[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Treasure Moment wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Smitty wrote: [/QUOTENAME]LOL, Treasure Moment's watched Zeitgeist one too many times...
As for the VP pick, Biden's an excellent choice. I'd go into more depth, but I'd just be echoing what everyone's been saying.[/QUOTE]
well that documentary has alot of very valid points.[/QUOTE]
It does have a lot of very valid points. But what it lacks is a lot of very valid evidence, especially in the last two parts.
But hey, this thread is about Obama's VP, so let's keep it on topic.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
I guess the USA is forward thinking enough to have an Afro-American president, but still too backward to have a female vice president.
Instead Obama picks a guy that has difficulty writing original campaign speeches, and feels it necessary to "borrow" from past speeches.
Instead Obama picks a guy that has difficulty writing original campaign speeches, and feels it necessary to "borrow" from past speeches.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Gym Bitch wrote: [/QUOTENAME]I guess the USA is forward thinking enough to have an Afro-American president, but still too backward to have a female vice president.
Instead Obama picks a guy that has difficulty writing original campaign speeches, and feels it necessary to "borrow" from past speeches. [/QUOTE]
I don't know Biden inside and out, but if this is the worst they have on him, well, it's a hell of a lot better than the skeletons of so many others.
As for a female vice president - I'm guessing if he picked any woman other than Clinton, he would have lost all the ground he gained. And, Hillary as his running mate would have been too controversial, not to mention completely opposite his stated goal for 'change'. You can't get change if you bring in more of the same. I'm a Hillary supporter yet even I didn't want to see her as his running mate.
If the election was held several months ago, maybe they would have had a chance to win the White House. Hillary furor has wound down. People want something new, something they can hope to believe in. Biden is always chopping at the bit - he WILL get things done. Obama wants to go down in history as more than being the first black president - he wants to be a great president who also happened to be the first black president.
The two together want the opposite of what we've had for the past eight years. That alone should secure them the top spots in the country.
But then... I have to wonder... is the USA really forward thinking enough to vote for a non-white president, regardless who his VP might be?
Instead Obama picks a guy that has difficulty writing original campaign speeches, and feels it necessary to "borrow" from past speeches. [/QUOTE]
I don't know Biden inside and out, but if this is the worst they have on him, well, it's a hell of a lot better than the skeletons of so many others.
As for a female vice president - I'm guessing if he picked any woman other than Clinton, he would have lost all the ground he gained. And, Hillary as his running mate would have been too controversial, not to mention completely opposite his stated goal for 'change'. You can't get change if you bring in more of the same. I'm a Hillary supporter yet even I didn't want to see her as his running mate.
If the election was held several months ago, maybe they would have had a chance to win the White House. Hillary furor has wound down. People want something new, something they can hope to believe in. Biden is always chopping at the bit - he WILL get things done. Obama wants to go down in history as more than being the first black president - he wants to be a great president who also happened to be the first black president.
The two together want the opposite of what we've had for the past eight years. That alone should secure them the top spots in the country.
But then... I have to wonder... is the USA really forward thinking enough to vote for a non-white president, regardless who his VP might be?
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Smitty wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Treasure Moment wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Smitty wrote: [/QUOTENAME]LOL, Treasure Moment's watched Zeitgeist one too many times...
As for the VP pick, Biden's an excellent choice. I'd go into more depth, but I'd just be echoing what everyone's been saying.[/QUOTE]
well that documentary has alot of very valid points.[/QUOTE]
It does have a lot of very valid points. But what it lacks is a lot of very valid evidence, especially in the last two parts.
But hey, this thread is about Obama's VP, so let's keep it on topic.[/QUOTE]
its is on the topic, its about how it doesnt matter which puppet gets elected.
As for the VP pick, Biden's an excellent choice. I'd go into more depth, but I'd just be echoing what everyone's been saying.[/QUOTE]
well that documentary has alot of very valid points.[/QUOTE]
It does have a lot of very valid points. But what it lacks is a lot of very valid evidence, especially in the last two parts.
But hey, this thread is about Obama's VP, so let's keep it on topic.[/QUOTE]
its is on the topic, its about how it doesnt matter which puppet gets elected.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]ThomasQuinn wrote: [/QUOTENAME]I consider it a good choice;[/QUOTE]
Well, that's a shock.
I assume you don't like him because he was FOR the invasion of Iraq. It's because he flip-flopped and jumped on the critique ship after America decided they weren't really 100% behind this thing. That's it, right?
Well, that's a shock.
I assume you don't like him because he was FOR the invasion of Iraq. It's because he flip-flopped and jumped on the critique ship after America decided they weren't really 100% behind this thing. That's it, right?
This is not a shot at magicalfreddiemercury, just a shot a politics in general.
Watch what you can do with this:
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]magicalfreddiemercury wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
As for Biden, I also think he's a good choice - though a chancy one. He's a hot-headed in-your-face kind of guy. I guess as a counter to Obama, that can be a good thing. [/QUOTE]
As for Cheney, I also think he's a good choice - though a chancy one. He's a hot-headed in-your-face kind of guy. I guess as a counter to Bush, that can be a good thing.
[QUOTE]If you consider Obama's limits in the area of foreign policy (and who isn't considering that?), Biden's experience there is his golden ticket to the V.P. slot - but the spin will be (and already is) that choosing Biden shows Obama's lack of confidence in this area.
[/QUOTE]
If you consider Bush's limits in the area of foreign policy (and who isn't considering that?), Cheney's experience there is his golden ticket to the V.P. slot - but the spin will be (and already is) that choosing Cheney shows Bush's lack of confidence in this area.
Uncanny, isn't it?
Here's to four more years!
Watch what you can do with this:
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]magicalfreddiemercury wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
As for Biden, I also think he's a good choice - though a chancy one. He's a hot-headed in-your-face kind of guy. I guess as a counter to Obama, that can be a good thing. [/QUOTE]
As for Cheney, I also think he's a good choice - though a chancy one. He's a hot-headed in-your-face kind of guy. I guess as a counter to Bush, that can be a good thing.
[QUOTE]If you consider Obama's limits in the area of foreign policy (and who isn't considering that?), Biden's experience there is his golden ticket to the V.P. slot - but the spin will be (and already is) that choosing Biden shows Obama's lack of confidence in this area.
[/QUOTE]
If you consider Bush's limits in the area of foreign policy (and who isn't considering that?), Cheney's experience there is his golden ticket to the V.P. slot - but the spin will be (and already is) that choosing Cheney shows Bush's lack of confidence in this area.
Uncanny, isn't it?
Here's to four more years!
While I agree that substituting Cheney for Biden does sound familiar, one thing should be noted as major differences between Bush and Obama.
Bush's major advisers (like Cheney, Rice, etc) were in fact holdovers from the elder Bush's presidency. In essence, Bush Jr. surrounded himself (or insulated himself, depending on your politics) with voices from the past.
Taking your father's Sec of Defense and making him your VP is slightly different than taking a former critic and giving him the slot.
Bush's major advisers (like Cheney, Rice, etc) were in fact holdovers from the elder Bush's presidency. In essence, Bush Jr. surrounded himself (or insulated himself, depending on your politics) with voices from the past.
Taking your father's Sec of Defense and making him your VP is slightly different than taking a former critic and giving him the slot.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Maz wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
Taking your father's Sec of Defense and making him your VP is slightly different than taking a former critic and giving him the slot.[/QUOTE]
You're right. Cheney has/had a lot more experience at the executive level than a wild ass senator. So, I'd say Bush made a good choice. Who knew he'd become the incarnation of Al Haig?
Taking your father's Sec of Defense and making him your VP is slightly different than taking a former critic and giving him the slot.[/QUOTE]
You're right. Cheney has/had a lot more experience at the executive level than a wild ass senator. So, I'd say Bush made a good choice. Who knew he'd become the incarnation of Al Haig?
personally i think the choice will cost him the election
biden may be an attack dog--but his mouth has gotten him in trouble more then one time..
then we will have this:
the republicans will reply over and over again Biden in the primaries saying that Obama was not yet ready to be President..... then two weeks later on meet the press standing by that assesment....
totally understandble why he chose him--namely to shore up his lack of foriegn policy experience--
but short of a miracle i think he messed up
biden may be an attack dog--but his mouth has gotten him in trouble more then one time..
then we will have this:
the republicans will reply over and over again Biden in the primaries saying that Obama was not yet ready to be President..... then two weeks later on meet the press standing by that assesment....
totally understandble why he chose him--namely to shore up his lack of foriegn policy experience--
but short of a miracle i think he messed up
He should've asked Arnie to be VP. Then their campaign slogan could've been:
"I'll be back and I'll be black"
"I'll be back and I'll be black"
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]iron eagle wrote: [/QUOTENAME]personally i think the choice will cost him the election
biden may be an attack dog--but his mouth has gotten him in trouble more then one time..
then we will have this:
the republicans will reply over and over again Biden in the primaries saying that Obama was not yet ready to be President..... then two weeks later on meet the press standing by that assesment....
totally understandble why he chose him--namely to shore up his lack of foriegn policy experience--
but short of a miracle i think he messed up
[/QUOTE]
I completely agree with this post.
biden may be an attack dog--but his mouth has gotten him in trouble more then one time..
then we will have this:
the republicans will reply over and over again Biden in the primaries saying that Obama was not yet ready to be President..... then two weeks later on meet the press standing by that assesment....
totally understandble why he chose him--namely to shore up his lack of foriegn policy experience--
but short of a miracle i think he messed up
[/QUOTE]
I completely agree with this post.
Nah, his slogan should be :
"I've got your black".
"I've got your black".
Maybe my question is naive but here it is:
Biden won about 10 000 votes in his 2008 Presidential campaign, Hillary Clinton won 18 Million votes. Wouldn't it have been the obvious choice to ask Clinton? Why risk to alienate half of the party?
Biden won about 10 000 votes in his 2008 Presidential campaign, Hillary Clinton won 18 Million votes. Wouldn't it have been the obvious choice to ask Clinton? Why risk to alienate half of the party?
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]YourValentine wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Maybe my question is naive but here it is:
Biden won about 10 000 votes in his 2008 Presidential campaign, Hillary Clinton won 18 Million votes. Wouldn't it have been the obvious choice to ask Clinton? Why risk to alienate half of the party? [/QUOTE]
Hillary is a polarizing figure and her husband occupied the White House for eight years. Having her as VP would alienate those that hate her - and there are a lot of them - and it would counter Obama's message for change. Biden's foreign policy experience is paramount, and he's a pit bull senator who doesn't do things "Washington's way" but rather HIS way. For that reason, he represents less of 'the same' than Hillary.
I do see Hillary having a role in Obama's administration, though - maybe as Secretary of State. I just think as VP he made a better choice with Biden than he would have with Clinton.
Biden won about 10 000 votes in his 2008 Presidential campaign, Hillary Clinton won 18 Million votes. Wouldn't it have been the obvious choice to ask Clinton? Why risk to alienate half of the party? [/QUOTE]
Hillary is a polarizing figure and her husband occupied the White House for eight years. Having her as VP would alienate those that hate her - and there are a lot of them - and it would counter Obama's message for change. Biden's foreign policy experience is paramount, and he's a pit bull senator who doesn't do things "Washington's way" but rather HIS way. For that reason, he represents less of 'the same' than Hillary.
I do see Hillary having a role in Obama's administration, though - maybe as Secretary of State. I just think as VP he made a better choice with Biden than he would have with Clinton.
Obama would be overshadowed big time if he were elected with her as his VP. People would say, just like they did when Bill was President, that Hillary is really the one who runs the country..it would probably be true too. I agree with Magical...Hillary will be involved in Obama's administration if he is elected. I don't think he'll be elected though.