 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Popular Views on Obama
|
|
|
Subject: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 25 Apr 07 - 11:28 AM Wins Over Chicago Fed's Canning, a Top Bush Fundraiser By Jay Newton-Small April 25 (Bloomberg) -- John Canning has impeccable Republican credentials: He was a Pioneer, one of President George W. Bush's top fundraisers. He's the head of a leveraged- buyout firm. He's the deputy board chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago. Now he has given the maximum campaign contribution, $4,600, to Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama. Canning says he's fed up with the Republican Party. ``It's become a party that's taken Neanderthal positions on things like stem-cell research and global warming,'' Canning, who was appointed to the Fed post in 2004, said in an interview. ``I no longer find myself on the same page.'' To Canning, 62, the party once represented individual rights. Then in 2005, the Republican-led Congress intervened in an effort to keep Terri Schiavo, a brain-damaged Florida woman, alive against her husband's wishes. The move was symbolic of Republican positions on social issues that Canning says he found increasingly frustrating. Canning is one of a number of prominent Republicans who have turned against the party. At least two other Bush Pioneers are contributing to Obama this time, and Bush's chief 2004 campaign strategist, Matthew Dowd, assailed the president's second-term performance in an April 1 New York Times interview. Canning said he likes Obama's approach to reducing greenhouse gases, his opposition to the Iraq war and the fact that he's spent so little time in Washington. `Strongest Candidate' ``You know when they say someone's experienced, if that means they've spent a long time in Washington, I don't know if that's a pretty good deal,'' he said. ``He's the strongest candidate in the entire field from both parties.'' .... One Bush Pioneer who contributed to Obama, Framingham, Massachusetts-based Staples Inc. founder Thomas Stemberg, also gave to Romney, a former governor of the state. He didn't return phone calls seeking comment. Another, Chicago publicist Jayne Carr Thompson, declined to discuss her contribution to Obama except to say, ``He is a great representative of Illinois.'' To qualify as a Bush Pioneer, fundraisers had to bring in at least $100,000 in donations for the 2004 election. ...Obama also is attracting support from Republicans who aren't prominent in business. It's hard to go to one of his events and not meet at least one Republican, either curious about the senator or already converted. Volunteer Until two weeks ago, Kristen Martin was a lifelong registered Republican. On April 15, she wore a blue ``Obama Volunteer'' T-shirt while working a $25-a-person fund-raising crowd in Tampa, Florida. ``One of the reasons I support him is his stance on the war in Iraq,'' said Martin, 31, a registered nurse. ``It's just kills me the way we're viewed overseas.'' David Warden, 50, spent 30 years in the Navy, retiring with the rank of master chief. At an Obama low-dollar fundraiser in Milwaukee on April 15, he blushed and said he was a lifelong Republican. ``I like his perspective, his fresh ideas,'' said Warden, who gave $25 and said he's not considering any other candidates. ``This is the first Democrat I've ever supported, let alone gave money to.'' |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 26 Apr 07 - 10:08 AM Obama, Gospel and Verse By DAVID BROOKS Published: April 26, 2007 Yesterday evening I was interviewing Barack Obama and we were talking about effective foreign aid programs in Africa. His voice was measured and fatigued, and he was taking those little pauses candidates take when they're afraid of saying something that might hurt them later on. Out of the blue I asked, "Have you ever read Reinhold Niebuhr?" Obama's tone changed. "I love him. He's one of my favorite philosophers." So I asked, What do you take away from him? "I take away," Obama answered in a rush of words, "the compelling idea that there's serious evil in the world, and hardship and pain. And we should be humble and modest in our belief we can eliminate those things. But we shouldn't use that as an excuse for cynicism and inaction. I take away ... the sense we have to make these efforts knowing they are hard, and not swinging from naïve idealism to bitter realism." My first impression was that for a guy who's spent the last few months fund-raising, and who was walking off the Senate floor as he spoke, that's a pretty good off-the-cuff summary of Niebuhr's "The Irony of American History." My second impression is that his campaign is an attempt to thread the Niebuhrian needle, and it's really interesting to watch. On the one hand, Obama hates, as Niebuhr certainly would have, the grand Bushian rhetoric about ridding the world of evil and tyranny and transforming the Middle East. But he also dislikes liberal muddle-headedness on power politics. In "The Audacity of Hope," he says liberal objectives like withdrawing from Iraq, stopping AIDS and working more closely with our allies may be laudable, "but they hardly constitute a coherent national security policy." In Chicago this week, Obama argued against the current tides of Democratic opinion. There's been a sharp rise in isolationism among Democrats, according to a recent Pew survey, so Obama argued for global engagement. Fewer Democrats believe in peace through military strength, so Obama argued for increasing the size of the military. In other words, when Obama is confronted by what he sees as arrogant unilateral action, he argues for humility. When he is confronted by what he sees as dovish passivity, he argues for the hardheaded promotion of democracy in the spirit of John F. Kennedy. I dare anyone to ask this question of Bush, Cheny or Rumsfield and compare the quality of the answers. Double-dog dare. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Peace Date: 26 Apr 07 - 10:16 AM No contest and no thanks. It would take too long to explain the concept of philosophy to people like Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld, let alone teach them how to read something other than a balance ledger. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: GUEST,mg Date: 26 Apr 07 - 08:07 PM I think he is the best candidate in quite some time. Intelligent, practical. ...I think he will be a great president domestically but might get us in deep doo doo internationally, not that we aren't already...I think that his Muslim heritage is quite an advantage internationally...or should be..fanatics will not like the fact he has changed his father's religion. mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Teribus Date: 26 Apr 07 - 08:15 PM In short Amos the man has said sweet FA - Go back and read over what you have so assiduously cut 'n' pasted. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 26 Apr 07 - 08:33 PM Teribus: I suggest you misunderstand the purpoe of this thread in your rush to judgement. As for sweet-fuck-all, I see nothing wrng with speaking from principles, if they are authentic. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Ron Davies Date: 26 Apr 07 - 09:03 PM Gee, I wonder why Teribus doesn't like Obama. Probably has something to do with Obama's skepticism on the War on Terror, which of course in Teribus' fantasy is just about won. All we have to do is stay the course--for a year--or maybe 30. Of course I'm sure he'll also caution us that the existence of Islam is a danger we're going to have to eliminate--because Islamic radicals exist. By the way, read yesterday in the WSJ that "the long war" is now out as acceptable language for describing the whatever that's going on in Iraq. Writer was speculating on a "name that war" contest. Except it's also not to be called a war. Obama on our current regime: "This president may occupy the White House, but for the past 6 years the position of leader of the free world has been vacant." Perfect. Couldn't have put it better myself. This man has command of the language and can think on his feet--a pleasant change from the current situation. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Rapparee Date: 26 Apr 07 - 09:10 PM I would love to see an Obama/Edwards ticket. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Ron Davies Date: 26 Apr 07 - 09:20 PM So would I--and I think--and hope-- it might well play in the South--which is important. I used to think the ticket would be better reversed--but the more I hear Obama the more impressed I am. Obama/ Edwards is the way to go. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Peace Date: 26 Apr 07 - 09:26 PM You do be got that right. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Donuel Date: 26 Apr 07 - 11:54 PM Amos, you do some writing of your own don't you? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 27 Apr 07 - 12:05 AM Yes, i do. But I don't clutter up these "Popular Views..." threads with my own writing. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 27 Apr 07 - 08:39 AM Obama's religious affiliations bother me, a lot. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 27 Apr 07 - 10:34 AM Rig, what do you know about them? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Bill D Date: 27 Apr 07 - 10:52 AM Presidential candidates don't get off the ground without religious affiliations in this country. Do you find Obama any different than most of the others? He seemed to get very good reviews after the debate in S. Carolina...even from some picky talking heads. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Don Firth Date: 27 Apr 07 - 01:00 PM "I see nothing wrong with speaking from principles, if they are authentic." It's most refreshing to contemplate the possibility of a presidential candidate who actually has principles to speak from. Especially if those principles encompass concepts that include future generations and peaceful solutions to foreign relations difficulties. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Peace Date: 27 Apr 07 - 01:08 PM "Obama's religious affiliations bother me, a lot." Really? Sounds like you don't know shit about his religious affiliations. What is there about the Trinity United Church of Christ that bothers you? Or is FOX your source for news? From the NYT: 'All of the claims about Senator Obama's faith and education raised in the Insight Magazine story and repeated on Fox News are false. Senator Obama was raised in a secular household in Indonesia by his stepfather and mother. Obama's stepfather worked for a U.S. oil company, and sent his stepson to two years of Catholic school, as well as two years of public school. As Obama described it, "Without the money to go to the international school that most expatriate children attended, I went to local Indonesian schools and ran the streets with the children of farmers, servants, tailors, and clerks." [The Audacity of Hope, p. 274] To be clear, Senator Obama has never been a Muslim, was not raised a Muslim, and is a committed Christian who attends the United Church of Christ in Chicago. Furthermore, the Indonesian school Obama attended in Jakarta is a public school that is not and never has been a Madrassa. These malicious, irresponsible charges are precisely the kind of politics the American people have grown tired of, and that Senator Obama is trying to change by focusing on bringing people together to solve our common problems.' And YOU, Riginslinger, perpetuate the crap with posts like that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: GUEST,mg Date: 27 Apr 07 - 01:17 PM Good heavens...how can calling someone a Muslim be malicious? At least it shouldn't be in civilized society. I think his ties are an advantage in this day and age. I realize people will use this against him, but it really should be used for him and for multiculturalism. I believe by their traditions, if the father is Muslim, the children are considered to be as well. I do not say he is one, he is whatever he proclaims himself to be. But if he were one, it would be great. It is great that he has this as a major part of his heritage...mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 27 Apr 07 - 01:23 PM Out of the blue I asked, "Have you ever read Reinhold Niebuhr?" Bush's tone changed. "Dhhh..." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Peace Date: 27 Apr 07 - 01:42 PM "Good heavens...how can calling someone a Muslim be malicious?" You might want to think about that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Donuel Date: 27 Apr 07 - 02:55 PM How could calling someone a liberal be malicious? impune communism and add the words "card carrying" liberal add the word godless use liberal and traitor in the same sentence. Repeat for a year... and its done. in the Obama's goose is cooked thread the mud slinging tactics were ennumerated. Although a lie, the whispering campaign about Obama's muslim brainwashing ecucation will be on the lips of the the Bush faithful types forever. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 27 Apr 07 - 04:13 PM Normally, it could not be, by basic definition. However, Ann Coulter has provided a new record of mastery in twisting, distorting and filling with hate language that was once a common grounds for communication. So when she says somoene is a liberal, she doesn't mean any definition in the dictionary. She means something like a treacherous double-crossing quisling communist homosexual blackguard wussy wimpy good-for-nothing-slimeball. Of course it has taken her years to gradually establish this definition in even a small pool of her fellow psychos, but there are a number who are willing to have their brains twisted in this fashion who like chasing after her cross-eyed sense of "Wonderland whatever semantics". A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: mg Date: 27 Apr 07 - 09:15 PM If there were no safety issues for him and his family involved, and there are, I would say he should grab on to this and run with it...it is important to have as many people represented in government, and he embodies so many cultures, both in US and internationally....and Muslims need a voice..not that he has to be that voice, but a presence...not that he is one unless he says so but some of his family is. mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: mg Date: 27 Apr 07 - 09:22 PM Back to him and Edwards...I like them both..I think Obama seems more presidential but I must say Edwards has some very good ideas and would be a good vp, especially considering his wife's situation. He had an idea to help men get back with their families, as a presence, as a financial resource, not necessarily remarried or married...hire them, some goes to child support automatically as it should..and Obama had ideas on getting people exiting jail employed before they left, which we need. They also need housing, perhaps, probably, very secure housing, almost like jail but free to leave during the day. Lack of housing keeps many man (I presume women too) in jail and private parties, including myself, do not want to rent to them. Should be almost highest priority for public housing, again, nothing fancy, cement, cleanable, indestructable..spartan enough so you work towards getting something nicer...although I personally could be quite happy in a safe and quiet spartan cell.... Perhaps Richardson for secretary of state..I don't think we will be needing a secretary of defense. mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Ron Davies Date: 27 Apr 07 - 09:51 PM No secretary of defense?--tell us more. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Don Firth Date: 27 Apr 07 - 10:25 PM Secretary of Peace? Or would that make us all too wussy, as some folks insist? Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Peace Date: 27 Apr 07 - 10:31 PM Heaven forfend! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Rapparee Date: 27 Apr 07 - 10:54 PM I think that the Department of Defense should go back to its original name: War Department. It would be far more honest, and the State Department could actually go back to diplomacy and working as a Peace Department. But of course, we all know that the State Department is full of Commie sissies like Colin Powell -- Joe McCarthy and Richard Nixon proved that. I also have the strange notion that if the US is going to commit troops to combat, to a "war", it should be declared by Congress, as per the Constitution, and not given to the President as some sort of "authority to use force." If the President thinks a war is necessary, let him ask Congress for it -- and for the powers that would be necessary, including a draft and rationing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Ron Davies Date: 27 Apr 07 - 11:45 PM Absolutely, Rap. If the country believes a war is worth fighting, it's worth sacrificing for--and that's not, as in Mr. Bush's interpretation, going shopping. It means a draft. Otherwise, it's too easy for the "decider" to have somebody else pay the price. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 28 Apr 07 - 08:48 AM "What is there about the Trinity United Church of Christ that bothers you?" A whole lot--you name it. It's about time we had leadership in this country that was capable of thinking for itself. But what I was talking about was the speech Obama gave in the Senate, when he encouraged Democrats to court the same wigged-out-religious-wakkos who are supporting George Bush now. It's time to start ignoring these people. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Ron Davies Date: 28 Apr 07 - 12:39 PM Sorry, no, Riginslinger. It's time for you to show some of the tolerance for religion that you demand for skepticism. Also time for you to come down from the ivory tower and recognize reality. The South is heavily Christian. The only Democrats who have been elected President recently have been Southern men with a claim to religious belief. It does not follow that a candidate will attempt to ram that belief down your throat--did Kerry?----it appears that Obama, for instance, is fully aware of the separation of church and state. And it is reasonable to hold him to it. But it is not reasonable to reject a good man because of his own personal religion. And I do not claim to be in the least religious. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Peace Date: 28 Apr 07 - 12:47 PM The same stuff was said about John Kennedy. Folks thought that the Vatican would be running Washington. Didn't happen. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 29 Apr 07 - 09:23 AM "Sorry, no, Riginslinger. It's time for you to show some of the tolerance for religion that you demand for skepticism." I guess when one sees a force in the universe that seems to be dedicated to destroying the planet and leading mankind to complete annihialtion, it's hard to be tolerant. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Ron Davies Date: 29 Apr 07 - 01:22 PM Rig-- As you may have heard before, it's not religion which is dedicated to destroying the planet--except in your overheated imagination. Abuse of religion exists. This is a revelation? So does abuse of other ideologies. If you reject Obama because of his religious beliefs, please let us know who meets your stringent standards. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 29 Apr 07 - 02:26 PM Yes, I've heard it before, though I'm not at all sure I believe it. Of course, if that is the case, if we could just stamp out the scourge of religion there would be no religion to abuse. I'm not saying I reject Obama because of his religious views, I merely said they bothered me. This could have a lot to do with the fact that everytime the popular media presents someone to the public to represent the black community, it's always Reverend this or Reverend that. These people's views do not seem consistent with other black Americans I have known and worked with. In addition to that, I'm afraid if he was successful in getting the nomination, the same thing would happen to him in the general election that happened to Harold Ford in Tennessee. Finally, looking at the prospect of having another Republican in the White House, I would rather see Hillary Clinton, John Edwards of Dennis Kucinich take the primary. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Ron Davies Date: 29 Apr 07 - 08:27 PM Rig-- Iraq will determine who wins in 2008. If the situation hasn't drastically improved, none of the Republicans now declared candidates has a chance--regardless of who the Democrat is. I'm not quite as cynical as you are--though I was til recently. Ford had the problem that his opponents could couch their opposition as a stand against corruption--problems in his extended family. They can't get Obama for that--and anybody with more than one brain cell will realize Obama is not a radical Moslem. I think the country is ready to put racism behind it---finally. Obviously, we'll see. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Charley Noble Date: 29 Apr 07 - 08:28 PM I'm assuming the Democratic ticket will be Edwards/Obama and my rationale includes Edwards broad appeal in the south and his willingness to take firm positions on issues. Obama can add to the tickets appeal as an articulate liberal and a person of color. Clinton has solid support of 30% of the electorate but very little potential for expanding beyond that among Democrats, and much less among moderate Republicans who are sick of the Bush Administration. I wish Obama had the experience of a Richardson but he doesn't. Unfortunately, Richardson has the experience but not the popular appeal. I'd vote for him as Secretary of State, if Bill Cohen were not available. Oh, and as a delegate to Maine's State Convention, assuming I'm elected again, I'll be voting for Kucinich so that his bargaining power will be increased. Last time around Kucinich got over 25% of the Maine delegates. Cheerily, Charley Noble |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 30 Apr 07 - 08:57 AM It's too bad the whole thing has turned into a money-raising, spending thing. I think Kicinich has a lot to offer. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 01 May 07 - 02:46 PM "...anybody with more than one brain cell will realize Obama is not a radical Moslem." A radical Moslem, probably not, but a radical Christian? Maybe. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: GUEST,RealisticPatriot Date: 03 May 07 - 08:54 AM Is Obama muslim in part or other? radical or not, it doesnt matter.read the koran.islam is a message of hate; its followers to be rewarded richly by a god for the number of "unbelievers" they can erradicate from the earth. We classify muslims "radical" by the ones who actually follow the directives given them in their koran. If any of these religious principles play any part in my presidents descision process, i don't want them!
-Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 03 May 07 - 08:58 AM I really don't think Obama is a follower of Islam. He's a member of a Christian church--if that makes you feel any better. I think his father was born into some kind of Islamic tradition. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: DougR Date: 03 May 07 - 01:36 PM I think he is very clean and articulate. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 03 May 07 - 01:53 PM Where did this idea come from that he was Islamic? Sounds pretty reactionary, or possibly an intentional smear campaign from thiose with other axres to grind. And when did the religion test get added into the qualifications for public office? How very unchristian. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Don Firth Date: 03 May 07 - 01:58 PM ". . . read the Koran." Yes, GUEST,"Realistic" Patriot! Read it! It doesn't say any such thing, any more than the Bible does—which, I might add, is a bit problematic. It's only the radical Muslims—just like the Christian fundamentalists—who want to cram their beliefs down other people's throats, or slaughter "heretics" who won't accept their bill-of-goods. They comb through the scriptures (either Koran or Bible) to cherry-pick the verses (more often than not, taking them out of context) to try to "justify" their own heretical beliefs and actions. These people are neither Muslim nor Christian, no matter how pious their rhetoric. So Obama's father was a Muslim. But Obama is not. Religious belief is not a matter of heredity, it's a matter of choice. Besides, what, pray tell, would be so bad about having a president who is Muslim? Apart from certain factions having a hissy-fit over the fact, the same way they had a hissy-fit over John F. Kennedy's being a Catholic? It sounds like rampant bigotry to me! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 03 May 07 - 02:24 PM "Religious belief is not a matter of heredity, it's a matter of choice." Your absolutely right about that. And I've always wondered why, then, it should be protected as a protected right for the forces of anti-discrimination, like race or gender. If I choose to be a drunk or an opiate addict, the governmen thinks it's perfectly fine to discriminate against me, but if I choose to be a Presbyterian, it's not. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 03 May 07 - 02:34 PM Nor should it be, Rig. Your choice to be a Presbyterian reflects on your views of spiritual matters. Traditionally, the underlying assumptyion is that sensitivity to some kind of spiritual sensitivity makes an individual a better human, more open to such things as ethics, justice, and beauty. However, the absolute respect for self-determination in such matters is the only workable way to implement that principle in a free society. At least, I can't think of a more workable one. The problem gets multiplied inordinately and unnecessarily when spiritual interest or curiosity is automatically associated with one or another sets of silly icons, bizarre predictions, and far-out (and unfounded) assertions about how the world must be. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 03 May 07 - 05:07 PM The point is, it would be my choice to be a Presbyterian, if I chose to be one. I don't choose to be male, female, African or European. I don't see any reason to antagonize somebody unnecessarily, but governmental sanctions should only apply, it seems to me, when people are unvoluntarily herded into classified groups. Though I'm not at all sure any of this has anything to do with Obama. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: mg Date: 03 May 07 - 10:06 PM I suspect that not everyone would choose to be the religion they were raised in. Well, me for example. I would be a unitarian or druid or something..mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 04 May 07 - 10:24 AM The point is, however, as some time in their life they do choose. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 10 May 07 - 02:17 PM Democrats Overtake Republicans in 2008 Ballot May 9, 2007 (Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Democrat Barack Obama leads three prospective Republican presidential nominees in the United States, according to a poll by Princeton Survey Research Associates released by Newsweek. 50 per cent of respondents would vote for the Illinois senator, while 43 per cent would back former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani. In addition, Obama holds a 13-point advantage over Arizona senator John McCain, and a 19-point lead over former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney. In other contests, New York senator Hillary Rodham Clinton leads Giuliani by three points, McCain by six points, and Romney by 22 points. Former North Carolina senator John Edwards is also ahead against the three Republicans. On May 7, Giuliani called for an expansion of the country's armed forces, saying, "I believe America needs at least 10 new combat brigades in addition to those already proposed (that) are already in the budget." In American elections, candidates require 270 votes in the Electoral College to win the White House. In November 2004, Republican George W. Bush earned a second term after securing 286 electoral votes from 31 states. Democratic nominee John Kerry received 252 electoral votes from 19 states and the District of Columbia. http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/15674 A |
