I thought the Democrats were the party of EVERY VOTE COUNTS....
Posted By: okiegirl on 2008-05-28
In Reply to: "a lot of people stayed home because they knew it wouldn't count" - exactly why it shouldn't even be considered
I guess that only applies to certain situations? Amusing, to say the least. Wonder how they would be feeling right now if Obama were leading for delegates in those states?? LOL. Ahem. Sooo transparent.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Good point. I don't vote party, I vote for the
person. Every Democrat is not bad and every Republican good or vice versa.
vote third party
Remember how we just "don't understand" how the bailout is good for us? Every politician and every single new media outlet said that we did not understand. They are protecting us from ourselves? we have to get together on this and get them out!
Have you folks given any thought to why your party imploded?
will be here before you know it.
I thought it was a great debate. I would rather vote for a
Biden-Palin ticket or a Palin-Biden ticket any day before I would ever vote for Osmabama and his anti-American babymama.
I think sadly you are right, I always thought that if I would vote Republican, it would be for McCai
and believe he really wants to do good for this country; my own thought was that he was advised, after seeing all the disillusioned Hillary supporters who were not completely sold on Barack yet, that he should pick a female running mate, scoop up all the disappointed Hillary supporters who would want a female in the White House, and it all blew up, Ms. Palin was just not an intelligent choice as running mate, she brought him down, and I think it all snowballed so quickly that all Mr. McCain could do was watch as the snowball hit bottom and disintegrated. But I believe he is a very good Senator.
Curious, did you vote for John McCain because you thought he was perfect? sm
I don't think so. Why then would you expect Obama to be perfect?
I know exactly what you mean, on all counts....sm
I will only glance in at the board once or twice a day, and it's not worth the bother to post, because it's the same bashing of Palin as it always was, and the same Obama supporters being ga-ga over him, and he can do no wrong, and everything will be wonderful in the world now that he's been elected. They can have him, because even though I am trying to give him a chance, the man isn't even in office yet, and he's turning into a big disappointment, and making mistakes, but the media and his adoring masses will keep giving him passes.
He's had news conferences, terrorist leaders are calling him, left wing organizations are calling on him, he's made his own new office of the president elect, and now we even have to listen to him have a radio address on Saturdays (instead of the dem response to Pres Bush, we now get Obama).
Obama did fall on his face already, in a major way. He is definitely not presidential material. After only two hours in the oval office yesterday for a private meeting with Pres. Bush, the man (Obama) has leaked their private conversation, and "lied" about it.
What a wonderful four years we have to look forward to.
We're going out and buying more guns and supplies, too, as soon as we can, because our rights are going down the tubes, by this person who has no character. I wonder when the masses will start to awaken and see what they've done.
And I'm outta here from now on too. I'm sure I'm about to be bashed for my honest opinion, and it's just not worth my time.
LOL....I think I would fail on all counts (sm)
as well as on grammar and my inability to multitask. I was talking on the phone when I wrote that last post, looked back at it after I posted it and was astounded. LOL 
The volunteers are crucial for honest counts sm.
By throwing them out, there were no witnesses. I read they were also harrassed and intimidated by the lawyers in the Hillary camp. Hillary had a 7% swing in the vote only in precincts using Diebold electronic voting machines, and not anywhere using hand counts. Diebold is very hackable. Perhaps, Obama should not have conceded so quickly. There are people keeping very detailed data on this as they put the information up I will post it here. One is Bev Harris. Vote fraud has been confirmed from last night in Sutton, NH.
Rahm Emanuel counts as his mentors...
From what I can see about the Democratic Leadership Counsel is they think Democrats should adopt the more centrist view when the run for something...the way Obama did. Obama is a far left liberal, his voting record says it, his history says it. But that is not the way he ran his campaign.
Rahm Emanuel was totally immersed in the Chicago political machine and counts Richard Daley as a mentor. There is a centrist for you.
as to his supporting the Iraq War....I believe that comes from his militant pro-Israel stance, not from any support of Bush. I think anyone who looks at his history knows that. And anyone who knows him knows how he stands on Israel, so I am assuming that is A-ok with Mr. Obama. It might cause some concern for Hamas though...they might withdraw their endorsement.
Chief of Staff is a title and I know you are not naive enough to think that Emanuel will not have Obama's ear, probably before anyone else.
A little on Mr. Emanuel: "At this point of his political career he was known for his intensity. Notably, he reportedly told British Prime Minister Tony Blair, prior to Blair appearing in public with Clinton for the first time after the Lewinsky scandal, "This is important. Don't fu*k it up."[17] Emanuel is said to have "mailed a rotting fish to a former coworker after the two parted ways."[16] On the night after the 1996 election, "Emanuel was so angry at the president's enemies that he stood up at a celebratory dinner with colleagues from the campaign, grabbed a steak knife and began rattling off a list of betrayers, shouting 'Dead! ... Dead! ... Dead!' and plunging the knife into the table after every name."[2] His "take-no-prisoners attitude" earned him the nickname "Rahm-bo".[16]
I think even his mother called him that...lol.
People who worked with Emanuel at that time "insist the once hard-charging staffer has mellowed out."
Let's hope he mellowed out. Not a lot of impeccable discretion going on THERE.
He left the White House to accept a well-paid position at Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein investment bank in Chicago, where he worked from 1999 to 2002 and reportedly earned US$18 million.[18]
Hmmm...$18 mil in 3 years. Not bad.
Bristol's future MIL arrested on 6 counts of felony drug charges.
Palins can't seem to catch a break this past week.
Bush was sort of in national guard but never showed for the physical... that counts? Cheney was nev
duh?? ya'll?
I am an independent....neither party is "my" party.
THis election cycle I believe the best man is a Republican. Do your research. John McCain warned about this in 2005, named Fannie and freddie by name, co-sponsored legislation to control them. Blocked by Democrats, led by Chris Dodd..same guy now trying to fix what he and the Dems broke. Chris Dodd, #1 on contributions list from fannie/freddie, followed closely by #2, your shining knight Mr. Obama. The chickens have come home to roost all right...or should I say the donkeys. :)
I agree neither choice is great, but will vote McCain just as a vote against Obama. nm
x
A vote for Ron Paul is a wasted vote. No chance on Earth he can win. sm
Votes for him only take away from the real candidates.
Then you need to vote for Obama. A vote for McCain will...sm
not help you. Obama wants to give tax relief to 90% of Americans who earn 1% of the gross earnings in this country. The top 1% of earners bring in 90% of earnings. Any one person who earns $250,000 or less will benefit from Obama's tax plan.
they didn't vote - they registered to vote -
that is a big difference. The votes were not counted, they were stopped by the means in which they were supposed to be stopped - ID verification, address verification, etc. The cards were filled out by the ACORN workers and then given to the proper authorities to sort through.
The phony registrations were pulled out by the actual authorities. ACORN is just a middle man.
We get what we vote for. If we vote "party", we get extremes.
If we make it a point to try to identify candidates who hold moderate views and vote for them, rather than voting a "party ticket", we'll have a better chance of getting away from these extremes, whether right or left.
One of the problems, though, is that candidates often play games with their real positions. During the primaries, they talk the "party" line and then they move to the center for the general election. Both sides do this, unfortunately.
The only hope is to look at their past records - and take them seriously. History is prologue to the future. When a man has done certain things in his adult life, it tells us more about him than anything he says. If Obama hasn't taught us this fundamental truth, we'll never learn it. The evidence about him goes all the way back to his days in law school, and it was available for anyone to see. Some didn't bother to look. Others looked and didn't take it seriously. Either way, we weren't paying attention or he'd have probably never made it through the primaries.
No one can pull the wool over your eyes unless you let them, and the way they do it is by making smooth speeches filled with unlikely promises (and even glaring contradictions as they appeal to groups with opposite interests). They believe we won't notice the lies, exaggerations and mischaracterizations of their opponent's positions, etc. Unfortunately, they are often right.
Let's start taking the candidates' prior records and their life histories as the best evidence of who they really are - not their speeches. If we do this, we'll make better choices.
I just thought it might be nice to hear an original thought. sm
I guess I was reaching.
Thought this was good so I thought I'd share
Down the drain? Beware of Obama's plan to 'spread the wealth around'
By Betsy Newmark
High School History and Government Teacher/Blogger
If the McCain campaign can’t use this Obama quote to raise doubts about his attitude towards wealth and success, then they deserve the shellacking they seem headed for.
“Your new tax plan is going to tax me more, isn’t it?” the plumber asked, complaining that he was being taxed “more and more for fulfilling the American dream.”
“It’s not that I want to punish your success. I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they’ve got a chance for success too,” Obama responded. “My attitude is that if the economy’s good for folks from the bottom up, it’s gonna be good for everybody … I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.”
Plumbers of the country, unite! Forget about the work and effort you put into building up a business or the scummy work that you do that many of us don’t know or don’t want to do. If you have succeeded, you should be willing to give up more of what you earn to help those who haven’t had the great good luck that you have had to be a successful plumber. Remember how Obama is going to give 95% of all of us a tax cut even though over 30% of the population doesn’t pay taxes?
He might call it a tax credit, but what he’s really doing is his vision of “spreading the wealth around.” It sounds a lot like Huey Long’s 1935 plan to “Share the Wealth.” And when he finds that he can’t tax the top 5% of the population to gain enough wealth to spread to the 95% of the rest of us, do you really think that he’ll stop with that 5%?
Remember…This is the guy who said in the ABC debate during the primary season that his approach to raising tax on capital gains is not based on whether it would provide more revenue but on his idea of what is fair:
GIBSON: All right. You have, however, said you would favor an increase in the capital gains tax. As a matter of fact, you said on CNBC, and I quote, “I certainly would not go above what existed under Bill Clinton,” which was 28 percent. It’s now 15 percent. That’s almost a doubling, if you went to 28 percent.
But actually, Bill Clinton, in 1997, signed legislation that dropped the capital gains tax to 20 percent.
OBAMA: Right.
GIBSON: And George Bush has taken it down to 15 percent.
OBAMA: Right.
GIBSON: And in each instance, when the rate dropped, revenues from the tax increased; the government took in more money. And in the 1980s, when the tax was increased to 28 percent, the revenues went down.
So why raise it at all, especially given the fact that 100 million people in this country own stock and would be affected?
OBAMA: Well, Charlie, what I’ve said is that I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness.
Just what we need in these fragile economic times — a guy who wants to raise taxes because he thinks it’s a matter of “fairness” and time to “spread the wealth around.”
That will be some incentive for other plumbers who want to work hard and build up a successful business.
But don’t worry - according to Joe Biden, it’s the patriotic thing to do.
Haha! I thought I was the only one who thought he looked
I told you what I thought he thought....
and thank you so much for reducing it to "a piece."
That being said, here is link to article from Wall Street Journal about both candidates and outsourcing...Obama is not going to stop it either. He has said on the stump the answer is more highly educated American workers to compete.
It seems to me, and although you may think this is also a "piece," that if you put our corporate tax rates lower, if that corporation is inclined to hire Americans and not outsource then they will do so.
You honestly think the majority of corporations just WANT to outsource and taxes don't matter?
go democrats..go
Are they? Where I live I go house to house to get people to sign up as democrats and frankly many are signing on as democrats and I hear anger and distrust and concern about Bush and his policies..So, dont know where you are from but I see the actual opposite..I also see many minorities, Blacks and Latinos signing on to the democratic party. From your posts, IMHO you are a republican plant and so your posts mean nothing to me. You are either a couch political potato who never goes out there and works the grass roots or you are a republican trying to put seeds of discontent in the democratic party. Gotta tell ya, the democratic party is doing just fine and each time bush screws up, which has been many over the past five years, the democrats do even better..Yeehaww!!
Democrats
...and I sure DO NOT appreciate union busters. This country has gone beyond "dog eat dog." Bush wanted to spend $$$$ for research on Mars?! I'm all for new discoveries and learning new things, but come on...let's do ALL that we can for the problems here on earth and her inhabitants first.
The democrats did not cause
this mess. And it was not caused by the people who were extended credit. Here is part of what caused it:
Banks issued subprime mortgages to people at a rate they could initially afford but which would increase to an inflated rate after a period of time. Those banks then immediately sold those mortgages at the inflated rates to other banks. These adjustable rate loans were misrepresented to a lot of homebuyers, especially first-time homebuyers. A lot of them didn’t realize, for example, they could not refinance for a period of time without huge penalties. Then the market started to decline and many of those homeowners found themselves upside down on their loans and could not refinance. Their interest rates had ballooned to rates they could no longer afford. The banks who were sold the loans at inflated prices could not afford to lower the rates for the homebuyers because they had bought the loans based on the inflated interest rates and would lose money if they did. People lost their homes and the banks lost the amount of the loans they had bought. But the banks (and the CEOs) that initiated those loans walked away with a great deal of money.
It was because of greed. And the deregulation that the republicans have passed over the years allowed it to happen.
Here are some other facts:
Since 1960 the nation's deficit has risen during every republican administration and dropped during every democratic administration.
The standard of living and income has improved for everyone in the country during every democratic administration since 1960, EVEN for the top 1% of the country. It has gotten worse for everyone in the country during every republican administration EXCEPT the top 1%.
Please tell me how you think the democrats...sm
contributed to the economy diving in the last 2 years. Specifics please. The economy takes way longer than that to do anything. No economic bills have been passed. The last 8 years of the Bush presidency has put us into the tank. Stop parroting the party line. Lets be honest here. John McCain offers nothing better.
Yes, well, those would be democrats as well
--
Democrats
 Obama, if elected the next President of the US, will change how other peoples look at the Americans: He will restore respect and admiration for the American people that was lost during these last 8 years. And the world will see that the American people do not discriminate (at least not the Democrats).
Can't think of anything that would help democrats more
Skip the landslide. It would be an avalanche.
Obviously so do Democrats. nm
*
Like the democrats
don't do the same thing. When are people going to realize that both parties are just as crooked as the other here? When the dems had control of congress during Bush's presidency, did the dems do anything positive for our economy then. Of course they didn't.....why.....because they would hate to do something good during Bush's presidency because he might get credit for it. This goes both ways and your post is very one sided. We all need to wake up and realize that the only people we can trust is ourselves and stop putting so much faith in either party. Government as a whole has screwed us over and I am sick and tired of putting all the blame on one party. They all had their greedy little hands in the cookie jar and that is the reason we are in the mess we are in.
democrats and
Pace your rage. It has only been 100 days.
LOL, who lies, not democrats
That is what dems say? LOL. I ask you to check out one of the top posts, i.e., Rush and Olbermann..Reality check starts attacking the poster, Olbermann, MSNBC, saying they lie, even though the transcript is on the web, also printed in his article, and on video..yet they are lying right?? and its the dems that always scream that people are lying, right? I thought up a new name for neocons after reading about that Xtian..NOT..Robertson stating Chavez should be eliminated. Neocons are the American Taliban. You are just as bad. If everyone does not think, act, believe, live like you, then they are wrong and lying..You guys are ridiculous..
Democrats/Liberals
Amen,sm! I noticed that you used one word in one of your responses that is the tell-tale sign distingishing conservatives from liberals, that word being logic. Liberals have no logic and cannot reason, else why would they support Bill Clinton going to war in Bosnia/Yugoslavia when no attack at all had been made on our country and deploy our troops all over the world for no good reason, then pounce on President Bush who is only engaging us in this war on terror to protect all of us here at home, as well as those of our loved ones who have to travel the world over for companies they work for or those who serve our government in various capacities all over the world? Prior to 911, we had been attacked 19 times by terrorists over a period of 20 years or so and not one single president but Ronald Reagan and finally George W. Bush had the gumption to be a real leader and respond, with very noticeable results I might add. Does anyone remember Moamar Kadafi and how his terrorism stopped after President Reagan took care of him?? Bin Ladin and his terrorist organization had attacked us so many times without any response that he called the United States a paper tiger, believing his dreams of total destruction of our country were an inevitable event. I suppose the liberals prefer having our schools, supermarkets, shopping malls, sports arenas, etc., etc., be the targets for terrorists rather than following the advice of every top military general I can think of (save Wesley Clark who obviously has political ambitions)and fight the terrorists where they are amassed rather than fighting them here. To say that Saddam Hussein had no connection to terrorist organizations is nonsense. He hated us with the same vitreolic hatred Bin Ladin had for us and would have loved nothing better than to see us go down. In addition, he was paying a $25,000 reward for each Israeli killed in a terrorist attack. He was a WMD himself, just as Adolph Hitler was. You don't have to possess WMDs to be a WMD; the result is the same. Immediately after the 9-11 attack, 27 Al Qaeda terrorists were rounded up in the very small community in which I live (makes one wonder how many were in the larger cities and communities), and believe me, I feel a lot better knowing that they, along with their terrorist network, have been put out of commission under President Bush's leadership. As of today, our military has brilliantly performed the task of reducing the entire terorrist organization to about 17,000 in number. Quite a feat!! God bless them all!! I recently heard that a letter from a top terrorist leader was intercepted and stated, We are losing the war. I have much more I could say, but I'll save it for another time as it is getting late.
Psychotic democrats.
Well I guess that is better then a psychotic democrat.
I believe the Democrats will take the House
and pick up seats in the Senate enough to make it very even. When Lieberman is elected as an Independent, I predict he will change his party to Democrat when he gets into the Senate, a direct slam at the Democrats who failed to support him. Lieberman, the only Democrat with a spine, will be the big winner. I am not gnashing my teeth about any of this. Democrats are the one who do the teeth gnashing. They have been gnashing since Bush won the first election and their bitterness and sore loser attitudes have eaten away like a cancer all these years. Democrats have no plan for keeping America safe, or winning the war against the fanatics. They have opposed most of the Bush administration’s domestic surveillance methods. They have opposed aggressive interrogation tactics designed to get information to protect us, including opposition to the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where detainees are treated better than they could expect if they were detained in their homelands... The terrorists in Iraq and elsewhere don’t speak of timetables for withdrawal or bringing their fighters home. They’re in it for the long haul. They believe we are not. A victory by Democrats will validate their view and encourage them to fight harder. Republicans have been far from perfect in this war. They have barely approached mediocrity in their handling of domestic issues. But to change horses and leaders mid-war is a prescription for a longer engagement, because this is a confrontation that will end only in victory or defeat for one side or the other. That’s why the Republicans need to keep their majority and conservatives need to keep the pressure on them to get back to the original GOP principles that brought them that majority. That’s a better strategy than Republicans acting like Democrat-lite. Unfortunately, I think it is too late this time around. But there is always next time. God Bless our troops.
Democrats vs Republicans...
I agree that problems occur on both sides of the aisle...obviously. What I find troubling, and I am being serious here, is that Democrats seem much less likely to own up to it when they do something wrong, even when caught, and the entire party seems to rally around them and somehow want to twist the wrong into a right or rationalize the wrong (he only lied about sex for example. He committed felony perjury, doesn't matter what the lie was about. If it was no big deal, why didn't he just tell the truth? I guess that depends on what the meaning of truth is?). Republicans generally fall on the sword when caught. There just seems to be something skewed about the Democratic party as a whole and their vision of what is wrong or right and it seems to be directly correlated to whether one of their party is guilty or the other party is guilty. This is just an observation. I am not a registered Republican nor Democrat. I am conservative, I am registered Independent but vote for whoever most closely follows my belief system, though they as a rule don't do as they say...and I mean ALL politicians. I just keep hoping for an honest one. Bush did what he said he would do for a long time, but I see him waffling now, and I am not sure that is a good thing. As I look at the two major parties in this country, it just seems to me that on the Democratic side they are more likely to support each other and try to spin wrongdoing even when caught at it, rarely if ever admitting to wrongdoing. I do not see that so much on the Republican side. I suppose now I should go back to the conservative side and let the process continue. I thought the boards were about opinion and discussion and debate. How can you expect to change any minds if you only talk to the like-minded? Thanks for your time, Lurker. I do enjoy talking to you.
This is old news...and yet the Democrats in...
congress voted to give the President the use of force in Iraq. They knew all this then. But they voted to use force. So I do not understand why it is being brought up again now like it was some big secret. Yes, 20 years ago the US did try to deal with Saddam. And you saw what his word was worth. Zip, nada, nothing. Much like the word of the Democratic Congress that sold South Viet Nam down the river to the North...broke the promises that were made to end the war. If you want to point fingers at something dispicable that should be HIGH on your list.
I see it with Democrats and Republicans. sm
Where are all the progressives and antiwar people?
WELL there are certainly NO liberal Democrats
running for president...
Sick of it too, but the Democrats are no different. sm
Of the main candidates, our choices are a socialist, a Marxist, and a fascist. Which one do you think is not going to tax our eyeballs out, or force us further and further into a control grid? Obama sounds like the least harmful, but the only thing he is going to change is his mind. My vote goes to NOTA (none of the above).
Democrats vs Republicans
1. My research on the black liberation movement of which Obama's church is a part tells me all I need to know about whether or not I want to see him in office. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_liberation_theology
2. If McCain is elected I believe we will face a great depression which will make the depression of the 30s look like a Sunday School picnic. People already losing homes, jobs, exploding deficit (and the piper will be paid sooner or later), cost-of-living getting so people can hardly afford to live. McCain's judgement is questionable in his choice of a running mate. Totally reckless to name someone he has only met once but then there's oil in Alaska.
I will not support or vote for either of them as were doomed either way.
The rich ARE the democrats
Look back over time. Who benefitted from tax breaks Clintons 2% of the richest people. Everyone makes it sound as though only republicans are rich. The democrat party has some of the richest people and they aren't paying their fair share. With the Democrats I've always had to pay more taxes. With the republicans I received refunds every year.
One wishes the Democrats who are...
Christians and live in rural areas would abandon the party that has created the kind of mentality that posts like this, so as not to be identified with such condescencion and intolerance. The Democratic party as it once existed is dead, and this is what rose from the ashes. Certainly something to be proud of...not so much.
Me too! My parents both Democrats....
the Zell Miller kind. THAT Democratic party is no more.
Because they are Democrats....and toeing....
the party line (congressmen) or Republicans who hate McCain. Not a one among them, I would be willing to bet, if you hooked them to a lie detector, would not get past the do you really think he would be a good President...lol Don't really think congressmen are the best judges...their approval rating is lower than Bush's. NO offense...just sayin.
Democrats are not responsible
for the mess we are in. It's the republicans and all their deregulation, for one thing. How about the war in Iraq and the huge deficit we now have? And then there are the corporate tax breaks. All of those things have contributed to the mess we are in. The money didn't trickle down, did it? It only made the top 1% of the people in this country better off. Those aren't things the democrats have done.
The republicans made this mess and then they have the gall to turn around and blame the democrats. Do you know why? Because there are those out there who don't know better and will believe them. That's what they are relying on. The republicans got into office with lies and misleading the public and they are still trying the same tactics. Hopefully enough people will not buy into it this time.
Democrats vs Republicans
Just dropped in to see if either the Dems or Pubs on this board have given an inch. They haven't. Boring and useless. I'm betting McCain will win so we'll never know about big, bad Obama for sure. I'll drop back in after a few years of McCain to see how well y'all like him then. Like about now I'm really wondering if John Kerry wouldn't have been an improvement over George Bush. I understand ole Georgie has an all time low approval rating. Must be a bunch of Republicans who aren't as pleased with him as they thought they would be.
I think that the democrats need to go home...sm
and let the republicans sort it out with their president. Hurt feelings are not a reason to vote for or against something that is good for the country because you are trying to make a point. What a bunch of middle-aged/elderly/men crybabies. I hope that the president lays it on the line to those that voted against his plan.
So would those 94 democrats who voted no.nm
nm
Yes, and 94 Democrats voted no. So why not...
11 more democrats voting yes instead of 11 more Republicans?
|
