Which Democrat Is Electable?

**Admiral Crunch** · Civilian Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

This isnt about raising taxes. Its about repealing tax cuts to the top 1% who can actually afford to pay taxes and reducing the excessive taxes on those who cant afford them. This will increase consumer spending and demand that will create incentive to create more jobs.

**CHUQ** · Agitator Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts votes: 3

Admiral Crunch wrote:

This isnt about raising taxes. Its about repealing tax cuts to the top 1% who can actually afford to pay taxes and reducing the excessive taxes on those who cant afford them. This will increase consumer spending and demand that will create incentive to create more jobs.

I agree. But if Clinton or McCain is pres then this will not happen.

**JimH52** · Associate Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts votes: 1

I still think Hillary is the most electable but Obama will be nominated. I see the Dems shooting themselves in the foot once again in 2008. Obama has baggage that has not been unpacked yet.

**CHUQ** · Agitator Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts votes: 3

I think becuz of the Clinton/Obama wars McCain will be the next pres

**Bumpy** · Civilian Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

Personally, I think Barack Obama is the better candidate. However, Hillary has the advantage, because Bill Clinton is good with economics and foreign affairs-and we all know that he'll be doing his third term as president behind the scenes. I don't think John McCain is a very good presidential candidate. He's just an older version of G.W. Bush, and is always talking about war or bombing down some country. McCain is not very good with economics or diplomacy in foreign countries outside of Europe, and he thinks he can solve America's problems in Iraq with endless war. And, McCain is one step away from using a walker, and he's too old school and can't really relate to us younger voters. At least Hillary and Obama can do this, and Obama is still kinda young, and full of energy. Hillary is older, but she still know how to relate to the younger voters, and is up to date on the times. Plus, Hillary has a daughter who is part of the young crowd, so that is to her advantage too. However, I hope Obama is our next president. I think it would be exciting to see a black man as president of the U.S., and interesting everyday just to see how all the American people react to him. He's probably not going to be able to even go to the bathroom without loads of security. And, all the women go crazy over him-fainting, wanting him. Gee, maybe I should be president. And, Obama is very smart politically, too. And, I think he could bring the entire world in line and on a positive path. But, we'll all just have to wait and see what happens.

**Wolf** · Soldier Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts votes: 1

Neither Clinton or Obama is "electable". We should write off the White House and try to focus our efforts at getting Progressives elected to Congress so they may stand up to the abuses of power McCain shall engage in.

**sglaine** · Moderator Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts votes: 1

I really do not see a choice in any party...And that is pretty depressing

**JimH52** · Associate Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts votes: 1

Obama will win the Dem nod but he cannot beat McCain. I will probably end up not voting form anyone..

**CHUQ** · Agitator Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts votes: 3

Polls are showing that McCain can beat Obama, but it is way too early to believe those head to head polls. I recall that Gore had a good lead over Bush, but it did not work out that way. Of course, there was a little help from Florida. I think that the polls will start reflecting tghis as soon as tghere is a clear Dem frontrunner.

**JimH52** · Associate Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts votes: 1

The wild card that Obama holds is the new voters, as was said earlier in the forum. The new voters will be overwhelmingly Democratic . If there is no Rev Wright still in the picture or another Bitter comment out there, he could defeat McCain.

The debates will either make or break Obama. I know! I know! That is the way it is every year but more so this year. Obama is still an unknown quantity to many of the electorate.

**Rupchuk** · Moderator Thanks: 0 Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts votes: 4

JimH52 wrote:

The new voters will be overwhelmingly Democratic .

Why is that? I've wondered that sometimes. I think it is because the young voters are usually more naive.

It'll probably be close between Obama and McCain. I think McCain has a slight advantage because he is already proven, Obama has to outdo McCain, he can't just break even. Also Obama seems to have problems with bad press every time he starts to break away with the voters. The sad part is that sometimes it wouldn't happen if he just kept his mouth shut. Rev. Wright, the speech on race, talking about the "bitter" people, and so on. If he wants to win he needs to keep not only his mouth shut but keep his friends quiet because every time they open their mouths I think they are losing votes.

**CHUQ** · Agitator Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts votes: 3

Polls are showing that in the head to head with Clinton, Obama is still holding a 10 pt lead, but polls are about as useful as used toilet paper; they are usually wrong at election time. McCain lost all support from me when he flipped on tax cuts, torture, etc. I do not vote for people that change their tune just to get votes.

So my problem is that is happening with all candidates and that leaves me thinking of just what the hell to do.

**Rupchuk** · Moderator Thanks: 0 Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts votes: 4

I'd vote for McCain (and I'm not voting for McCain) before Obama and Clinton simply because he is more likely NOT to enact a gun ban. Even though he still only got a C+ from the NRA, Clinton and Obama both got a F. And guns are a big issue for me. I could care less about self-defense and hunting. I don't hunt and self-defense was such an inherit right that the founding fathers never put it in the constitution (just like they didn't put the right to breathe). Firearms are all about keeping the government in check and any candidate who wants to limit the access of law-abiding citizens to firearms will not get my vote even at the cost of me not voting.

Oh and Ron Paul was about the only candidate who was gun friendly for the sake of keeping the government in check.

**JimH52** · Associate Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts votes: 1

"Firearms are all about keeping the government in check and any candidate who wants to limit the access of law-abiding citizens to firearms will not get my vote even at the cost of me not voting."

What do you mean? Would the army take military rule if we didn't have our guys? PLEASE... I thought Charlton Heston died?

**Rupchuk** · Moderator Thanks: 0 Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts votes: 4

No the military wouldn't take control. A tyrant might take over though and try to suspend rights or maybe even worse. The last thing a tyrant wants is an armed populace. You cannot guarantee that the government will not betray its own people. The killing in Sudan is a fresh example. Granted that Sudan isn't the US. However, things may be nice and peachy here in America now but that doesn't guarantee the future. Europe wasn't so bad either, then 6 million Jews didn't make it to the end of 1945.

Like it or not the 2nd amendment was designed to keep the government in check.

Quote:

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."