PDA

View Full Version : Your Opinion...



sack316
02-08-2008, 12:15 AM
And this opinion is YOUR opinion on "Society", not your opinion on the matter itself but...

Do you (in your opinion)think our society is willing and ready to vote into office and African American or a female?

Now I don't really care about replies that say "well, the polls so far say_______". Yeah, we know what the numbers say... and then results come out different in the end. Nor do I need your personal stand on the matter... again we all pretty much know each others political beliefs on here. What I'm curious about is your view on our society, and whether or not you think it would be willing as a whole to "make history" as it were... whether that lines up with your belief is irrelevent here.

So my take is: probably not yet. No matter how wrong it may be, I think there are still enough people in our country who would simply not vote Hilary or Obama because of the two factors in question... and it's probably enough people to take away enough to cost either of them. Now I do think as the process continues, we (we meaning the country) will SAY we are ready for it... but in the end I don't think it will wind up that way. We've proven time and time again that we will cry out loud for a change, but in the end are still more comfortable with what we know. JMHO.

Sack

pooltchr
02-08-2008, 05:55 AM
While there are some in our country who will make their decision based on race or gender, I would like to think most voters would make their decision based on the actual qualifications of the candidate. There are always going to be a percentage who are blinded by partisan politics and personal bias. For the sake of our country, let's hope they are a small minority.
Steve

hondo
02-08-2008, 06:28 AM
I've asked the same question, Sack.
I guess we'll find out.
What amazes me is the depth of hate that Republicans have for Hilary. They literally start foaming at the mouth when her name is mentioned.
Kinda makes me want to vote for her despite my misgivings. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

eg8r
02-08-2008, 07:32 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Do you (in your opinion)think our society is willing and ready to vote into office and African American or a female? <hr /></blockquote> I think we are closer than we have ever been in the past.

eg8r

Deeman3
02-08-2008, 09:46 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote hondo:</font><hr> I've asked the same question, Sack.
I guess we'll find out.
What amazes me is the depth of hate that Republicans have for Hilary. They literally start foaming at the mouth when her name is mentioned.
Kinda makes me want to vote for her despite my misgivings. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue">Of course, the distrust of Her does not come only from the right as if that were true, she would be very eaisly swept into office.

I don't think it matters if America is ready for a woman President. I think we are. I just don't think we are ready for Hillary. I feel she will be very devisive and get nothing really done, despite a friendly congress. I do feel some of us are too harsh on judging her but, of course, that's a part of presidential politics, likeability and trust.

I think we are much more ready for an Obama type president, not that I would support his campaign. He has great communication's skills like Reagan, but not a lot of substance nor experience. It is still questionable how much experience matters.

I don't beleive, despite their yodeling, there has ever been an elected woman leader from the left. All I am aware of are from the right of the political spectrum. Again, the Nyfongian charges of people like Gayle that we won't elect a woman ignores our long standing respect and support for women like Thatcher and others.

It may be that, in the end, aside from older, bitter women in the Democratic party who may have actually burned their bras are the only deep supporters of a women who didn't really quite burn hers, only scortched it.

If like some claim, 70% of the country is opposed to republican policy, then the question is over and we will elect a rat if put forward especially if faith, service, security are really off the table now. If so, I will support that rat as well as I can and hope he/she has some success. </font color>

DickLeonard
02-08-2008, 10:38 AM
Deeman does experience matter I like to refer to a column author by my favorite columnist Maureen Dowd. When that subject was brought up her column pointed out the after 7 years in office George Bush was the most inexperienced person in Washington.

Obama is a quicker learner than George, any bookie would give you 100 to 1 on that.

If the blacks can pull the lever this time Obama in a landslide. Hilliary will be a little closer.

A Democratic Landslide and George's Presidential Library will be in a 4x8 U-Haul Storage Unit. Not even big enuff to play pool in. ####

Deeman3
02-08-2008, 10:50 AM
Dick,

I think experience may count in two areas. First, the ability to get things done by knowing the people and the avenues to move legislation. I will say Hillary and McCain both have that knowledge. Secondly, it may matter in the maturity to deal with difficult issues in a sense of what is best for America, rather than what will satisfy the electorate. It would be easy to want to be liked at the expense of the nation's security and ceed our long term security for short term likability in the world. See, the terrorists don't care if we like them, that gives them a very stretegic advantage over someone who needs to be politically correct.

Fran Crimi
02-08-2008, 01:10 PM
Yes. I think they are ready. The Baby Boomers were the forebarers of the equal rights movement and they are now approaching their senior years. There are still pockets of ignorant people who have race and gender prejudices, but for the most part, that is not the case.

Fran

catscradle
02-08-2008, 02:09 PM
In principal I'd say yes, but ...

Not this particular woman, her record speaks for itself. I'm not sure about this particular black. He has lots of charisma, but I think people will be leary of his relative inexperience.
In other words, I don't think these 2 are good test cases.

A black or a woman (which ever is running on the Dems ticket) will definitely get the electoral votes from my home state, the bluest of the blue, Massachusetts. If they don't win MA, then we've a long way to go before either can win.

wolfdancer
02-08-2008, 02:33 PM
the Nyfongian charges of people like Gayle
I hope that word fades out like being "Borked" has....
I also, despite the claims...think we aren't quite ready for a Golda Meir, or a Nelson Mandela....or a John McCain
I'd like to offer myself as a write-in candidate....

Gayle in MD
02-08-2008, 02:48 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I don't beleive, despite their yodeling, there has ever been an elected woman leader from the left. All I am aware of are from the right of the political spectrum. Again, the Nyfongian <font color="red">Nyfongian? Would you mind giving us a definition for this word? </font color> charges of people like Gayle that we won't elect a woman ignores our long standing respect and support for women like Thatcher and others. <font color="red"> Thatcher wasn't elected by Americans, however, I didn't say that Americans wouldn't elect a woman, I said that there are many men in this country who can't stand the idea of a woman running this country.

</font color>

It may be that, in the end, aside from older, bitter women in the Democratic party who may have actually burned their bras are the only deep supporters of a women who didn't really quite burn hers, only scortched it. <font color="red">A women who didn't quite burn hers? You have a real talent for misogenistic, incorrect language. Although you obviously think it worthwhile to spend your time trying to incite me by insulting women, over and over again, I might remind you that without women of a pioneering spirit, we might still be considered men's chattel, and still be fighting for the right to use birth control, and the right to vote. Chauvinism is easily detectable to women of the pioneering spirit, I can assure you.

It's clear to me, atleast, that the Republican base, would prefer a true master yodeller like Hickabee, mispelling intended, who can lay out a nice fried squirrel hoe down, between smashing up hard drive evidence, than a woman with a genius level IQ, who has earned honors in academics, supported her husband, overcome every obsticle, and raised a lovely daughter, who has made herself among the most admired of all the children of United States Presidents.
</font color>

If like some claim, <font color="red">If? </font color> 70% of the country is opposed to republican policy, then the question is over and we will elect a rat if put forward especially if faith, service, security are really off the table now. <font color="red">No, not faith, service and security. Just liars, thieves, and insane foreign policies. </font color> If so, I will support that rat as well as I can and hope he/she has some success.


<hr /></blockquote>

<font color="red">Given the mess your party has made of everything, that's reall big of ya. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif </font color>

Gayle in MD
02-08-2008, 02:57 PM
Dick,
Somehow the words library, and George Bush,seem a poor fit included in the same sentence. /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Maureen is right about George. Inside the Beltway he's nothing more than a joke. His display this morning was one for the books. He was swaying like he had mad cow's disease, throughout the long introduction before he began to murder the english language, yet again. Although there were no Arab men on his arm, his performance left one wondering if he had finally gone completely over the edge of sanity.

OMG, if we can survive this ill man for the rest of his term it will surely be a miracle! /ccboard/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

Deeman3
02-08-2008, 03:30 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
<font color="red">Nyfongian? Would you mind giving us a definition for this word? </font color>

Certainly, pre-convicting people by the use of politically trumped up evidence that is used to prosecute innocent people in the eyes of the public when they don't have enough real evidence to convict. (Duke Lacrosse Case 2007)
Liberals proudest moment.<font color="red">

Thatcher wasn't elected by Americans, however, I didn't say that Americans wouldn't elect a woman, I said that there are many men in this country who can't stand the idea of a woman running this country. <font color="blue">

I think you are foolish to beieve that American conservatives would not take her over any candidate we have runnning now. </font color>

</font color>

<font color="red"> I might remind you that without women of a pioneering spirit, we might still be considered men's chattel, and still be fighting for the right to use birth control, and the right to vote. Chauvinism is easily detectable to women of the pioneering spirit, I can assure you. <font color="blue">

I am proud of your pioneer days. I just don't think Hillary took the yoke of the plow, but allowed Bill to do the tilling NOTE: Only in a political sense, she's a crafty lawyer, unparralled investor and apparently an excellent mother. </font color>

It's clear to me, atleast, that the Republican base, would prefer a true master yodeller like Hickabee, mispelling intended, who can lay out a nice fried squirrel hoe down, between smashing up hard drive evidence,

<font color="blue"> This is, again, of course a really silly statement as Huckabee was not the choice of the Republican base, Mitt was. Christian Conservatives, of which I am not, are his base. You need to stop watching so much MSNBC and C-Span and pay more attention to what is really going on. </font color>

than a woman with a genius level IQ, who has earned honors in academics, supported her husband, overcome every obsticle, and raised a lovely daughter, who has made herself among the most admired of all the children of United States Presidents.
</font color>

<font color="blue">Oddly, I agree with much of that last statement but just not to the extent that she will be the best person for the country.... </font color>

If like some claim, <font color="red">If? </font color> 70% of the country is opposed to republican policy, then the question is over and we will elect a rat if put forward especially if faith, service, security are really off the table now. <font color="red">No, not faith, service and security. Just liars, thieves, and insane foreign policies. </font color> If so, I will support that rat as well as I can and hope he/she has some success.


<hr /></blockquote>

<font color="red">Given the mess your party has made of everything, that's reall big of ya. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif </font color> <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue"> Thank-you. I am glad you recognise my willingness to accept Hillary as my president if elected. If I was opposed to her election, then would not support her as president, I'd be a pretty low life as an American. Now, if I disagreed with her policy, I'd say so, but I hope respectfully. After all, I said she is devisive, not evil. </font color>

Gayle in MD
02-08-2008, 03:53 PM
[ QUOTE ]

Thank-you. I am glad you recognise my willingness to accept Hillary as my president if elected. If I was opposed to her election, then would not support her as president, I'd be a pretty low life as an American. Now, if I disagreed with her policy, I'd say so, but I hope respectfully. After all, I said she is devisive, not evil. <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="red">Right, probably about as respectful as your previous statements about Hillary.

To state that Hillary is devisive, is nothing more than parroting right wing fantasy. She has been in the Senate for seven years, and worked across the isle, winning the respect of both Republilcan and Democratic Senators, who have both recognized for being among the hardest working Senators in The Hill.

She is the ONLY Senator selected by the Pentagon, and the Military, to serve as an advisor in their quest to improve Pentagon/Military effectivity.

Hillary Clinton is consider an expert in the Middle East, and in foreign affairs, and has been acknowledged as such by both sides of the ilse.

Perhaps you should turn ON C-Span occasionally.

</font color>

[ QUOTE ]
This is, again, of course a really silly statement as Huckabee was not the choice of the Republican base, Mitt was. Christian Conservatives, of which I am not, are his base. You need to stop watching so much MSNBC and C-Span and pay more attention to what is really going on.
<hr /></blockquote>

<font color="red">There is no Conservative Base in the Republican Party. Conservative Republicans have left the party, and the base, is the Christian Coalition. The Conservatives of the Republican Party are among the authors who have been bashing the Republican Party, and George Bush, for the last five years. Perhaps you should turn on C-Span occasionally, or read a book or two. The term, Republican Conservative, is now an oxymoron.</font color>

Deeman3
02-08-2008, 04:02 PM
If what you say above is true, as I said, she will be swept into office almost unopposed. I happen to disagree and think there may even be somewhat of a contest in the election. Apparently, either all this is a vast right wing conspiracy from a party that you say, has abandoned Bush or there are core Democrats that have some problems with Hillary. All national poles indicate Obama beats McCain and all national poles say McCain beats Hillary. What is up with that? Are all the polls now controlled by Rush?

It's o.k. if you don't have real answer for that.

pooltchr
02-08-2008, 04:10 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr>
<font color="red">There is no Conservative Base in the Republican Party. Conservative Republicans have left the party, and the base, is the Christian Coalition. The Conservatives of the Republican Party are among the authors who have been bashing the Republican Party, and George Bush, for the last five years. Perhaps you should turn on C-Span occasionally, or read a book or two. The term, Republican Conservative, is now an oxymoron.</font color> <hr /></blockquote>

Wow! I actually agree with this statement! /ccboard/images/graemlins/shocked.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/shocked.gif
The Republican party has moved so far to the left in recent years that they no longer reflect conservative thinking. They spend money like Democrats, They tax like Democrats, and it looks like they are going to nominate a RINO to run for President. Even LWW has commented that the two parties have more in common now than they have differences. I believe more and more conservatives will leave the Republican party if this trend continues. Republicans must return to their conservative values, or I believe a strong 3rd party is going to emerge. I don't believe I am in the minority in thinking that the American people are being given some pretty lousy choices in the upcoming election.
Steve

Gayle in MD
02-08-2008, 04:14 PM
[ QUOTE ]
All national poles indicate Obama beats McCain and all national poles say McCain beats Hillary. What is up with that? Are all the polls now controlled by Rush?
<hr /></blockquote>

<font color="red">Looks like Rush's personal poll, of one, is the only one you're interested in. All polls chose Hillary as the best candidate in addressing our foreign affairs, and Iraq. Many other polls I have seen show her as the leading candidate. I hardly think Hillary could have won California, New York, Ma. New Hampshire and Florida, among others, if people thought of her as divisive and incompetent. You really should try to free yourself of the vast republican mythology. Try not to forget, No WMD's, No Connection to 9/11, No connection to Saddam, No Yellow Cake, No nuclear missiles, no nuclear aluminumn tubes, no rolling weapons factories, no misiles ready to hit the US in forty five minutes, in fact, absolutely no real reason to throw the inspector out, and invade the country.

Facts are facts. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif To subscribe to right wing polls, is a bit foolish, given that 30% of Republicans still think we found WMD's in Iraq, and the Saddam was involved in 9/11.</font color>

Gayle in MD
02-08-2008, 04:20 PM
Republicans have not moved to the left, they have moved to the extreme right, causing the Republican centrists, to leave the party, and join the Democratic and Independent parties.

The American People who have traditionally voted Democratic, are thrill over their candidates, hence many of them dream of their two frontrunners joining together in the same administration. It is the Republican Party which is whining over their poor choices within their own party, not the Democratic Party.

Left, btw, isn't what you think it is. Most of the Democratic Candidates were centrists.

SKennedy
02-08-2008, 04:40 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote sack316:</font><hr> And this opinion is YOUR opinion on "Society", not your opinion on the matter itself but...

Do you (in your opinion)think our society is willing and ready to vote into office and African American or a female?

Now I don't really care about replies that say "well, the polls so far say_______". Yeah, we know what the numbers say... and then results come out different in the end. Nor do I need your personal stand on the matter... again we all pretty much know each others political beliefs on here. What I'm curious about is your view on our society, and whether or not you think it would be willing as a whole to "make history" as it were... whether that lines up with your belief is irrelevent here.

So my take is: probably not yet. No matter how wrong it may be, I think there are still enough people in our country who would simply not vote Hilary or Obama because of the two factors in question... and it's probably enough people to take away enough to cost either of them. Now I do think as the process continues, we (we meaning the country) will SAY we are ready for it... but in the end I don't think it will wind up that way. We've proven time and time again that we will cry out loud for a change, but in the end are still more comfortable with what we know. JMHO.

Sack <hr /></blockquote>

Yes, I think our society is ready to vote for a black and/or woman President. I would! I would not vote for Hillary, but it has nothing to do with her being a woman. There are other women out there I would vote for.
I agree that there are some who will not vote for someone because of their gender or race, but I think they are a small minority. I vote based on issues and think most do likewise. Regardless, if Hillary wins the nomination and loses the general election, many wil claim she lost because we were not willing to vote for a woman.....likewise the same for Obama. If they lose it will be because of issues and how their party or they, as individuals, stand on those issues.
I think it would be truly great to have a woman or someone of a different racial background to become President because it shows what America is truly all about...opportunity! However, I don't want someone serving as President just because they are a woman or are black. And as I've stated before, as a Republican, if McCain gets the nomination, I may be voting for Obama before I vote for McCain. I could not vote for Hillary under any circumstances.
And while you did not ask for personal beliefs, I am part of society and I think many voters view this situation just as I do about gender or race. I don't care what gender you are or what color your skin is....I do care about your motivation, your love for this country, your opinions on issues, and your stance on what the future of this country should or could be...etc. These things trump gender and race. I think we are sick and tired of gender and race used as trump cards or being used against us, etc. I think that if Hillary or Obama lose the general election and it is blamed on race or gender, there will be a significant backlash from society. We are sick of hearing that we are racists, etc. when it is simply not true for the most part...there are always exceptions.

Deeman3
02-08-2008, 04:44 PM
You know as I do that these are not right wing polls. I was just asking fo you could explain this consistency in the polls. Of course, you can't.

The polls say Bush is down to 30% and the Congress is down to 22%. I don't think this poll was a Rush poll either but, as I have not seen or heard Rush in several years, I am not sure.

So, the polls you watch say that the election with Clinton vs. McCain is at 70/30 right? /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

SKennedy
02-08-2008, 04:52 PM
Hey Dee....this christian conservative did not prefer Huckabee. My preference has been Mitt for the last few weeks. The more I learned about Huckabee, the less I liked. And I think Huck's refusal to quit was simply his way of saying he is totally against a Mormon being President. I think Huck was completly selfish and his desire to be Pres is simply and completely self-centered.

McCain is a sell-out! Hillary I just don't trust! That means currently my choice is narrowed down to Obama or a write-in for Wolfie! Right now Wolf has the edge.

pooltchr
02-08-2008, 05:34 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> Republicans have not moved to the left, they have moved to the extreme right, causing the Republican centrists, to leave the party, and join the Democratic and Independent parties.

The American People who have traditionally voted Democratic, are thrill over their candidates, hence many of them dream of their two frontrunners joining together in the same administration. It is the Republican Party which is whining over their poor choices within their own party, not the Democratic Party.

Left, btw, isn't what you think it is. Most of the Democratic Candidates were centrists. <hr /></blockquote>

Well, for a brief moment, I thought you actually understood what was happening. This post tosses that idea in the trash.

1. McCain is NOT conservative
2. Republicans seem to be supporting McCain
3. Conservatives are fed up and are not supporting McCain.
4. Conservatives understand McCain is at best a Cererist, and at worst, a liberal with a Republican nametag.
Connect the dots.
Steve

Drop1
02-08-2008, 08:06 PM
I think we have no problems with Blacks,that look like Tiger Woods,or Obama. I don't think a Black that looks like Al Sharpton,or Justice Long Dong Clarence Thomas,would have a chance. Bush might have destroyed the myth of White supremacy,with his friable intellect,but he didn't destroy white supremacists. I think we can elect a woman,if she is white,and her opponent is a priapic nonagenarian,better suited to a play pen,than the Oval office. In politics,the first casualty is Truth.

sack316
02-09-2008, 01:12 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Drop1:</font><hr> I think we have no problems with Blacks,that look like Tiger Woods,or Obama. I don't think a Black that looks like Al Sharpton,or Justice Long Dong Clarence Thomas,would have a chance. Bush might have destroyed the myth of White supremacy,with his friable intellect,but he didn't destroy white supremacists. I think we can elect a woman,if she is white,and her opponent is a priapic nonagenarian,better suited to a play pen,than the Oval office. In politics,the first casualty is Truth. <hr /></blockquote>

Probably true. One thing that isn't brought up much (if at all) against Obama is that sadly, there will be many whites who feel he is "too black" and many blacks who will feel he is "too white". No I can't reference that to any outside source or give a link... all I got is these two ears and what they hear some people say. And IF he turns out to be the best candidate, then it would be truly sad for thinking like that to play a role in the matter.

Sack

Gayle in MD
02-09-2008, 07:52 AM
Every candidate for president has some core party members who do not support them.

May I say, regardless of how you, or anyone else tries to deny it, that sexism is still rampant in this country, and around the world. Just look at our own houses of Congress, and tell me that the women vs men numbers reflect our population.

Unequal pay in the work place, is not just some foolish notion dreamed up by Gayle in Maryland. The statistics on rape and murder, are not just a fantasy. The obvious onslaught of the media pundits, two of them from MSNBC have now been forced to apologize for sexist statements against Hillary Clinton.

While some here say they are unable to trust Hillary Clinton, they give no examples explaining their feelings, and since Obama shows virtually no real idfference in his platform, or values, to Hillary's, perhaps, just perhaps, some of those men who claim they would vote for a woman, just not this woman, would be wise to reflect on their recent statements in this thread.

Perhaps, one of you would be willing to give me an example of a woman you would vote for, who is not an opprtunist, (or a man in politics, who is not an opportunist) is not ambitious, has never made a mistake, or told a lie, ever, in his political career.

If one were to be honest, they would atleast admit the themselves, that the media coverage has been against Hillary, and in fact, in my lifetime, I have never witnessed such extreme sexism, and down right lies, told over and over, as I have in regards to coverage of this election.

I don't think racism is the problem it once was, in this country, but anyone who denies that sexism is not still a vast problem in America, and in the world, is living in a dream world. Additionally, while I may not approve, I am atleast realistic enough to accept that if we made monogamy a condition for a man to qualify as a candidate for president, and insisted on lie detector tests in advance of announcing, we'd have many more women running and many less men.

While I am all for private life remaining private, particularly in those issues which should remain between a man and his wife, I'm not stupid enough to make an issue over the whole boys will be boys, behavior. If we did, we could just burn all the history books, and deny the existence of all our former presidents, as in my studies, I have only found three or four who were undeniably faithful to their wives.

There have been several statements made on this thread which truly are sexist statements, and also in the media, it's just a shame that some men are so sexist, that they themselves apparently don't recognize their own sexist natures, or they just decide to deny them, along with all their other denials of reality. Atleast I am realistic enough to accpet that unfaithful husbands have been running this country from the start, and we'd have lost a number of great presidents had we banished them for their weaknesses.

I suppose that in a nutshell, one reason why I find the entire Republican platform to be so completely unaccpetable, is because it is always so completely unrealistic, and since the basis for good judgement and effective solutions always lies in ones ability to see things as they are, rather than how they think things should be, no Republican candidate since Barry Goldwater, has won my admiration.

I'm not into electing rock stars for president. Also, I do believe that women are more capable of juggling a whole range of issues at once, than men are, and also have more stamina to guard our country from the vast critical issues of threat which we fact at this time, with compassion, and firm convictions against the inhumane global problems which lie at the base of all human problems.

Without the cave woman, awake and able to keep the fires rolling after sex, you men would have been eaten alive long ago! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif Mother nature gave women the ability to be worn out, and wide awake at the same time. Please don't tell me you've never noticed that. /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

There is no candidate, IMO, who displays the stamina, intellect, and desire to work tirelessly to solve the problems this country is facing at this time. She probably won't win, but it WILL be because she is a woman, trying to win, after decades of dealing with sexist attacks from the right, and left, in the media. To deny that, is simply folly.

Gayle in Md.





Gayle in Md.

Gayle in MD
02-09-2008, 10:47 AM
[ QUOTE ]

Well, for a brief moment, I thought you actually understood what was happening. This post tosses that idea in the trash.

1. McCain is NOT conservative <font color="red">I didn't say he was. Try to follow this, he isn't extreme right, hence the divide in your party over voting for him. Your core, particularly, wich is your downfall, the religious core, does not accept McCain, or Romney, obviously. </font color>
2. Republicans seem to be supporting McCain <font color="red">He is the fron runner, is he not? </font color>
3. Conservatives are fed up and are not supporting McCain. <font color="red">Again, the conservatives have left the Republican Party. Can you read? </font color>
4. Conservatives understand McCain is at best a Cererist, and at worst, a liberal with a Republican nametag.
Connect the dots.

<font color="red">Re-read my post, and see if YOU can connect the dots. Are you ever capable of posting without insults and sarcasm, or is that just your posting style when your posting to a woman? /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif </font color>
Steve <hr /></blockquote>

pooltchr
02-09-2008, 11:26 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr>

May I say, regardless of how you, or anyone else tries to deny it, that sexism is still rampant in this country, and around the world.
<font color="red"> Yes it is, and you have demonstrated it quite well in your comments below. </font color>

While some here say they are unable to trust Hillary Clinton, they give no examples explaining their feelings,
<font color="red"> Whitewater...non-existant documents that mysteriously were found in the White House... </font color>

Additionally, while I may not approve, I am atleast realistic enough to accept that if we made monogamy a condition for a man to qualify as a candidate for president, and insisted on lie detector tests in advance of announcing, we'd have many more women running and many less men. <font color="red"> So all men cheat. Yet you don't even consider offering the same test to women. You might be surprised at the result if your litmus test were applied equally to men and women. If that isn't sexist, read on... </font color>


There have been several statements made on this thread which truly are sexist statements, and also in the media, it's just a shame that some men are so sexist, that they themselves apparently don't recognize their own sexist natures, or they just decide to deny them, along with all their other denials of reality. <font color="red"> Better take a look in the mirror... </font color> Atleast I am realistic enough to accpet that unfaithful husbands have been running this country from the start, and we'd have lost a number of great presidents had we banished them for their weaknesses. <font color="red"> Again with the sexist comments. If so many husbands are unfaithful, who are they being unfaithful with........unfaithful WIVES, perhaps??? </font color>

Also, I do believe that women are more capable of juggling a whole range of issues at once, than men are, <font color="red"> You make this statement, and accuse men of being sexist!!!! </font color> and also have more stamina to guard our country from the vast critical issues of threat which we fact at this time, <font color="red">Really? What medical study gave you this tidbit? Women have more stamina than men???? Interesting! </font color> with compassion, and firm convictions against the inhumane global problems which lie at the base of all human problems. <font color="red"> women have more of these qualities than men? Interesting! (and Sexist!!!) </font color>

Without the cave woman, awake and able to keep the fires rolling after sex, you men would have been eaten alive long ago! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif <font color="red"> The little smiley face doesn't hide the fact that this is another sexist statement. </font color> Mother nature gave women the ability to be worn out, and wide awake at the same time. <font color="red"> Good grief! You just keep digging deeper and deeper. </font color> Please don't tell me you've never noticed that. /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif <font color="red"> Actually, I think that ability is present in some people of BOTH sexes...a fact that is obviously missing from your sexist point of view. </font color>

She probably won't win, but it WILL be because she is a woman, trying to win, after decades of dealing with sexist attacks from the right, and left, in the media.
<font color="red"> Very good. You have already set yourself up for 4 more years of crying if Hillary doesn't get the job. It will have been because of all those nasty men who decided that she was obviously the most qualified person for the job, but refused to vote for her because of her gender. Your victim mentality is disgusting. Poor Hillary...genius, financial guru, foreign affairs expert, military leader, health care expert, and mother of the year just can't figure out how to overcome the fact that she is female. /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif </font color>


Gayle in Md.

<font color="red"> Do you really hate all men?????
Steve </font color>





Gayle in Md.

<hr /></blockquote>

sack316
02-09-2008, 01:12 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr>

Without the cave woman, awake and able to keep the fires rolling after sex, you men would have been eaten alive long ago! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif
<hr /></blockquote>

I, for one, could definitely not argue with this point /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Sack

Gayle in MD
02-09-2008, 04:39 PM
/ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Gayle in MD
02-09-2008, 04:48 PM
WazzmattaSteve...angry because I pointed out the irrelevance of you previous post?

I think the sexist attacks against Hillary, and all the lies that have been spread around on cable tleevisions have hurt Hillary Clinton's campaign. I believe that even Deeman acknowledges that, enough to have suggested that perhaps Hillary should sue some of them. It's your choice to decide to deny all of it, and given your usual modus operendi, I'm sure you will.

Don't worry about me, Steve. Regardless of which candidate ends up in the White House, I will be thrilled to see the end of Bush's disasterous administration, and probably loads of Republicans, removed from office by the voters to boot. I'm looking forward to the unobstructed future. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif I believe you are the one who will be crying after the next election. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

hondo
02-09-2008, 04:59 PM
A good post, but I honestly feel that come election day, most Republicans will vote Republican, no matter how repugnant their choice is.

Sid_Vicious
02-09-2008, 05:01 PM
"I believe you are the one who will be crying after the next election."

Crying for most likely the next 8 years, IF not 16 years. Chelsea will be aging about right for here place on the throne by Hillary's stay BACK in the WH. THAT would be sour crow to eat by these bozos...sid

hondo
02-09-2008, 05:07 PM
So WHO are all these Republicans who are helping McCain win practically every state????
I honestly want to know.
BTW, it seems like every Republican I've talked to in WV
said they'd vote for McCain. Really depressing.
The Republican Viet Nam vets I've talked to said they'd vote for McCain because he was a Nam vet.
When I asked them if that meant they voted for Kerry they look at me like I was nuts.
And the beat goes on.

Drop1
02-09-2008, 07:59 PM
I can't think of any race,living in the U.S.,that is not racist,or any gender that is not sexists. Thanks to two thousand years of Judeo/Christian B.S.,most think they also have first claim to morality,and are willing to kill to prove their moral superiority ,granted by the Grace of God. Was there ever a sitcom on T.V.,where the husband demonstrated a shred of intelligence,from the Nelsons,to "under achiever,and proud of it Simpsons" When do we figure out,men,and women are victims of the equality myth.

pooltchr
02-09-2008, 09:23 PM
Hondo,
That is a great question, and I wish I knew the answer. I don't see how the same Republicans who supported RR could support McCain. I believe much of his support is coming from independents, but that isn't enough to win an election. McCains military history, while admirable, does not change his political ideas. McCain was a driving force behind McCain-Finegold and a solid supporter of the Kennedy/Clinton/McCain amnesty bill. Hardly what I would consider a conservative.
I think the MSM has a lot to do with his success. In the early days of the campaign, only 3 candidates got any coverage in the news. Even when McCain lost in Iowa, all the MSM could talk about was how he would win in New Hampshire. And when he did, every news outlet gave lots of press to his "momentum". For anyone who depends on television news for their information would have been led to believe that McCain was the Messiah. All that free air time is a gift. His campaign didn't have to pay for any of it. Conservative candidates like Thompson weren't even mentioned on the news.
So to try to answer your question, I would say that those Republicans are a great majority of people who take what they see on television news at face value, without bothering to dig a little bit on their own to uncover the truth. I listened to an interview he did a few months ago on a local radio station. He was on for about 30 minutes, and came across as an egotistical SOB who thought nobody knew anything as well as he did. He was beligerant to the point of screaming at the interviewer for questioning his support of amnesty for illegal aliens. Quite a contrast to his soft spoken, neighborly campaign speeches and tv commercials.
I'm beginning to believe that many people in this country have no idea what they believe...and rely on the MSM to tell them what they should think. Either that, or they just follow the party lines. And that goes for those on both sides of the political fence.
Steve

hondo
02-10-2008, 07:58 AM
excellent post, Steve. Dead on.

Gayle in MD
02-11-2008, 01:33 PM
Republican turn out is very low, compared to Democratic turn out. I heard someone say McCain would be like Bush on crack, lol. I agree. Unlike some people who praise a president for stubbornly ignoring what the American people want, even when they are totally against his policies, I don't admire any president who completely ignores the polls, particularly when it comes to war. If a president fools the population into a war, he deserves just what he gets, disgust from most Americans. McCain has proven through his statements, he's been ignoring public opinion about this war, throughout this fiasco. Yapping about another 100 years in Iraq has got to be the dumbest statement Ive ever heard a politician make. /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

hondo
02-11-2008, 02:07 PM
" Bush on crack" ! LMAO!

eg8r
02-11-2008, 02:39 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Republican turn out is very low, compared to Democratic turn out <hr /></blockquote> There is an easy explanation to this...The Reps are not happy with their options. I am not saying it is right or wrong, but I agree, I think the Reps do not have anyone worth voting for.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
02-11-2008, 02:52 PM
That's part of it, but also, people are leaving the Republican party in large numbers.

pooltchr
02-11-2008, 06:27 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> That's part of it, but also, people are leaving the Republican party in large numbers. <hr /></blockquote>

Or maybe the Republican party has turned away from it's conservative roots. I'm beginning to think GOP stands for the "Gone Old Party".
Steve

Gayle in MD
02-12-2008, 07:32 AM
That happened long ago, it just took republican voters three decades to figure it out.

Reagan = cut taxes initially, then ran up debt, then raised taxes, and grew the government, without cutting spending.

Bush I = cut taxes initially, ran up debt, then raised taxes, and grew the government, without cutting spending.

Both administrations ended in recession, and greater debt than when they took office.

The last true conservative, high profile Republican, was Barry Goldwater, who was outraged over what the Republican Party had become before he died. I voted for Barry Goldwater, against a Democrat.

Gayle in Md.

DickLeonard
02-12-2008, 08:05 AM
Gayle you mean Bush isn't on Crack. Your taking away my list of reasons trying to explain his behavior.####

Gayle in MD
02-12-2008, 08:49 AM
Whom did they have worth voting for in 2,000?

eg8r
02-12-2008, 08:57 AM
No one worth it at the time and Bush was better than Gore.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
02-12-2008, 09:03 AM
I don't want to shoot pool with you, I want to take your wife out, somewhere expensive, for her favorite meal. Any woman who can live with a man who steadfastly insist he is/was right, against all proof to the contrary, deserves something extra special. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Poor Mrs. Eg.... /ccboard/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

eg8r
02-12-2008, 09:19 AM
[ QUOTE ]
I don't want to shoot pool with you, I want to take your wife out, somewhere expensive, for her favorite meal. Any woman who can live with a man who steadfastly insist he is/was right, against all proof to the contrary, deserves something extra special. <hr /></blockquote> She would love that. She would probably also agree with your perception of me. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif I told her when we first got married that we would be argument free forever if she just did what I told her to. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

eg8r

Gayle in MD
02-12-2008, 09:22 AM
Why am I not at all surprised. /ccboard/images/graemlins/crazy.gif