Editor's Blog0 min ago
The Next US President
26 Answers
I'd be interested to hear your views, especially from American members, as to the inside take on this. It appears that the Democratic candidate will now definitely be Barak Obama. On the other hand I am reading that Obama being Black is never going to work nationally when push comes to shove and America elects its next president. So, the Democrats have shown how liberated they are. As an Englishman I like Obama, he is a committed Christian, but is this a step too far for America to accept. Will they vote in a Black president, even if he kicks Muslim ass ?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by whiffey. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I'm actually quite terrified that they won't and that they'll hand the election to the Republican's because of America's own bias' that they can't overcome.
Nothing wrong with Obama or Clinton in my book, but I bet our enlightened US friends won't vote in a black president and I hope that I am wrong.
Hi whiffey btw:)
Nox.
Nothing wrong with Obama or Clinton in my book, but I bet our enlightened US friends won't vote in a black president and I hope that I am wrong.
Hi whiffey btw:)
Nox.
Problem is, whiffey, Obama has a lot of negatives going against him. He has very little experience. No one can point to any accomplishments while he's been in the Senate, (for less than one full term) he's stubbed his toe repeatedly in some of his questionable friendships, especially a radical pastor of his church where he attended for 20 some odd years, where he was married and his children (2) were baptised. However, the pastor has made radical, well publicized anti-white sermons that have raised legitimate questions about Obama's own view points on race. He continues friendships with Weather Underground member William Ayers and his wife Bernadine Dohrn who bombed the Pentagon, Capitol Building and police stations in the 1970's and continues to be unrepentant saying of 9/11 " �I don�t regret setting bombs,� and �I feel we didn�t do enough.� As soon as one episode is put to bed another pops up (Google Tony Rezko).
Nobody should hold Obama responsible for his friends' and supporters' violent terrorist acts. But it is fair to hold him responsible for a startling lack of judgment in his choice of mentors, associates and friends, and for showing a callous disregard for the lives they damaged and the hatred they have demonstrated for this country. This is but a few of the real stumbles he's made, but he speaks so well, that he seems almost idolized by many of his followers.
Contd.
Nobody should hold Obama responsible for his friends' and supporters' violent terrorist acts. But it is fair to hold him responsible for a startling lack of judgment in his choice of mentors, associates and friends, and for showing a callous disregard for the lives they damaged and the hatred they have demonstrated for this country. This is but a few of the real stumbles he's made, but he speaks so well, that he seems almost idolized by many of his followers.
Contd.
Contd.
Unfortunately, these and other objections will be seen only as racist. In fact his campaign managers have already laiyed that groundwork charging any dissenters with being racist, no mastter how valid the questions. If he was a Caucasian he wouldn't have made it past the first farce. Even more so if he were a Caucasian Republican.
Although his opponent, Senator John McCain is a valid war hero from the Vietnam era, with a very moving history of captivity and honor under torture, he isn't a valid Conservative in many Republican's opinions. His view on taxation, socialist leaning policies and waffling on securing our southern borders are troubling, but he's the best we have. I, personally, don't know where real leaders with inspiring ideas are hiding. We need another Ronald Reagan badly.
Unfortunately, these and other objections will be seen only as racist. In fact his campaign managers have already laiyed that groundwork charging any dissenters with being racist, no mastter how valid the questions. If he was a Caucasian he wouldn't have made it past the first farce. Even more so if he were a Caucasian Republican.
Although his opponent, Senator John McCain is a valid war hero from the Vietnam era, with a very moving history of captivity and honor under torture, he isn't a valid Conservative in many Republican's opinions. His view on taxation, socialist leaning policies and waffling on securing our southern borders are troubling, but he's the best we have. I, personally, don't know where real leaders with inspiring ideas are hiding. We need another Ronald Reagan badly.
Obama seems to treat McCain with a good deal more respect than Bush ever did when running against him, Clanad - remembering the Swiftboat affair. I respect him too, but I suspect he will fail in the same way as Hillary and Bush: that a vote for him is essentially backward-looking. As Hillary invoked the Bill years, Bush invoked the legacy of George Sr and McCain invokes the Vietnam war of 40 years ago; Obama is a young man and voting for him is voting for the future. In other words, my guess is that the vote will turn on age rather than race.
But I could be utterly wrong on this. Britain, in particular, likes its leaders young, which is how Blair came to power and how Cameron will. Americans have more respect for age - rightly, in my (aged!) view. And they may feel so gloomy that they simply won't want to try anyone new, and fall back on Washington pols, as they have many times before.
But I could be utterly wrong on this. Britain, in particular, likes its leaders young, which is how Blair came to power and how Cameron will. Americans have more respect for age - rightly, in my (aged!) view. And they may feel so gloomy that they simply won't want to try anyone new, and fall back on Washington pols, as they have many times before.
Hope that you are joking hun...that would be as bad as Reagan in my book.!......As for electing a black president-we are more ready than ever.....whether or not it will happen is another matter. The one thing McCain has against him that would bother me if I was a Repulican would be his age.....and whether or not he would be able to bear the stress of the job.
You could be right jno... but McCain wasn't involved in the swiftboat accusations you mention. Kerry brought that on himself. All he had to do to repudiate any and all of the charges was to release his military records, which he promised to do... here we are nearly 4 years later and he still hasn't released them... he didn't acquire the nickname Jean Francoise Kerry for no account... what a disaster...I've nothing against Obama. He just is unknowable... his reliance on a good speech anytime he's challenged is going to wear thin, in my opinion. We have no idea what his positions are on almost any subject, with the exception of the typical Democrat promise to raise taxes and weaken the military...
Thanks jno - I DID know that was the reason for Arnie getting no further, but sorry, it was a pretty tongue in cheek reply, because whenever politics are brought up, the debates get pretty serious - and sometimes heated! I hope the US gets a President who has understanding, and who can deliver the things that people really want. Pretty much like here, in fact! We must have the lousiest government ever!!!
sorry, Clanad, you're quite right - I had the wrong Vietnam vet. Allegations against McCain at the time (whispered ones) included the contradictory ones that he was gay and had fathered a black illegitimate child, didn't they?
As far as 'unknowable' goes, David Cameron is the same and for the same reason: no policies. But I suspect he will win because UK voters have had enough of the current administration and want a change. Maybe the same will happen in the USA, maybe not.
Do you think the choice of a running mate will make a big difference? I can't imagine Obama picking Clinton; he'd need a white male, I would have thought. And McCain would want someone visibly young enough to take over if he dropped dead of stress - because I don't think McCain shares the Reagan ethic of 'Hard work never killed anyone, but why take a chance?'
As far as 'unknowable' goes, David Cameron is the same and for the same reason: no policies. But I suspect he will win because UK voters have had enough of the current administration and want a change. Maybe the same will happen in the USA, maybe not.
Do you think the choice of a running mate will make a big difference? I can't imagine Obama picking Clinton; he'd need a white male, I would have thought. And McCain would want someone visibly young enough to take over if he dropped dead of stress - because I don't think McCain shares the Reagan ethic of 'Hard work never killed anyone, but why take a chance?'
McCain has his own set of problems outside of his age. He divorced his first wife of many years when she suffered a near fatal car accident when he was still a prisoner in Hanoi. On his return he, apparently expected the same svelte model he had married 14 years previously, however the accident left her disfigured. He soon began an affari with his current wife, a model and a millionaire heiress. Within a month of divorcing his first wife he married this one. However, that was many years ago and probably won't be a factor. It's hoped that he will select Piyush "Bobby" Jindal, current governor of the State of Louisiana and the first Indian/American (as in India) governor of any state. He's extremely personable, speaks well and has an excellent conservative record as governor and Congressman before that. He's well liked and for his youth (born 1971) has been very effective in a notably Democrat state. He'll be the best foil against Obama, in my opinion.
McCain is all for "getting along" with the Democrats and being amicable. Problem is, Bush tried that tactic early on and especially following 9/11. He got his head handed to him. I really think, in the case of Afghanistan and Iraq, regardless of all the criticism, Bush has been effective. I think history will vindicate his moves and will also vindicate his pronouncement that we'vee been in World War III for some time. He should be faulted for his unwaivering loyalty to the previous Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.
Contd.
McCain is all for "getting along" with the Democrats and being amicable. Problem is, Bush tried that tactic early on and especially following 9/11. He got his head handed to him. I really think, in the case of Afghanistan and Iraq, regardless of all the criticism, Bush has been effective. I think history will vindicate his moves and will also vindicate his pronouncement that we'vee been in World War III for some time. He should be faulted for his unwaivering loyalty to the previous Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.
Contd.
Contd.
The current success in Iraq was due almost entirely to the "surge" and putting enough boots on the ground. Rumsfeld believed in a smaller, mobile force in the face of much advice from his Generals to saturate the country. History will also show the mistake of disbanding the Iraqi Army after defeating them. They could, with understanding of the culture, been put to good use. I voted for Bush twice and still think he had a lot of potential, disregarding the criticisms of the Europeans, all of whom have been replaced with Conservative leaders.... how ironic... (What are you doing up so late... it's only aboyt 2230 here in the mountain west of the U.S.)... Thanks for the interchange!
The current success in Iraq was due almost entirely to the "surge" and putting enough boots on the ground. Rumsfeld believed in a smaller, mobile force in the face of much advice from his Generals to saturate the country. History will also show the mistake of disbanding the Iraqi Army after defeating them. They could, with understanding of the culture, been put to good use. I voted for Bush twice and still think he had a lot of potential, disregarding the criticisms of the Europeans, all of whom have been replaced with Conservative leaders.... how ironic... (What are you doing up so late... it's only aboyt 2230 here in the mountain west of the U.S.)... Thanks for the interchange!
Of course interesting as Clanad's take is it's probably irrelevant.
I suspect he'd sooner jump off of a cliff than vote Democrat. I think you really need the opinion of someone who's a floating voter. After all they're the people who decide elections in most democracies.
Remember too that a large portion of America is not registered to vote (22% in 2006) A young black democrat could make inroads into that in a way that an old white democrat could not.
On the other hand there's the ballot box race effect - a number of people will say one thing in public but vote another way in private.
What's really difficult to know is whether the long drawn out contest with Clinton will work for or against him. On one hand he's spent a lot of money and taken a lot of negative publicity from her but on the other hand he's had pretty continuous publicity for months (certainly internationally - don't know if it's the same in the US) as everybody seems concentrated on the democrat race .
It'll be interesting to watch it pan out.
Another Regan? - well I guess maybe if you want someone to sell weapons to the Iranians on the quiet and fund terrorists with it !
I suspect he'd sooner jump off of a cliff than vote Democrat. I think you really need the opinion of someone who's a floating voter. After all they're the people who decide elections in most democracies.
Remember too that a large portion of America is not registered to vote (22% in 2006) A young black democrat could make inroads into that in a way that an old white democrat could not.
On the other hand there's the ballot box race effect - a number of people will say one thing in public but vote another way in private.
What's really difficult to know is whether the long drawn out contest with Clinton will work for or against him. On one hand he's spent a lot of money and taken a lot of negative publicity from her but on the other hand he's had pretty continuous publicity for months (certainly internationally - don't know if it's the same in the US) as everybody seems concentrated on the democrat race .
It'll be interesting to watch it pan out.
Another Regan? - well I guess maybe if you want someone to sell weapons to the Iranians on the quiet and fund terrorists with it !
As far as I can see, the big winners of the Iraq war have been the Iranians (indeed, there's some evidence suggesting that the WMD story was an Iranian hoax, which would suggest that the entire US involvement was as an unwitting proxy for Tehran). Since this was precisely the opposite of what Washington planned, I can't share Clanad's optimism over 'success' on the ground there.
If I were McCain, and if there was a suitable candidate (which there probably isn't) I'd choose as a running mate a smart middle-of-the road woman. This could win him a lot of the Hillary voters who will feel disenfranchised if she (ever) admits defeat.
If I were McCain, and if there was a suitable candidate (which there probably isn't) I'd choose as a running mate a smart middle-of-the road woman. This could win him a lot of the Hillary voters who will feel disenfranchised if she (ever) admits defeat.
