US election 2008

Gorbachioo

Fledgling Freddie
Joined
Dec 18, 2005
Messages
1,250
I think its time to discuss the upcoming elections in the US. Who's your favourite?

Personally im torn between Barack Obama and John McCain. I think Obama would have made an excellent president in 2000 but clearly isnt on top of things now. McCain on the other hand would have made many of the same mistakes that Bush made in 2000 but is right man for the job now. Why? The US chose its path on fighting terror in 2001. Its too late to change now. And the truth is that americans are winning in the middle east, Al-Qaeda is loosing support every day.

Even though the risk that Obama will screw up in the middle is high, the change he promises sounds very appealing to me. But then, from what i've gathered so far McCain isnt too bad on other issues either.

So what do you think? Would love to hear your opinions about McCain as he seems like a very promising candidate right now.
 

Chronictank

FH is my second home
Joined
Jan 21, 2004
Messages
10,133
Clinton seems to be following in her husbands footsteps and even supported the use of war to solve problems, while she hasnt said it out in this election but lets not forget it was she who was the driving force behind Kosovo in 99

Personally while Obama may be ok for the US it 'feels' as if he will ignore global politics as he has stated 'the US comes first' on serveral occasions.
He publicly denouces the war in Iraq but equally he will have something to proove so may actually go to the other extreme and cause more problems than he fixes, but then this is only speculation. Prime example of this mentality is the psycopath Condella Rice,
he also states that he wants to fight proliferation of nuclear weapons, does that mean he wants to go into Iran?
But then he is likely to put focus on fixing the US economy, which ultimately will benefit the rest of the world

McCain seems to want to continue Bush's policy and ruin whats left of order in the world, and the global economy along with it, i hope he doesnt get in power as i dont think the world needs more years of George Bush's legacy

Out of the 3 i would probably go Obama, as he seems to be the lesser evil in this case

p.s. The US is most definitely not winning they haven't sorted Afghanistan out let alone Iraq so i really don't see on what basis you can say they are coming out on top. Also i would be interested to see what you base 'Al-Qaeda is loosing support every day' on
 

old.Tohtori

FH is my second home
Joined
Jan 23, 2004
Messages
45,210
Obama ofcourse, black president for the motherf*cking win.

Or that failing, Hillarypoo.

Anything else is just, boring.

Hillary would be interesting, with the "once a month nuke a country for NO good reason and cry about it while eating a tub of cherry garcia" tactic.
 

kirennia

Part of the furniture
Joined
Dec 26, 2003
Messages
3,857
I do have to see, while watching one of Hilarys speeches on the news as no-one could be bothered to get the remote, the room burst out into laughter at her when she started on about her being the first womens president with an entirely female audience standing behind her. Okay so she's well and truly got the womens vote but now everytime I see her all she goes on about is being the first woman president hence why I really don't hope she gets in. Don't get me wrong, I've got nothing against it but if that's her main driving force for getting into power, you do start to wonder if she actually has the balls (sorry, couldn't resist) to decide on important matters in the world.
 

Ezteq

Queen of OT
Joined
Jan 4, 2004
Messages
13,457
lol i think the democrates must be almost apoplectic by now

aaargh who do we vote for we got a woman...and a black man!!!! aaaaaargh which one is the most liberal ultra lefty choice!!

im just praying that a gay handicapped person will enter the running and confuse them all so much theyll do the world a favour and spontainously combust.
 

cHodAX

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Jan 7, 2004
Messages
19,742
I would have to say Clinton, it is about time America had a woman president anyway and I just think she is a little but more politically savvy than Obama. She might be a bit of a bitch but she is damn smart and as someone said earlier she was the driving force behind the scenes in getting NATO into Bosnia/Kosovo, just about the only thing America has got right in the last 2 decades.
 

Gorbachioo

Fledgling Freddie
Joined
Dec 18, 2005
Messages
1,250
Clinton seems to be following in her husbands footsteps and even supported the use of war to solve problems, while she hasnt said it out in this election but lets not forget it was she who was the driving force behind Kosovo in 99

Personally while Obama may be ok for the US it 'feels' as if he will ignore global politics as he has stated 'the US comes first' on serveral occasions.
He publicly denouces the war in Iraq but equally he will have something to proove so may actually go to the other extreme and cause more problems than he fixes, but then this is only speculation. Prime example of this mentality is the psycopath Condella Rice,
he also states that he wants to fight proliferation of nuclear weapons, does that mean he wants to go into Iran?
But then he is likely to put focus on fixing the US economy, which ultimately will benefit the rest of the world

McCain seems to want to continue Bush's policy and ruin whats left of order in the world, and the global economy along with it, i hope he doesnt get in power as i dont think the world needs more years of George Bush's legacy

Out of the 3 i would probably go Obama, as he seems to be the lesser evil in this case

p.s. The US is most definitely not winning they haven't sorted Afghanistan out let alone Iraq so i really don't see on what basis you can say they are coming out on top. Also i would be interested to see what you base 'Al-Qaeda is loosing support every day' on


Violence in Iraq has decreased and the Iraq security forces are gaining more numbers all the time. According to what i've read from several sources the situation is looking good in Iraq right now. The reason why Afghanistan hasnt been sorted out yet is that all troops are in Iraq.

And yes, McCain will (more or less) continue Bush's policy. But like i said, the choice is made, the damage is done, only thing left to do is to finish it. If Obama gets elected and americans leave the middle east then they will leave it in a worse condition than what it was when they came. And they say that when it comes to environmental issues McCain isnt all that bad. He's been called a "closet democrat". Also, hes not a religious whacko and the general opinion seems to be that he would handle the economy well.
 

Chronictank

FH is my second home
Joined
Jan 21, 2004
Messages
10,133
Violence in Iraq has decreased and the Iraq security forces are gaining more numbers all the time. According to what i've read from several sources the situation is looking good in Iraq right now. The reason why Afghanistan hasnt been sorted out yet is that all troops are in Iraq.

And yes, McCain will (more or less) continue Bush's policy. But like i said, the choice is made, the damage is done, only thing left to do is to finish it. If Obama gets elected and americans leave the middle east then they will leave it in a worse condition than what it was when they came. And they say that when it comes to environmental issues McCain isnt all that bad. He's been called a "closet democrat". Also, hes not a religious whacko and the general opinion seems to be that he would handle the economy well.

People are pulling out of Iraq anyway, so he will achieve nothing that will not be done anyway
What he will do is continue Bush's legacy of causing more trouble in the middle East, and ultimately the world
The damage may be done, but the problem hasn't been well and truley fu**** to the extent it cannot be fixed.
I truely believe if he gets into power he will be the instigator of chaos with his attitude of strong arming anyone who doesn't follow the foreign policy he wants.
I hope the American's do leave the middle east under Obama, but i think you are a bit disillusioned if you think as soon as he is elected there will be a sudden migration, what he wont do (i hope, again theorising based on what he says), is start another war and cause more trouble which , if McCain is following the currrent regime as he claims he will, is what will happen, most likely in Iran or Syria.

Obama has already stated there will be a phased withdrawal, similar to that beign done by the British, French and most other countries involed in this mess
About.com: http://obama.senate.gov/speech/061120-a_way_forward_in_iraq/index.html
Which is the most sensible method of doing so.
He also wished to open dialogue with Iran and Syria instead of threatening them at every turn, which inevitbly leads to conflict
Personally i will support anyone who wants to find a middle ground opposed to the schoolyard bully who will kick about anyone who opposes their point of view
So for me its either Obama or Clinton
 

Iceforge

Can't get enough of FH
Joined
Dec 24, 2003
Messages
1,861
I am wholeheartedly for Barack Obama and got completely happy now when I checked up after a day or two without checking and found him in the lead over Hillary.

Taken with some precaution, as he is only in the lead with 3 delegates with 1137 on Obama and 1134 on Hillary, but compared to the fact that after Super Tuesday Hillary had 77 delegates more than Obama, he did very good in the 4 states who has had their votes since then.

And tomorrow it is time for Virginia, Maryland, District of Columbia and Democrats abroad to vote and in the 2 biggest of those, Virginia and Maryland (200 delegates total), Obama is in the lead in polls and he has yet to loose a state which he was the lead in.
Data on Columbia/Abroad (45 delegates) was unavible.

There is ofc the super states waiting (Texas, Pennsylvania and Ohio (577 total Delegates) which are still putting Clinton in the lead in polls, but only with +5 to +20, and she had lost a lot compared to polls in most of the previous states who has voted.

Reason why Clinton gets so much more in some states in polls than when the actual voting occures is that a large potion of female voters feel ashamed to admit they are not voting for their genders runner when asked for a poll and hence reply Clinton, even when it is untrue.

Clinton played the gender card to many times, while Obama himself has (according to all I checked) never played the race card, i.e. said "I will be the first black president" just to get black votes, like Clinton seems to do for the female voters.
Problem being that it doesn't work. Sure, some women vote for Clinton on the premise, but women got their right to vote in 1920, which gives them the right to vote for whom they themselves think is best, and not be manipulated into voting for somebody just because thats "the right thing for a women to do on behalf off her gender".
 

old.Tohtori

FH is my second home
Joined
Jan 23, 2004
Messages
45,210
People are pulling out of Iraq anyway, so he will achieve nothing that will not be done anyway

Well, invading is like having sex with a REALLY hot woman, no matter how good it is, you have to pull out sometimes.
 

Aesgir

Loyal Freddie
Joined
Jul 29, 2007
Messages
252
I'm for Obama. Think it's time for someone who isn't a Bush or a Clinton. McCain is a good candidate for the Republicans, but the last thing the US needs is more of the same. At least with Obama in charge, they might actually fulfil some of the change EVERY candidate was promising, and concentrate on their f*cked up economy. A speedy withdrawal and a slight more leniency in foreign policy wouldn't exactly harm world tensions at the moment.

I'd have something good to say about Hillary, but try as i might, i couldn't see Bill keeping his mouth shut about her policies, and so be an influence behind the scenes.

The only reason i couldn't see Obama winning it is because of playing the Race card. There's still some very conservative people in the US, so by actually pointing out he'd be the first black president could go against him. To me, the colour of his skin shouldn't even have been mentioned in the race for nomination, it's irrelevant to his politics, which are very strong. But then again, i'm probably a bleeding heart liberal lol.
 

Imgormiel

Part of the furniture
Joined
Apr 18, 2004
Messages
4,372
Mcain = non entity
Obama = not ready
Clinton = I am impressed but not sure, would take her over the 3 of them.
 

Marc

FH is my second home
Joined
Dec 28, 2003
Messages
11,094
I want that dude to win who has promised to pull US troups out of every conflict thats going on and to never get america involved in any more conflicts unless its a direct attack on america.

It would be great to then see all the america haters, crying out for america's help when Osama bin laden and buddies start owning the rest of world (except britain, we can handle ourselves) only for america to stick 2 fingers up at them all.

That would be sweeeeet.
 

old.Tohtori

FH is my second home
Joined
Jan 23, 2004
Messages
45,210
I want that dude to win who has promised to pull US troups out of every conflict thats going on and to never get america involved in any more conflicts unless its a direct attack on america.

It would be great to then see all the america haters, crying out for america's help when Osama bin laden and buddies start owning the rest of world (except britain, we can handle ourselves) only for america to stick 2 fingers up at them all.

That would be sweeeeet.

And the cash used for those operations and the upkeep of the military, removed or atleast cut to 50% and use that omnipotentially huge wad of cash for medical research.
 

noblok

Part of the furniture
Joined
Jan 2, 2005
Messages
1,371
I want that dude to win who has promised to pull US troups out of every conflict thats going on and to never get america involved in any more conflicts unless its a direct attack on america.

It would be great to then see all the america haters, crying out for america's help when Osama bin laden and buddies start owning the rest of world (except britain, we can handle ourselves) only for america to stick 2 fingers up at them all.

That would be sweeeeet.

Except that military intervention isn't really effective against terrorism. You don't fight terrorism with an army, you fight it with contra-terrorism (and maybe even beter: changing the socio-economic circumstances in the relevant countries). After all, how long has Israel been trying to counter Palestinian terrorism with their army and what have they achieved? Invading Afghanistan didn't prevent the London and Madrid bombings either and from what i've heard/seen/read the link between Iraq and Al-Qaeda was non-existant before the USA invaded it. After they'd invaded it some terrorist groups sprung up which named themselves Al-Qaeda to have a greater impact et voila: self-fulfilling prophecy.
 

Sharma

Can't get enough of FH
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
4,679
Apologies to the women, but she would be the biggest mistake America has ever made if she was elected.

She's incredibly unstable and completely feckless - she'd do to America what margaret bloody thatcher did to the UK which was in short, fuck it up to bloody hell.

Not only is her incessant bleating about being "First female president" absolute tosh - When Obama took over the lead, she started crying! CRYING!

I do not understand how you want someone with unstable moods and an obvious lack of leadership and decision making skills running one of the most powerful nations in the world!

Obama should be the one to win, mainly because:

A) It'd piss off all the WHITE POWER tossers in Alabama etc
B) Breath of fresh air and level headed decision making
C) Does not want America to be the one to have the biggest say on everything
D) Is patriotic but not to the point where when someone else in the world disagrees, the first thing America does is point out it's got more nukes than them.

McCain seems alright, but as said, he's Bush #2.

If Hilary Clinton is elected, it would be a complete disaster.
 

Marc

FH is my second home
Joined
Dec 28, 2003
Messages
11,094
And the cash used for those operations and the upkeep of the military, removed or atleast cut to 50% and use that omnipotentially huge wad of cash for medical research.

And with that extra money, america could find a cure for aids and if they had any sense, they would keep it to themselves and only make it available for american citizens


That would be sweeet too
 

old.Tohtori

FH is my second home
Joined
Jan 23, 2004
Messages
45,210
And with that extra money, america could find a cure for aids and if they had any sense, they would keep it to themselves and only make it available for american citizens


That would be sweeet too

And then create a fake vaccine for the rest of the world that turns them into zombies!

Now that would be SUPERsweet.
 

Azurus

Can't get enough of FH
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
1,263
I want that dude to win who has promised to pull US troups out of every conflict thats going on and to never get america involved in any more conflicts unless its a direct attack on america.

It would be great to then see all the america haters, crying out for america's help when Osama bin laden and buddies start owning the rest of world (except britain, we can handle ourselves) only for america to stick 2 fingers up at them all.

That would be sweeeeet.

Looks like someone needs to get a clue.

1) The American invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan has INCREASED terrorism, they knew this would happen before they went in.

2) The 'terrorists' aren't really a threat to us at all unless they get nukes. The actions of the current administration are actually making this more likely.
 

Iceforge

Can't get enough of FH
Joined
Dec 24, 2003
Messages
1,861
One thing many has held against Obama is that he in a speech/debate stated that if they knew excatly where a terrorist base was in Pakistan (US allied) and Pakistan would not act on it, he would send in troops to take care of it.

While that does sound an awefull lot like Bush in some ways, there is a difference between invading a hostile country and overthrowing the leader and attacking a terrorist base that a US allied fail to act on.
I mean, honestly, what kind of allied is that? Who knows excatly where terrorist train and live and don't act on it?

The funny thing is seeing Republicans trying to rip on Obama for doing that, saying that he is willing to create more terrorist in the hunt for terrorists... hmm... sounds like 2 wars made by the previous administration to me, except Obama didn't speak about occupying/overthrowing leaders, only striking the terrorists no matter where they was.
 

Vasconcelos

Part of the furniture
Joined
Dec 26, 2003
Messages
4,022
I find very improbable for Obama winning the elections, specially taking into account the old american midlewest standard beliefs.

Paraphrasing the great Morrisey:

"the land of the free they say, where the president is never black, female or gay..."
 

Ezteq

Queen of OT
Joined
Jan 4, 2004
Messages
13,457
does no one else find it mildly disturbing that the future most powerful person in the world could gain that position just because he's black or just because she's a woman??

there are people actually saying "yeah hillary should win, we need a female presedent!" not if she's incompetant we dont and lets face it she couldnt even control her husband so hows she going to fair ruling a country???

and then there are all these black celebs coming out in droves to support obama...would they still be there for him if he were white?

i dont care what race/sex/species the future ruler of the USA is so long as they are able to do a good job, i absolutely refuse to vote for someone based on something they had no control or part in (i.e. sex or race) but rather what they can control like beliefs and if they get the job done.
 

Iceforge

Can't get enough of FH
Joined
Dec 24, 2003
Messages
1,861
does no one else find it mildly disturbing that the future most powerful person in the world could gain that position just because he's black or just because she's a woman??

there are people actually saying "yeah hillary should win, we need a female presedent!" not if she's incompetant we dont and lets face it she couldnt even control her husband so hows she going to fair ruling a country???

and then there are all these black celebs coming out in droves to support obama...would they still be there for him if he were white?

i dont care what race/sex/species the future ruler of the USA is so long as they are able to do a good job, i absolutely refuse to vote for someone based on something they had no control or part in (i.e. sex or race) but rather what they can control like beliefs and if they get the job done.

Hillary Clinton might be running the "Vote for me, I am female"

Barack Obama has NEVER asked for people to vote for him because of his skin colour and he does NOT get a higher % of blacks voting for him than he got % of white people voting for him.
Watch some of his speeches and dare say Barack Obama will win "just because he is black".
As John F. Kennedy's daughter said "People always tells me about how my father made them feel. Now I finally found one who makes me feel the same way about a leader" (not excat quote, but the meaning is the same)

Also, Barack Obama got a LONG LONG LONG list of celebrities endorsing him who are white: John F. Kennedy's daughter, Arnold Schwarzenneggers wife, Ben Affleck (who claim most of hollywood supports Barack Obama when it is discussed at celeb parties) and, damn, can't be bothered listing them all, but also, following your arguements: Why did Oprah choose Obama rather than Clinton then? She should endorse both, if she did it for either gender or skin colour, but she didn't, so she choose the one who made most sense
 

Ezteq

Queen of OT
Joined
Jan 4, 2004
Messages
13,457
this is my point ice, im not saying that hillary (though i suspect she is) or obama are playing the race/gender card but you can bet there are people out there who are voting for them solely because theyre either black or female, irrespective of what the candidates them selves are putting across as their manifesto.

which i think is totally wrong you should vote for someone because you believe in them or because they are the best choice not because of what they are. And you can turn it the other way and bet that many people will vote hillary not because she's a woman or they think shes better but simply because they would hate it if a black person got the office.
 

Huntingtons

Resident Freddy
Joined
Jan 19, 2004
Messages
10,770
iceforge needs to be shot for using celebs as an argument. post facts when you critisize Mcain, Hillary or Obama please.
 

Iceforge

Can't get enough of FH
Joined
Dec 24, 2003
Messages
1,861
iceforge needs to be shot for using celebs as an argument. post facts when you critisize Mcain, Hillary or Obama please.

I did not use them to argue for him, Huntingtons!
Ezteq was commenting that Obama was pulling out BLACK celebs all the time and I just wanted to point out that he does not only get black support like that was made out to be.

Read the thread before commenting to make yourself look stupid
 

Iceforge

Can't get enough of FH
Joined
Dec 24, 2003
Messages
1,861
And if you want facts to be used, lets get some facts. I am not into Republicans at all, never has and never will be, so I don't really bother about McCain yet, but instead focused on Clinton and Obama (Please, don't belittle Hillary Clinton by calling her by first name while calling the others by last name!) to see whom of them I would think is the right one:

1) Obama voted against invading Iraq and gave speeches about why it would not be a good idea, now, over 5 years later, all he said against the war still holds true. Clinton voted for the war against Iraq to get rid of the fictional WMD

2) Obama wants healthcare for everybody, payed and financed through the government, and not just a law that obligates people to have it (force them to pay), like the one Clinton is proposing. While I am not American and got free healthcare here in Denmark, any person dying anywhere in the world, be it USA from not getting healthcare or in Africa from starvation, is a concern for me as a world citizen, and thus I support any steps to limit any death.

3) Obama does not believe that it is punishment to the leaders of hostile nations when the president of USA refuse to meet and speak with them, but instead believes dialog will create less tention and hostility. I agree, distancing and refusing dialog will only make everything worse. Clinton leans more towards Bush's approach that "he won't speak with bad people", but is still not entirely like Bush on that stance, but less willing to talk than Obama

4) Obama got a specific plan on how to pull out of Iraq. He does not believe a continued occupiation will help the country, but instead believes they have to learn to work together (the different people in Iraq, that is) and make their country work, and a Occupation force is not aiding them uniting in anything but hate of the occupating force. Clinton also wants to pull out, but got no specific plan yet. I agree with both, because if I have to look over History for an occupation of another country, the only one coming to my mind, is Nazi-germany's occupation of Denmark in 1940-1945, and I dont think any occupation is every good.
 

Sharma

Can't get enough of FH
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
4,679
and then there are all these black celebs coming out in droves to support obama...would they still be there for him if he were white?

He's half-caste so that's a wee bit irrelevant. ;)
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom