Hillary or Obama?

I've never voted republican but I won't vote for Obama. this recent screw-up talking about 'small town bitterness fits in with my view of him as very insulting and out of touch. Cuz all he wants to be in touch with is the blacks.
We are going to hear some big speech about his screw-up now. It will be off-topic. so many peeps getting smoozed by smooth talking. Stay on the topic Obama. No guts.
Didn't have the guts to vote tough topics. That tells me everything. He is in it for politics ambition only...to reach the top so as to create the race war.
I find it very insulting that he thinks he is so special that he doesn't have to vote the tough topics. He views himself as unamerican. Wake up people. His wife even admitted she ain't american. He ain't got the guts to tell his wife he is half white.
He can take his snooty crap and go visit Farakhan...another snob full of hate. Unamerican too.
 
Cowpuppy said:
I've never voted republican but I won't vote for Obama. this recent screw-up talking about 'small town bitterness fits in with my view of him as very insulting and out of touch. Cuz all he wants to be in touch with is the blacks.
We are going to hear some big speech about his screw-up now. It will be off-topic. so many peeps getting smoozed by smooth talking. Stay on the topic Obama. No guts.
Didn't have the guts to vote tough topics. That tells me everything. He is in it for politics ambition only...to reach the top so as to create the race war.
I find it very insulting that he thinks he is so special that he doesn't have to vote the tough topics. He views himself as unamerican. Wake up people. His wife even admitted she ain't american. He ain't got the guts to tell his wife he is half white.
He can take his snooty crap and go visit Farakhan...another snob full of hate. Unamerican too.
Click to expand...
I agree. He's been changing (along with some of his sponsors) his views too often.

First, he's focused on the white people. Then he changes his focus on the black people. Then one of his supporting pastors goes anti-white.

Which is which?

I remember when there was the accident and death of that police officer in Texas. When Hilary decided to stay with the officer's family (instead of going to give her Democratic speech), a bunch of Obama supporters started mocking her saying that she doesn't care about everyone else.

So, who really is better? All I see right now is a bunch of blame-games and lies and two-faced attitude with everyone. :(
 
oh boy.. you mean I have to decide between which pile of $#!T that I like better... What about neither? And McCain isn't quite the shining star either. Once again we have to pick between the lesser of the worst.
 
Ok... I skipped all reading. Maybe I will repeat few things but want to make a point.

I am watching both party as how they run their party. Based on observation and logic thinking. Republican is more organized and already announced a winner. They are waiting on Democrat to finish their progress of choosing the correct candidate. Its in April and 7 months away from Election, Democrat still after each other's throat. Do you want a president to be after each other's throats? A good leader will not need to be after each other's throats. It is not necessary.

So I would rather to choose Republican for they already show a good quality in leadership and determined the one correct candidate for presidency.

So which group do you want. Chaotic or the stable one? Take your pick.
 
rockdrummer said:
oh boy.. you mean I have to decide between which pile of $#!T that I like better... What about neither? And McCain isn't quite the shining star either. Once again we have to pick between the lesser of the worst.
Click to expand...
From what I've read on what the candidates have said...

Hilary and Obama have goals with a deadline for almost all of them.

McCain has goals with no deadline.

I would rather go with someone who establishes a deadline so that we know what to expect instead of a guy who says, "This will be done." without saying when it will be done.

If we pick him because he says 5 things will be done, but he doesn't do any of them during his term... he can still say it was done after the next president does those 5 things. "See? I told you... it will be done. I just didn't say that I would do it." ;)
 
VamPyroX said:
From what I've read on what the candidates have said...

Hilary and Obama have goals with a deadline for almost all of them.

McCain has goals with no deadline.

I would rather go with someone who establishes a deadline so that we know what to expect instead of a guy who says, "This will be done." without saying when it will be done.

If we pick him because he says 5 things will be done, but he doesn't do any of them during his term... he can still say it was done after the next president does those 5 things. "See? I told you... it will be done. I just didn't say that I would do it." ;)
Click to expand...
Assuming they deliver on their promises I might agree. The problem I see is many don't deliver on what they promise. Once in office there is no accountability to deliver on the promises that got them elected in the first place. The whole process disgusts me. I know, it's the best in the world but that doesnt mean it's the best it can be.
 
I am getting ready to switch my vote to McCain as I am getting tired of the Democrats not being able to decide on who to put on the ticket.

This Democrat contest is getting ridiculous....
 
These runners can do anything to talk on both sides because they really want to be a winner. No matter what.

It's the only way for you to be relax and breathe normal until the ballot comes up in November. We might go crazy each other who is right at the end.
 
doesn't matter. Every vote doesn't count anyway. We have seen it a few times in history where the popular vote didn't win.
 
rockdrummer said:
doesn't matter. Every vote doesn't count anyway. We have seen it a few times in history where the popular vote didn't win.
Click to expand...
The President of the USA is never elected by popular vote; they are all elected by the Electoral College.

But I guess you were referring to the times in history when the popular vote results were more than the Electoral College votes. Such examples are:

1824, Andrew Jackson received more popular votes than John Quincy Adams.

In 1876, Samuel J. Tilden received more votes than Rutherford B. Hayes.

In 1888, Grover Cleveland received more votes than Benjamin Harrison.

There were also two times when the Electoral College failed to reach a majority. (In such cases, the election is decide by the House of Representatives.)

In 1800, Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr each received 73 electoral votes. The House chose Jefferson to be president.

In 1824, John Quincy Adams received 84 electoral votes, and Andrew Jackson received 99. Even though Jackson had the most electoral votes, he did not have a majority "of the whole Number of Electors appointed," so the vote went to the House, which selected Adams.
 
(sigh) I usually vote Republican. This time around, it's iffy because we need help AT HOME. Then again, we've had a Democratic Congress and not much of help in the past 8 years. :dunno2:

I'm not crazy about the Three, but I would lean towards the One with most experience. I was thinking about voting Democratic (cross the party lines to get the best person into the White House) but now, I'm still on the fence.

I'll just wait til November and see what happens. I'd appreciate if the new President does his job both here and overseas.
 
Reba said:
The President of the USA is never elected by popular vote; they are all elected by the Electoral College.

But I guess you were referring to the times in history when the popular vote results were more than the Electoral College votes. Such examples are:

1824, Andrew Jackson received more popular votes than John Quincy Adams.

In 1876, Samuel J. Tilden received more votes than Rutherford B. Hayes.

In 1888, Grover Cleveland received more votes than Benjamin Harrison.

There were also two times when the Electoral College failed to reach a majority. (In such cases, the election is decide by the House of Representatives.)

In 1800, Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr each received 73 electoral votes. The House chose Jefferson to be president.

In 1824, John Quincy Adams received 84 electoral votes, and Andrew Jackson received 99. Even though Jackson had the most electoral votes, he did not have a majority "of the whole Number of Electors appointed," so the vote went to the House, which selected Adams.
Click to expand...
Yes and don't forget George W. Bush lost the popular vote to Al Gore in 2000. Every vote counts??? HUH??
 
Bill Clinton won without any majority popular voting.
 
Reba said:
I'm curious.

Those of you who support either Hillary or Obama--do you even pay any attention to what they say to each other in debates, or in their campaign ads?
Click to expand...

Thats just mud slingin'! I am more aware as to who canget the job done without flinching under stress. A good persuasive mouth, whether clean or dirty will be necessary on the job.
 
PuyoPiyo said:
Yeah I know that, but here's the example I got from one of my family members in the email..
Click to expand...

If these facts are true, hell we are probably looking at a potential anti-christ! Another thing Obama may not have considered, there are other American radical groups who may attempt to assassinate him based on his beliefs or who he is.

Welcome to a world you never have imagined of, people!
 
SCBassist said:
If these facts are true, hell we are probably looking at a potential anti-christ! Another thing Obama may not have considered, there are other American radical groups who may attempt to assassinate him based on his beliefs or who he is....
Click to expand...
I certainly hope that doesn't happen.
 
Back
Top