Dyson Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 So Obama is like Wayne Palmer and Clinton is more like the Vice President from Season 6 of 24. Except female. Awesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slaggis Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 Since people seem to be wondering, Tuesday leaves Clinton with 1012 in total delegates, and Obama with 933. A total of 2,025 are needed to win, so it's essentially neck and neck. I thought so. Clinton is ahead, just. Hopefully Obama can pull some women voters in, because at the moment Clintons getting them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The fish Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 If they end up with a Republican President, well, the worlds screwed. Possibly, but if the US tries to push it's luck too much globally, then India, Iran, China, and Russia will step up to the position of superpower. Also, a more unified Europe would give everyone else (even combined) one hell of a run for their money, if only as it has by far the largest economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gaggle64 Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 Hang on, just deleted my last post while I double check that. Keep it in mind though. It's still damned close though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The fish Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 Hang on, just deleted my last post while I double check that. Keep it in mind though. It's still damned close though. According to Le Beeb: "Hillary Clinton has a precariously slim lead with a 46% chance of gaining the nomination, just ahead of Barack Obama, at 42%." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mundi Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 Also, clinton seems to mention "I'm not afraid of military action" etc alot, which worries me a little, whereas Obama seems set of sorting things out without the needs for wars and in turn innocent people dying. Sorry but no... http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article2182955.ece For lazy people, he says he´s willing to send troops Pakistan to hunt down Al-Qaeda with it without their permission. Which is pretty much saying I want to invade Pakistan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McPhee Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 Obama won more primaries, but some states have more delegates than others. As a result Clinton is ahead, she won California, New York, and New Jersey. So far it's 845 - 765 to Clinton Basically Clinton is the more favoured of the 2, but only just. John McCain will be the next President. He pretty much represents what the Republicans want, whereas the Democrats are split between 2 candidates with very different politics. There will be a large number of alienated Democrats never mind who out of Obama and Clinton wins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slaggis Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 Sorry but no... http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article2182955.ece For lazy people, he says he´s willing to send troops Pakistan to hunt down Al-Qaeda with it without their permission. Which is pretty much saying I want to invade Pakistan I know he said that way back in August last year, but I'm sure he recently stated military action would be by far the last resort to resolve anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mundi Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 I know he said that way back in August last year, but I'm sure he recently stated military action would be by far the last resort to resolve anything. It´s to attract votes. Tell one crows you want war tell the other you don´t. Make sure that as little of both crowds know what you said to the other and you got yourself a big crowd voting for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slaggis Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 It´s to attract votes.Tell one crows you want war tell the other you don´t. Make sure that as little of both crowds know what you said to the other and you got yourself a big crowd voting for you. You also realise people can change their stance on issues? It's not all lies you know. But, I think Obama has already lost, It's pretty obvious who the next President will be (Unless Clinton royally fucks up that is). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mundi Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 The thing is he taking a different stand on this because he changed his opinion or because it made him less popular with the public? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gaggle64 Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 But, I think Obama has already lost, It's pretty obvious who the next President will be (Unless Clinton royally fucks up that is). It's impossible to say that though, there are still the majority of Delegates to capture. Obama now has a simply massive campaign fund to support him thanks to Ted Kennedy, while Clinton has had to invest $5mil of her own cash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monopolyman Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 I know he said that way back in August last year, but I'm sure he recently stated military action would be by far the last resort to resolve anything. Actually, he says pretty much the opposite. Good afternoon. Let begin by saying that although this has been billed as an anti-war rally, I stand before you as someone who is not opposed to war in all circumstances.The Civil War was one of the bloodiest in history, and yet it was only through the crucible of the sword, the sacrifice of multitudes, that we could begin to perfect this union, and drive the scourge of slavery from our soil. I don’t oppose all wars. My grandfather signed up for a war the day after Pearl Harbor was bombed, fought in Patton’s army. He saw the dead and dying across the fields of Europe; he heard the stories of fellow troops who first entered Auschwitz and Treblinka. He fought in the name of a larger freedom, part of that arsenal of democracy that triumphed over evil, and he did not fight in vain. I don’t oppose all wars. After September 11th, after witnessing the carnage and destruction, the dust and the tears, I supported this Administration’s pledge to hunt down and root out those who would slaughter innocents in the name of intolerance, and I would willingly take up arms myself to prevent such tragedy from happening again. I don’t oppose all wars. And I know that in this crowd today, there is no shortage of patriots, or of patriotism.What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perles and Paul Wolfowitz and other arm-chair, weekend warriors in this Administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne. What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Roves to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income – to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone thru the worst month since the Great Depression. That’s what I’m opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics. Now let me be clear – I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity. He’s a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him. But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history. I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences.I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the middle east, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of Al Queda. I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars. So for those of us who seek a more just and secure world for our children, let us send a clear message to the president today.You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s finish the fight with Bin Laden and Al Queda, thru effective, coordinated intelligence, and a shutting down of the financial networks that support terrorism, and a homeland security program that involves more than color-coded warnings. You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to make sure that the UN inspectors can do their work, and that we vigorously enforce a non-proliferation treaty, and that former enemies and current allies like Russia safeguard and ultimately eliminate their stores of nuclear material, and that nations like Pakistan and India never use the terrible weapons in already in their possession, and that the arms merchants in our own country stop feeding the countless wars that rage across the globe. You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to make sure our so-called allies in the Middle East, the Saudis and the Egyptians, stop oppressing their own people, and suppressing dissent, and tolerating corruption and inequality, and mismanaging their economies so that their youth grow up without education, without prospects, without hope, the ready recruits of terrorist cells. You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to wean ourselves off Middle East oil, through an energy policy that doesn’t simply serve the interests of Exxon and Mobil. Those are the battles that we need to fight. Those are the battles that we willingly join. The battles against ignorance and intolerance. Corruption and greed. Poverty and despair. The consequences of war are dire, the sacrifices immeasurable. We may have occasion in our lifetime to once again rise up in defense of our freedom, and pay the wages of war. But we ought not – we will not – travel down that hellish path blindly. Nor should we allow those who would march off and pay the ultimate sacrifice, who would prove the full measure of devotion with their blood, to make such an awful sacrifice in vain. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ But, I think Obama has already lost, It's pretty obvious who the next President will be (Unless Clinton royally fucks up that is). Trust me, Clinton will not be president. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gaggle64 Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 The thing is he taking a different stand on this because he changed his opinion or because it made him less popular with the public? Are you sure you're not getting some issues confused? He has voiced support for sending troops in after Al-Qaeda on the Pakistani/Afghani border, but has always said he'd be open to talks with Iran. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slaggis Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars. (Thanks for the article find Monopolyman) He needs to win. War for the right reasons is whats needed, a fight to stop people being oppressed (like he says), not a war that was obviously about getting oil (imo). He has said he would not send troops to Iran aswell, which can at the moment only be a good thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dyson Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 John McCain will be the next President. I thought you meant this guy when I first read it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mundi Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 Enlightenment at the barrel of a gun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McPhee Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 I've not read that whole piece, but isn't that from years ago? Like before the invasion of Iraq? It talks about Sadam like he's still alive and in power... Personally i agreed with the Afghanistan war, and i really, really wish the US finished it instead of starting a second war with Iraq. I'd welcome US raids in to Pakistan to hunt terrorists. They won't seize the country, it would piss China and India off too much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gaggle64 Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 Obama did vote against the war in Iraq. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slaggis Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 Obama did vote against the war in Iraq. Exactly. At least we know he's not one to rush into any war just for the sake of it, and on some crappy bit of evidence about weapons. Clinton voted for it, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gaggle64 Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 Yes, but said she wouldn't have if she knew what she knew now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McPhee Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 Yes, but said she wouldn't have if she knew what she knew now. Lets be honest here, who would? Even Bush would have been against the Iraq war if he knew what he knows now. It took too long, was too costly and has fucked the country up brilliantly. Then theres Afghanistan, which got worse as a result of the Iraq war. It's gonna cost the US government Billions to fix that mistake! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haver Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 Clinton: I will stop short of malignant. Power-crazed, without ethics, just like her husband. Obama: I thought he was all rhetoric until the Google Q and A. He doesn't have a great amount of experience but he is honest, candid. A quick learner I am sure. Someone to believe in. Tough on foreign policy, but emphasis on diplomacy. I like that. Not like some of these moral-relativist/isolationist Democrats. McCain: walks his own line to an extent. Flip flops a bunch. Best Republican of a bad bunch. Huckabee: unqualified, nutjob, PR Man. Romney: needs to answer questions about his Mormonism and the (officially racist until the 70s) organisation he is a higher-up in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haden Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 Ok just quick thoughts. I support Mcain just for the descion to troop surge in Iraq I think it will be a long term good descion. At the same time I guess a democrat being in office would be good to save relations with Europe even though Europes opinion is pretty irellevent at the moment. I dont want Obama as he made some very stupid comments about Pakistan so I want either a Clinton/Edwards or a Mcain/Huckabee ticket. Both the Presidents in this case I belive would hae foriegn policy benifits and both the deputys would be commited to helping domestic welfare. I think Hillary will just get it with Mcain getting the Rep nomination and Clinton winning overall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bard Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 Enlightenment at the barrel of a gun Bombs to set the people free, blood to feed the dollar tree Flags for coffins on the screen, oil for the machine Army of the liberation, gunpoint indoctrination The fires of sedition Fulfill the prophecy... \m/. Are we gonna have a lyric-off? :p Also: being woefully ignorant about anything outside my 10 sq miles of concrete playground, I haven't the faintest clue opinion about it...so I'll leave...quietly.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts