USA Presidential Politics - 2008

[ryberg]

The previous was in response to your "whoa, pardner!" post, JL, if that wasn't clear.

Originally Posted by Just Lucky

Personally I don't care how the right views the Democratic Party. I care about what the majority of the people in the country think about the Party.

The latter is precisely my point, as well. But since they include large swaths of the right, and since again I'd like to see a win not just by a candidate who shares more of my views, but rather by someone who could really help us get over that division and mistrust, well I necessarily have to care about the views on yhe other side of the spectrum from me, as well.

Originally Posted by melliedee

Okay, but it is precisely this worrying over each candidate/party's "image cast upon them" that makes the lion's share of presidental politics so fake and distasteful to me. Why not state your views passionately and without so much calculated forethought for public opinion (fickle at best, dead wrong/dangerous at worst).

I see the point but I'm not sure it's always true, that connection. I don't sense that with all candidates...

Originally Posted by melliedee

I'd have less respect for a candidate who tip-toes around touchy issues with Orwellian politco jargon and caution than I do for the one who's not afaid to be unpopular by speaking his mind, nomination be damned.

Even if all nominations are then damned?

Getting into office seems to be the most obvious way to effect change.

Steve

[melliedee]

Originally Posted by ryberg

The previous was in response to your "whoa, pardner!" post, JL, if that wasn't clear.

The latter is precisely my point, as well. But since they include large swaths of the right, and since again I'd like to see a win not just by a candidate who shares more of my views, but rather by someone who could really help us get over that division and mistrust, well I necessarily have to care about the views on yhe other side of the spectrum from me, as well.

I see the point but I'm not sure it's always true, that connection. I don't sense that with all candidates...

Even if all nominations are then damned?

Getting into office seems to be the most obvious way to effect change.

Steve

Ah, but that magical candidate who cures the division and mistrust you speak of necessarily must be the complete opposite of the current administration in order to reconcile the very bad blood and justified hideous perception of said administration. That leaves a lot of folks on the "other side" pissed off all over again. And, you know what? Tough toenails! They've had eight years and the country is worse for it.

Yes, the best way to effect change is to get your guy elected. I just don't like the rules of the process?

[ryberg]

I don't think at this juncture, at least, that such a person could possibly be Republican. That wouldn't be a sufficient change as compared to what has just been in place. But I also don't think that such a person could possibly be the complete opposite, either.

Steve

[melliedee]

Originally Posted by ryberg;841331[B

]I don't think at this juncture, at least, that such a person could possibly be Republican.[/B] That wouldn't be a sufficient change as compared to what has just been in place. But I also don't think that such a person could possibly be the complete opposite, either.

Steve

Ya think?

Okay, so we're back to an electable moderate who plays very nicely by the rules and does not shake the boat for fear of the right's wrath in the name of pacifying the very people whose views they are so at odds with? Why not say it plainly and without the scripted song and dance, is all I'm really trying to say?

[sctx]

Originally Posted by melliedee

Ya think?

Okay, so we're back to an electable moderate who plays very nicely by the rules and does not shake the boat for fear of the right's wrath in the name of pacifying the very people whose views they are so at odds with? Why not say it plainly and without the scripted song and dance, is all I'm really trying to say?

wow, this chick is good

[ryberg]

Originally Posted by melliedee

Ya think?

Okay, so we're back to an electable moderate who plays very nicely by the rules and does not shake the boat for fear of the right's wrath in the name of pacifying the very people whose views they are so at odds with? Why not say it plainly and without the scripted song and dance, is all I'm really trying to say?

Well I think that strips out some of the positives, here, like if I were trying to tell you about the subtle flavor and quality of arrachera and you said, "Oh, so it's just beef! Why didn't ya just say so?!?"

Steve

[roni]

Originally Posted by melliedee

Ya think?

Okay, so we're back to an electable moderate who plays very nicely by the rules and does not shake the boat for fear of the right's wrath in the name of pacifying the very people whose views they are so at odds with? Why not say it plainly and without the scripted song and dance, is all I'm really trying to say?

No, I don't think that is what we are back to, necessarily.

I think another possiblity is electing a president who is moderate, and who is a pragmatist. One who, after [then] eight years of inadequate vision and negligable competence, will bring us clear and coherent vision and acceptable competence in starting progress toward the achievement of the vision.

[melliedee]

Originally Posted by ryberg

Well I think that strips out some of the positives, here, like if I were trying to tell you about the subtle flavor and quality of arrachera and you said, "Oh, so it's just beef! Why didn't ya just say so?!?"

Steve

The scripted song and dance was in reference to the candidates, not your post Steve.

Darn online discourse. We need our own political emoticons?

imho, I just don't like the idea that Kucinich should shut up about impeaching Cheney because it doesn't follow the electable sure shot middle of the road?

[MikeW]

Originally Posted by roni

. . . . after [then] eight years of inadequate vision and negligable competence, will bring us clear and coherent vision and acceptable competence in starting progress toward the achievement of the vision.

Roni, stuck in a dream.

[ryberg]

Originally Posted by melliedee

The scripted song and dance was in reference to the candidates, not your post Steve.

Darn online discourse. We need our own political emoticons?

imho, I just don't like the idea that Kucinich should shut up about impeaching Cheney because it doesn't follow the electable sure shot middle of the road?

It's fine. He should say what he wants. As somebody said, he is probably realistic about his shot, anyway.

I just meant I think what I was trying to say (however unclearly) is more positive than you described it.

Steve

[roni]

Originally Posted by MikeW

Roni, stuck in a dream.

Starting progress is too modest a desire to qualify as a dream, I hope.
We had progress in the 8 years prior to the current President, in my opinion,
significant and substantial progress in a variety of areas
according to the Facts.

[Just Lucky]

Well Steve,I thought the blurb on Wikipedia about Coriolanus was mighty interesting. I noticed that there was no known performance before the Restoration. Being a big fan of the Enlightenment I kinda liked that. Don't forget that Cromwell,as much as many of us dislike him today,was in the beginning a populist.

I think I understand you on the deep division between the two sides idea. I just see a different solution. To my way of thinking there aren't two sides to that fight.
There is one that repeats 3-4 key points over and over again with some conviction and plays politics like it's a poker game that grandma's house is bet on. That side is much more concerned about winning and does give a flyin' F if they or some of the folks connected to them run ads full of lies about their opponent. It helps these folks that they own talk radio and at least one news network.

Now on the other side you've got some folks playin' some kind of genteel card game we don't even know the name of down here in Texas. It's a very civil sort of card game,after all it's important to be able to show up at the club again. Now these folks have a sort of "Senatorial" air about them and speak of high principles that are far too long to fit in a good soundbite. The problem with these folks is that they don't seem to realise that the average working person in this country keeps tellin' 'em "what have you done for me lately?". These folks would show up to a gunfight with boxing gloves on.

I was thinking about that 8 years that Clinton was in the White House. I remember when he was elected and said he was going to do about the health care system. Now you and I probably understand the powers that were arrayed against this proposal. It was not going to be an easy thing to get passed. I understand why it was defeated. On the other hand I live in Texas where many voters go by the name Bubba. I'll tell you this,in Bubba's eyes it looked like either he and his wife weren't serious about it or they just gave up. You know when Bubba's wife ends up in the hospital now and Bubba has to sell the house,in the back of his mind is that fellow from Arkansas and his party. I know my memory is not as good as it used to be, the things that did seem to be important to get passed under that administration were thing like Nafta which have a negative effect on the lower and working classes. The fact that the flow of our factories and jobs to the PRC was also escalated during that era also pisses off Bubba.

So now you've got some candiates from the Party that once had great ideas and great ideals trying to figure out how they are going to make compromises before they're even elected with the team that not only doesn't play fair,but mostly doesn't even believe we should have a government. Unlessin' we want to invade a country and enrich their cronies they don't think there is any use in the federal government. What kind of compromises do you think can be made with them? Is it possible that we could work some kind of deal out to get some of the civil rights we've lost in the last seven years back? We are talkin' power politics here,let the Democratic Party be the poker players. Let's get some great ideas that appeal to Bubba like a better education system where everyone can afford college. Real health care reform where Bubba doesn't lose his house if one of his kids gets sick. A huge program in conjunction with the private sector to develop alternative energy and help conserve energy.

How are you going to be able to make a compromise with the Republicans on those things? Even if you could why would you show your hand early in the nomination process. Those folks from the right who's vote you seem so worried about are looking for a leader with a plan not a plan that's going to get cut in half. If they were really right wing voters they'd be in the right wing party. People want a man or woman who can lead ,not one who is overly amiable to the opposition.

While it's too early to tell who will be at the top of the heap at the end of the nomination process I'm hopin' for some one who is a leader and not some fellow who seems to think he's runnin' for high school president and has to get along with everyone.

[Cosmo]

Step away from the pipe Lucky...

[Just Lucky]

Originally Posted by Cosmo

Step away from the pipe Lucky...

Claro que si!

[Cosmo]

love ya man...

Originally Posted by Just Lucky

Claro que si!