Which Democrat Is Electable?

**Tumbleweed** · Admin Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts votes: 4

I get the impression Hillary an Obama are both at blame for the back and forth point, counterpoint debate, but it's bringing up issues so I dont see the harm of mixing it up.

Politicians will give more details on defense more than offence ,so put them under pressure and squeeze it out of them. Wink

We are finally getting them to take a stand on the issues and everybody is hollering shut up. Rolling Eyes

This is the only way to dig through this mess . I like heated debates because I get straighter answers for my questions about their policy.

Other than saying Hillary is a liar and making stuff up , I haven't seen anything that shows she lies anymore than any of the other candidates from either side of the aisle. I do think Bill got involved a bit too soon, but she didn't play that card until she was projected to lose.

If Bill can translate his support into support for Hillary I think she will be tough to beat.

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

I have no prob with the issues, but I do with the misrepresentation and the lies.

**Tumbleweed** · Admin Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts votes: 4

I'm hearing a lot about lies and misrepresentations but what is it they are lying about ?

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

Lying about:

What he said about Ronald Reagan
The "fairy Tale" of his war opposition.

The war one really gets me - Hillary is Bush-Lite on the war. Went along while the polls showed that she should - only when the polls turned did her position turn. I would have thought that her Iraq vote wouldn't get the free pass that it does by the democrats. I overestimated the intensity of the anti-war crowd.

**Tumbleweed** · Admin Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts votes: 4

I see. The Iraq war vote. The one Obama wasn't a part of. Another one of his lip service votes.

The Ronald McDonald comment. Obama said that Reagan delivered on what people were looking for — controlling an overgrown government, for example.

I can't think of a single time in recent history that a Democrat has shrunk the size of government. Obama is not going to either.

Or maybe Obama thinks that raising the national debt in order to bring the country out of a recession was a good move. Either way Obama left his comments open to interpretation, then bitches about it when someone tries to figure out what he meant. Reagan didn't control government spending or the size of government.

Seems like Obama was endorsing Reaganomics to me.

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

That is the way they spin it.....he basically said that Reagan had ideas that changed the Us, that is true....i have heard nothing of praise

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

Tumbleweed wrote:

I see. The Iraq war vote. The one Obama wasn't a part of. Another one of his lip service votes.

The Ronald McDonald comment. Obama said that Reagan delivered on what people were looking for — controlling an overgrown government, for example.

I can't think of a single time in recent history that a Democrat has shrunk the size of government. Obama is not going to either.

Or maybe Obama thinks that raising the national debt in order to bring the country out of a recession was a good move. Either way Obama left his comments open to interpretation, then bitches about it when someone tries to figure out what he meant. Reagan didn't control government spending or the size of government.

Seems like Obama was endorsing Reaganomics to me.

Boy - you are a good Clintonite - you have got the twisting and spinning down pretty good.

Unfortunately, Billary, I did not write that they were lying about the "Iraq Vote". I wrote this:

"Lying about:

What he said about Ronald Reagan
The "fairy Tale" of his war opposition. "

Please note the difference. There is not the word "vote". Obama was not in the Senate for the 02 vote and therefore did not cast a vote on it. Hillary, on the other hand, coming off her 8 years of being very involved in the white house decisions, and a sitting senator with all the access to intelligence that she wanted - for 10 years - cast a YES vote.

Obama is on public record and with recorded speeches voiced his opposition to the war - going against the 70% majority. Obama didn't take a poll to decide which way to come down on the issue.

Now - Bill Clinton finds Obama's votes with Hillary for funding the war once he was in the senate to be the problem. Hence his calling his opposition to the war a fairytale. Nice attempt to change the subject and mislead readers about my statement.

Reagan

I don't think that you have read or watched the Obama quote - here it is.

Obama's Reagan Remarks to Reno Gazette-Journal,
Jan. 14, 2008
Obama: I don’t want to present myself as some sort of singular figure. I think part of what’s different are the times. I do think that, for example, the 1980 election was different. I mean, I think Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that, you know, Richard Nixon did not, and in a way that Bill Clinton did not. He put us on a fundamentally different path, because the country was ready for it. I think they felt like, you know, with all the excesses of the '60s and the '70s, you know government had grown and grown, but there wasn’t much sense of accountability in terms of how it was operating, and I think people just tapped into – he tapped into what people were already feeling, which is we want clarity, we want optimism, we want a return to that sense of dynamism, and, and, you know, entrepreneurship that had been missing.

I think Kennedy, 20 years earlier, moved the country in a fundamentally different direction. So I think a lot of it just has to do with the times. I think we’re in one of those times right now, where people feels like things as they are going right now aren’t working, that we’re bogged down in the same arguments that we’ve been having, and they’re not useful. And the Republican approach, I think, has played itself out. I think it’s fair to say that the Republicans were the party of ideas for a pretty long chunk of time there over the last 10, 15 years, in the sense that they were challenging conventional wisdom.

Now, you’ve heard it all before. You look at the economic policies when they’re being debated among the presidential candidates, it’s all tax cuts. Well, we know, we’ve done that; we’ve tried it. That’s not really going to solve our energy problems, for example.

Hillary Clinton LIES: [He] has said in the last week that he really liked the ideas of the Republicans over the last 10 to 15 years, and we can give you the exact quote. ... They were ideas like privatizing Social Security, like moving back from a balanced budget and a surplus to deficit and debt.

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

Oh - and why I find this all disappointing:

Because for the first time, I could have cast a vote for a democratic presidential candidate - I was looking forward to it.

The Obama campaign was running on hope, turn the page, we can do it etc. A positive message about the future - which I really thought would resonate with the democrats.

The Clintons saw that this worked in Iowa - so as they have done so many times before - the set out to destroy those who stand in their way of obtaining/retainig power. The democrats went for it in NH and Nevada.

So - what's Obama to do? The democrats have shown that they buy into the Clinton lies (again) - his only choice is to fight the Clinton hit squad - an uphill battle for sure.

This is so reminiscent of Jennifer Flowers - destroy her, call her a lying bimbo etc. Then, after winning, admit - we'll yeah, I did actually have an affair with her.

I really am holding out hope for Obama - unfortunatley, I am relying on democrats to stand on principle - I will not hold my breath.

**Tumbleweed** · Admin Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts votes: 4

I'm not a Clintonite so don't go there. I'm stating the obvious. I haven't even said I was voting for her. Rolling Eyes

You call me Billary again and I'll delete your whole post. Wink

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

Tumbleweed wrote:

I'm not a Clintonite so don't go there. I'm stating the obvious. I haven't even said I was voting for her. Rolling Eyes

You call me Billary again and I'll delete your whole post. Wink

Threats of Censorship ?

**Tumbleweed** · Admin Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts votes: 4

Nope. Personal insult. I don't have to tolerate being called names.

Freedom of speech doesn't give you a right to post personal attacks . You can give that argument up. If you don't like what I have to say that's fine with me but calling people names because you disagree with them is a personal attack, and it just so happens nobody here has to put up with it.

It's not censorship. It's the "shut to hell up with the name calling" clause in the fine print of forum rules. Wink

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

I didn't know that you would be insulted by labels indicating that you are a Clinton(s) fan. Your avatar and your posts led me to believe that you were a Clinton supporter.

**Tumbleweed** · Admin Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts votes: 4

RSR.

Are you familiasr with the term devils advocate? I took the opposing position on this discussion for the sole purpose of having 2 points of view but not knowing me very well you assumed I am a Hillary supporter.

I do like Bill but I'm still undecided who I'm going to support in this election. I put the avatar up for the hell of it actually.

The bottom line is I don't like being called names just because I present an opposinig view. Until recently I have avoided all that name calling, mud slinging style posting by staying in my comfort zone here on APF. It's discussions like this one that reminds me why I only post here. Wink

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

my mistake

**Kizzume** · Capo Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts votes: 1

Tumbleweed wrote:

RSR.

Are you familiasr with the term devils advocate? I took the opposing position on this discussion for the sole purpose of having 2 points of view but not knowing me very well you assumed I am a Hillary supporter.

I do like Bill but I'm still undecided who I'm going to support in this election. I put the avatar up for the hell of it actually.

The bottom line is I don't like being called names just because I present an opposinig view. Until recently I have avoided all that name calling, mud slinging style posting by staying in my comfort zone here on APF. It's discussions like this one that reminds me why I only post here. Wink

Being called "Billary" wasn't very nice, no, but at the same time, I don't understand AT ALL the idea of putting up an avatar that says you support something that you don't support.