of one...

I don't expect her to drop out before the Convention...

Apparently the RNC sent out six (or more) emails straight in a row slamming Obama, now that's interesting.... what's the RNC thinking when the pair's policies are so similar?

 

[chris1gill]

Holy crap!

Hillary's big applause line at the end? Guess what? It's not her line!

John Edwards spoke almost those exact words in a debate back in October. Keith Olbermann just broke that little bit of news.

Wait, which line? I must have missed his saying anything, I just turned him on...

You know, one thing they must both be fuzzy on as it wasn't mentioned, but I don't think Medicare for seniors is MANDATORY, yes, most if not all sign up, but it is NOT mandatory..... I know that was mentioned twice, and both times I thought to myself, that's not correct....

 

[MassJester]

Holy crap!

Hillary's big applause line at the end? Guess what? It's not her line!

John Edwards spoke almost those exact words in a debate back in October. Keith Olbermann just broke that little bit of news.

Oh good grief.