Senator Obama - A Moderate?

[GO CATS]

This is the wrong thread for it, but I think you're wrong.

 

 

 

It is reminiscent of Kerry's campaign where he failed to articulate specifics of his policies and objectives. Kerry ran as "not Bush" rather than "change", but it is interesting to see Obama have such appeal and support. It will also be interesting to see if Obama can sustain his transcendent appeal or at least articulate how he will change Washington.

 

Wrong thread for it?

[GO CATS]

I agree that Obama is trying to run his campaign as a transcendentalist but I do not believe that anybody can be elected without showing some basic command of the issues. Obama seems to stick his foot in his mouth whenever he wanders away from the text on his teleprompters.

 

I believe that Patches O'Houlihan is the brains behind Obama's campaign. Remember the five Ds, Barry, "Dodge, duck, dip, dive and dodge!" Wait until McCain starts throwing some wrenches Obama's way.

 

Obama does have the tendency to put his foot in his mouth but John McCain has had some trouble as well, remember when John McCain confused Shiites and Sunnis on multiple occasions among other goofs. The 100 year war bit will hurt McCain as well. Remember I am a undicided voter at this point although I do lean Obama, I just think to many people are wearing rose colared glasses when it comes to McCain and this election.

[Birdsfan]

If Obama is an ultra liberal, where do you place Dennis Kucinich, Barbra Boxer, Michael Moore and others that make Obama look conservative?

Hell, maybe?

[PepRock01]

Obama's record and policy objectives would classify him as a liberal of the American genus, but he's been campaigning on the platform a transcendentalist. He's found the most success in advocating the idea of "change" and systemic reform in Washington. I've found his policy discussions to be the weakest point of his candidacy. His challenge this fall will be to continue to idea of "change" without butting heads with McCain over the nuts and bolts of policy. If McCain can turn the election from that of Obama's transcendentalism to his specific policies then, I think, it would spell defeat for Obama.

 

 

I tend to agree, which is one of the things that is very telling in how he conducted his primary campaign as well. Once it looked like he had the upper hand he did nothing where he had to confront Hillary on anything directly. He is running on a transcendental platform of "change" that is appealing to the uninformed masses who think the anyone with an ® next to their name is a repeat of Bush. I do hope that McCain hits and hits hard on policy and the important details of the presidency because Obama truly concerns me. I really wish Hillary had a better shot at the nomination because I feel that she is a much better prospect for president than Obama. I prefer McCain over both, but if the election was between McCain and Hillary I would be far less concerned.

[02Ram54]

Hell, maybe?

Kinda not cool.

[GO CATS]

Hell, maybe?

 

:creepy:

[Habib]

Wrong thread for it?

 

Try the McCain thread.

[Run To State]

Hell, maybe?

:lol: :lol: :lol:

[shooter]

Arguing about who is a more liberal Senator, Boxer or Obama, is a bit like arguing who is better basketball player, Kobe or Lebron. Even if there is an objective answer to the question, it does not change the essential judgement that Kobe and Lebron are extremely good basketball players or that Boxer and Obama are extremely liberal Senators.

[Birdsfan]

Kinda not cool.

That's what I hear. :lol::fire:

[GO CATS]

That's what I hear. :lol::fire:

 

There is a place in hell for judgers as well!

[TheBurnOut]

Hell, maybe?

 

Dude, I like agree with you completely, man.

 

There is a place in hell for judgers as well!

 

Dude, I may not understand, but you said, "How about judging a candidate on the issues instead of things like churches and friends.", then man I think you got upset because the Birdsman disagreed with your opinion. Man, if you are going to talk politics, you should prepare for differing opinions, man, because all these cool dudes see things differently, man.

 

Dude, I am confused, man. You say "There is a place in hell for judgers as well", but you tell us to "judge a candidate on the issues". I guess we are all riding the same bus together then, man.

[Birdsfan]

There is a place in hell for judgers as well!

Actually, if you'll look back at my quote, you'll see that I was just answering for Run to State. :cool:

[Birdsfan]

Dude, I may not understand, but you said, "How about judging a candidate on the issues instead of things like churches and friends.", then man I think you got upset because the Birdsman disagreed with your opinion. Man, if you are going to talk politics, you should prepare for differing opinions, man, because all these cool dudes see things differently, man.

 

Dude, I am confused, man. You say "There is a place in hell for judgers as well", but you tell us to "judge a candidate on the issues". I guess we are all riding the same bus together then, man.

Dude, how about let's lose the Spicoli bit, so that our next post like that doesn't have to be deleted. :irked:

[the mathemagician]

I have to admit, I was impressed by those odds that you posted on McCain's prospective running mates. I had to Google one or two of people you listed to refresh my memory. I did not even realize Phil Gramm was still alive. So, I have no reason to question your conservative credentials. BTW, did you contact that guy who posted your list on his website? I am looking forward to your updates to the list. :thumb:

 

 

No need to go there again.