 sj |
||
|
||
BS: 2012 Presidential Election
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2012 Presidential Election From: John P Date: 03 May 11 - 06:06 PM Yes, the mega-corporations have way too much influence on our elections. However, that doesn't change the fact that Republicans want to legislate our bedrooms, change our history in our text books, destroy the earth, establish a state religion, and give everything that isn't nailed down to folks who already have way too much. Democrats are a LOT less likely to do those things. Those who think they are all the same need to look at the party platforms. Yes, Obama has wimped out on a lot of issues -- does that mean you'd rather have Bush or Trump or Palin? If you can't see the difference, please wake up. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2012 Presidential Election From: gnu Date: 03 May 11 - 04:47 PM Depends on if NATO stops bombing Afghanistan... pulls out... etcetera. Of course, there's the bombing of Libya... etcetera... etcetera... WHOLE lotta shootin goin on. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2012 Presidential Election From: Wesley S Date: 03 May 11 - 04:17 PM I don't know if the death of Osama Bil Laden makes Obama a shoo-in at the next election - but it won't hurt him either. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2012 Presidential Election From: Wesley S Date: 17 Mar 11 - 07:31 PM The Forth Congressional District of Massachusetts Barney Frank's website |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2012 Presidential Election From: Little Hawk Date: 17 Mar 11 - 06:32 PM He sounds like an interesting man. Which state is he from? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2012 Presidential Election From: Donuel Date: 17 Mar 11 - 06:29 PM LH Barney Franks is the Danial Webster and Mark Twain of Congress. Not only is he funny but he is exceedingly clear in his exposition of an issue or attitude. His orientation has never been a factor in his electability. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2012 Presidential Election From: Little Hawk Date: 17 Mar 11 - 06:21 PM Going for big names is generally a smart move. Politics is a giant marketing excercise. When you're marketing, you want a brand name that's easily recognizable. That's why Scharzenneger got elected in California....not because he could do the job well...because he was well known. Trump/Palin could certainly be viewed as a strategic ticket by the Republicans for just that reason...and Trump would appear to have the professional expertise while Palin would provide the hometown "spunkiness" and glamour. You should call them up, Bobert, and suggest it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2012 Presidential Election From: Bobert Date: 17 Mar 11 - 05:34 PM I agree with what a lot of BillD says... This idea that both side are guilty of this or that is the exact story that the right want people talking about... It's their only chance in the 2012... Seems the Dems have stood up and defended the labor movement, health care reform, Wall street reform and would have voted to repeal the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy had Obama not cut a deal... Might of fact, if the two parties were both the same then there wouldn't be so many votes down party lines... As for 2012??? I'm looking for a Trump/Palin ticket from the Repubs... They will go for "big names" over substance... Normal... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2012 Presidential Election From: Bettynh Date: 17 Mar 11 - 05:19 PM Presidential running is a cash crop here in NH. Here's part of the current crop.. Each of these visits produces a gaggle of staff who fill our hotel rooms. 8% of the room fees and restaurant tabs goes directly to the state of NH. Michele Bachmann was particularly entertaining when she congratulated NH on being the state where the battle at Lexington and Concord was fought (for those weak on US geography, the battle was in neighboring Massachusetts). No Sara Palin yet. George W. avoided us, too. Watching candidates is something to do while the snow melts. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2012 Presidential Election From: Little Hawk Date: 17 Mar 11 - 04:58 PM I hadn't even heard of Barney Frank before, Bill...don't particularly care whether he's gay or not, but if he is, then it would be a handicap of sorts in getting elected in the USA. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2012 Presidential Election From: GUEST,Ebor_Fiddler Date: 17 Mar 11 - 04:54 PM Do the rest of us really HAVE to suffer this outrageous nonsense again? To think that there are people in this country who would have us turn to a similar republican system whose constitution is still mired in the 18th century while the world elsewhere has moved on |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2012 Presidential Election From: Wesley S Date: 17 Mar 11 - 04:34 PM Amerigin - If you're right then the solution is to just crawl under a rock and give up. But I might add that just because you don't get the change that YOU want when you want it doesn't mean that nothing is happening. Ocean liners can't make 90 degree turns no matter how much we want them to. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2012 Presidential Election From: Donuel Date: 17 Mar 11 - 04:33 PM Oligarchies win typically for a hundred or more years and then are simantled from within and without. Taking out the current anti democratic State level oligarchs and govenors will be easy compared to Wall St. Does anyone know about the Odessa file? That points to the prize of the 4th Reich. Guess who owns the NEw York Stock Exchange? If you inderstand what I am saying you should write a novel about it. I would but I still have young children to care for. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2012 Presidential Election From: Bill D Date: 17 Mar 11 - 03:25 PM Yes LH... I understand that you agree with Amerigin and believe that way...and I even see some of the reasons. I just do NOT accept that is a gold-plated given that it IS totally that way, or that it always will be. Corruption and greed forever? Sure... remedies, if we bother to use them? Yes... "....both have their hands are paid off to do the bidding of mega corporations..." And you KNOW this how? Don't just tell me "it's obvious". One of the problems...and virtues... of a system like ours is that it is possible to sway events with votes.....good swaying or BAD swaying. Yes...votes can be 'bought'...in various ways and with different currencies.... this does NOT mean ALL votes in ALL circumstances. We are seeing that in Wisconsin as many voters realize they were lied to by the governor about what he intended to actually DO.....and some legislators, also. Now they are going thru the procedure of beginning recalls...and after a year, they can do it to the governor, too. I often wish we had, as many countries do, 'votes of no confidence' and special elections. I know about Dennis Kucinich ... and I think he serves a valuable purpose where he is. I just think that the good he would do as president would be outweighed by his 'shoot from the hip' concept of dealing with issues. (Now... I would vote for Barney Frank in a minute! but he is *gasp* gay!...and there are several others who know and understand what is going on). I am waiting to see what the Democrats run on next year.... there are SO many issues that are **important**, but not every one galvanizes voters. The Republicans DO know how to get disparate groups all under one bulgy, cluttered banner....but they mostly run AGAINST things. Now, the Democrats have some stuff THEY can run against. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2012 Presidential Election From: Little Hawk Date: 17 Mar 11 - 02:17 PM I have noted your objection to the idea of the Oligarchy, Bill. ;-) I regard it as naive. I think you are engaging in wishful thinking regarding the USA's political system and its possibilities. In other words, I agree with Amergin. I do not suggest that you do nothing, however. I suggest that you live as good and productive and happy an individual life as you possibly can...the same suggestion I would have made to a citizen of Rome during its long imperial slide into corruption and decline. I also suggest you support any politician who genuinely stands up against the great lobbying system in Washington...but such politicians are VERY rare. Obama isn't one of them. I think Dennis Kucinich is one, but he's in Ohio, and you're not, so it's kind of a moot point in your case to mention him. I think Ron Paul is another (though I totally disagree with his odd view of socialism)...but he does have some other good ideas. I don't have to agree with a man about everything to recognize that some of his ideas are well worth listening to. I don't think there's a dog's chance in hell that the 2 big parties will ever elect a maverick like Kucinich or Paul to the presidency, but it's nice to see that a few such can at least get elected to Congress. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2012 Presidential Election From: Amergin Date: 17 Mar 11 - 01:47 PM Ok...here in the states you have two parties....both have their hands are paid off to do the bidding of mega corporations....All any one does anymore is to vote for what they deem to be the lesser of two evils...and yet you blindly sit back and say voting brings change. It doesn't. Where is the change? Where are the jobs? The economy is in the toilet...Obama thought change meant bringing back the same crooks that were in the Clinton Administration, and to keep on many of the thugs from the Bush II regime. How is that change? We hear about change in the two houses of Congress, how things will get better if we vote for the liar that's running, whether he be elephant or ass. Yet nothing ever truly is. Have you ever wondered why the democrats do not fight for the things they profess to believe in, beyond a token response? It is because they are paid off. The republicans fight for what they say they believe in....or at least what they are paid to by their masters. Jack London was right. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2012 Presidential Election From: Bill D Date: 17 Mar 11 - 01:00 PM It will come as no surprise to some of you, but I am totally tired of the dismissive attempt to attribute all the power to "**The Oligarchy**". Yeah... I know that business interests and various related abstract entities DO strive to influence elections and events to their advantage, but it is That is barely one step below suggesting that Jewish bankers run the world. It IS a lot of work for the mass of average citizens to read and think & listen and VOTE... but they CAN if they try! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2012 Presidential Election From: Bee-dubya-ell Date: 17 Mar 11 - 08:55 AM The deciding factor in the 2012 election will be how many of the people who voted for Obama in 2008 don't vote at all in 2012. Who the Republicans nominate is irrelevant. He'll receive about the same number of votes as John MCain did in 2008. But if Obama's 2008 supporters stay home in large enough droves, that'll be enough. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2012 Presidential Election From: Rapparee Date: 17 Mar 11 - 07:15 AM About what? There was something I was going to say. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2012 Presidential Election From: GUEST,999 Date: 17 Mar 11 - 12:22 AM '"You might have had a chance with Hillary." I'm glad to know someone other than Charles Farquar--a good friend--thinks so. Thank you.' I posted that without appending the 999 to the GUEST place to put one's handle--sounds more lascivious than it is. And my response after that has been tempered by the fact that I can't quite recall what I had intended to write. I think it was Crap! Every time I have a great thought my mind goes blank. I'm quite sure too many of you understand. :) BM |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2012 Presidential Election From: Little Hawk Date: 17 Mar 11 - 12:08 AM Like Amergin said...both sides are ruled by the Oligarchy. Obama will be re-elected if things aren't looking quite grim for the economy in the last few months of his term...and if the Oligarchy wants him re-elected. The Republicans will be elected if things are looking quite grim for the economy in the last few months of his term...and if the Oligarchy wants them elected. If the Oligarchy doesn't really give a damn which one of them gets elected (which is quite possible), and if things are sort of cruddy but not totally hopeless, then it might go either way! ;-) In that case you can have an exciting and nailbiting finish and all go totally mad on election night...and whoever's side wins, they can go into total ecstasy for a short time afterward, and the ones who lost can mutter darkly about the hideous things that will surely happen under the new administration. Sound familiar? ;-D |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2012 Presidential Election From: Amergin Date: 16 Mar 11 - 11:56 PM Everyone will forget to hate republicans by then....and believe some new spin...but then it doesn't matter. Both sides are ruled by the Oligarchy, anyway. It makes voting a moot point. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2012 Presidential Election From: Donuel Date: 16 Mar 11 - 11:01 PM By then Republican govenors may have alienated so many people with their Soviet style over reach that a dark horse libertarian Tea party person would look centrist in comparison. Whoa did I just say that? I wish they would just get Beck and Limbaugh to run already. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2012 Presidential Election From: Bill D Date: 16 Mar 11 - 10:41 PM Makes no difference.... the world will end 6 weeks after the election... . . . . . . . . . . . ...maybe ☺ My basic take is that the Republicans have NO serious candidate in sight. Lawrence O'Donnell keeps predicting that Tim Pawlenty is the ONLY one with few enough negatives to have a chance, and he keeps saying silly things. Several Republicans are just in the 'maybe' field to make $$$$$ off speeches and books and donations. Almost any of them are disliked by other Republicans. Unless there is a real dark horse out there, or something weird happens, I can't see who they can challenge a well-spoken guy like Obama with. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2012 Presidential Election From: GUEST,number 6 Date: 16 Mar 11 - 10:35 PM Oh no .... here we go again .... :-{ biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2012 Presidential Election From: Little Hawk Date: 16 Mar 11 - 10:19 PM Anything is possible, and it's way too early to make predictions about 2012. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2012 Presidential Election From: Rapparee Date: 16 Mar 11 - 10:17 PM Suppose Obama decides not to run again? That he says, "Screw this, I'm outa here. Y'all can go ta hell in your own way." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2012 Presidential Election From: Donuel Date: 16 Mar 11 - 10:02 PM Wow look at all these happy campers all on one forum! I say we have a UN resolution to vote on an International Economic Reset. Once we hit the reset button all money owed to Wall St. or individuals with over 1 billion in assets goes to zero. Problem solved. If any billionaires go postal like a James Bond Villian, we send in James to take them out. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2012 Presidential Election From: Rapparee Date: 16 Mar 11 - 09:48 PM There are about 20 months between now and the 2012 election. That's better than 600 days. MUCH could happen between now and then. For example: * Civil war in China * A nuclear weapon is exploded in a US or European city * Deaths or Recalls change the makeup of Congress * The price of oil goes so high that it becomes economical to develop US oil reserves * The Middle East re-stabilizes with democracies in Egypt and elsewhere * North Korea and South Korea make up and become part of the emerging China-India economic powerhouse * The US/Canada/Europe economies realize how much depends on education It's way, way, way to early to play the game. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2012 Presidential Election From: Amergin Date: 16 Mar 11 - 09:08 PM Obama's idea of compromise is to bend over and take it like a prison bitch. Fuck him. I'm not voting for that man again. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2012 Presidential Election From: artbrooks Date: 16 Mar 11 - 08:59 PM Gee, and is the sky falling, too? I think you pay too much attention to Fox, Justa. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2012 Presidential Election From: Justa Picker Date: 16 Mar 11 - 07:55 PM Unfortunately you're probably right, and god help your country. You might have had a chance with Hillary. I am going to go out on a limb and predict that before Obama is re-elected, your stock market is going to crash; your economy is going to collapse once the world moves away from the US Dollar as the world's reserve currency (which means you won't be able to continue to just print money while artificially keeping your crippled economy afloat and therefore won't be able to sustain or pay your trillions in debt, causing 25% unemployment in the U.S and a total depression world wide) and martial law as well as internment camps will be imposed in the U.S, in an effort to try and curtail the wide spread looting and rioting that will ensue across the entire country. 'Course I could be wrong, but I doubt it. The writing is clearly on the wall for those who choose to see. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 2012 Presidential Election From: Donuel Date: 16 Mar 11 - 07:47 PM The Republicans need a really heavy ticket Christy Huckabee |
|
Subject: BS: 2012 Presidential Election From: Wesley S Date: 16 Mar 11 - 07:45 PM I'm going to go out on a limb here and now and predict that Barack Obama will win the American presidential election in 2012. He'll keep moving his platform toward the center to appeal to as many people as possible. His opponents will go stark raving bonkers - and that will drive more moderates to his camp. And he's still the best speech giver and campaigner out there. And if the tea party tries to run their own candidate that will just cinch the election for Obama. However - you may have a different opinion about all of this. |
