I'm In, He's In, She's In, We're All In (Trees And Things)

Acefantastik: Re: Picking Friends, Picking Enemies

Thu, 25 Jan 2007 17:33:43 EST

This will become more pronounced as the "liberals lost Iraq" meme becomes entrenched after Bush leaves office (you know it's coming)

The "Liberals lost/are losing/will lose Iraq/the War on Terror" meme is entrenched, but only among th

rEvolution inAction: Re: I'm In, He's In, She's In, We're All In

Thu, 25 Jan 2007 13:23:14 EST

The Unite States was founded on class-warfare, the civil war was fought over class-warfare.. why should it be abandoned now? It's probably America's greatest accomplishment.

zyxwvutsr: Re: I'm In, He's In, She's In, We're All In

Thu, 25 Jan 2007 09:21:49 EST

I do have to say that the "slick-talkin' ambulance chaser" and "standard liberal pablum" comments could give the impression that you don't much care for liberals or lawyers...

I like lawyers just fine. Some of my best friends

zyxwvutsr: Re: I'm In, He's In, She's In, We're All In

Thu, 25 Jan 2007 09:12:34 EST

that [people should be entitled to redress their grievances before a court of law] was your rationalization for not liking him

Oh, please. Go beat up on some other strawman: I never suggested that people ought not have the ri

coquito: Re: I'm In, He's In, She's In, We're All In

Thu, 25 Jan 2007 09:00:22 EST

Apparently.. maybe you have a hatred of teeth

That's just preposterous. In fact, I've previously supported Alfred E. Neuman for president.

uncarved block: Picking Friends, Picking Enemies

Thu, 25 Jan 2007 09:00:04 EST

Yeah, I checked out Hagel's profile at Wiki. He's certainly what the Republicans used to think of as a dream candidate, except for the war angle. I dunno, I may be overdoing it, but I think the New Right has changed the party for the foreseeab

coquito: Re: I'm In, He's In, She's In, We're All In

Thu, 25 Jan 2007 08:55:17 EST

I just knew you were going to reply to that. I was being cheeky. Sorry, something in the water yesterday. But, I do have to say that the "slick-talkin' ambulance chaser" and "standard liberal pablum" comments could give the impression that you don't much c

zyxwvutsr: Re: I'm In, He's In, She's In, We're All In

Thu, 25 Jan 2007 08:15:20 EST

a.) I like Southerners and Southern accents b.) I come from a family of lawyers and have nothing against them and c.) did I mention I'm a lib/Dem type? So, unlike (apparently) zyx, I believe I don't have any prejudices...

Hav

rEvolution inAction: Re: I'm In, He's In, She's In, We're All In

Thu, 25 Jan 2007 00:11:41 EST

Apparently.. maybe you have a hatred of teeth

thefadd: Hagel Rising

Wed, 24 Jan 2007 20:34:38 EST

On the Republican side, the Senator from Nebraska has long held Presidential aspirations and has the friends at Diebold to go with those aspirations. He's been an arch conservative most of his career but has softened a lot of his stances to move toward the

thefadd: Re: I'm In, He's In, She's In, We're All In

Wed, 24 Jan 2007 20:26:29 EST

No you're right, he's not as loose and relaxed as say Howard Dean but maybe that's a good thing in a President. He is a little uptight and square -- he is a lawyer afterall. Actually kinda reminds me of the new Raiders head coach.

thefadd: Re: I'm In, He's In, She's In, We're All In

Wed, 24 Jan 2007 20:24:39 EST

What has that got to do with anything? Is there a presidential candidate that thinks that way?

Er, that was your rationalization for not liking him. Thanks for conceding my point by trying to act like I was bringing up tangential issues

coquito: Re: I'm In, He's In, She's In, We're All In

Wed, 24 Jan 2007 18:45:44 EST

I'll admit, I'm a lib/Dem type (maybe really a Green) and even though I'm sure he's a nice guy, I thought he was slimy too. I think maybe it is the smile. He doesn't look sincere. He reminds me of a tent-revival preacher. Kinda like Joel Osteen, wit

rEvolution inAction: Re: I'm In, He's In, She's In, We're All In

Wed, 24 Jan 2007 18:28:37 EST

Not a problem.. I just ish I knew what it was exactly.. I thought it was the smile.. but it ain't really.. mayeb it's cuz he's a politician..

zyxwvutsr: Re: I'm In, He's In, She's In, We're All In

Wed, 24 Jan 2007 18:28:15 EST

We co-sponsored some 200+ bills while in the Senate. I'm presuming you've combed through all of those and have determined that none of them furthered his plans, right?

One of those 200 bills was to authorize the preside

coquito: Re: I'm In, He's In, She's In, We're All In

Wed, 24 Jan 2007 18:26:52 EST

Sorry, I wasn't being serious. (Although it is true that many people feel that way.)

rEvolution inAction: Re: I'm In, He's In, She's In, We're All In

Wed, 24 Jan 2007 18:22:38 EST

I've heard enough southerners that sound credible to know it aint the accent.

coquito: Re: I'm In, He's In, She's In, We're All In

Wed, 24 Jan 2007 16:51:31 EST

It's the accent. Many Northerners just can't get over it (the reverse is also often true).

Thalia: Re: I'm In, He's In, She's In, We're All In

Wed, 24 Jan 2007 16:30:53 EST

Edwards co-sponsored some 200+ bills while in the Senate. I'm presuming you've combed through all of those and have determined that none of them furthered his plans, right?

Thalia: Re: I'm In, He's In, She's In, We're All In

Wed, 24 Jan 2007 16:30:36 EST

We co-sponsored some 200+ bills while in the Senate. I'm presuming you've combed through all of those and have determined that none of them furthered his plans, right?

zyxwvutsr: Re: I'm In, He's In, She's In, We're All In

Wed, 24 Jan 2007 16:05:36 EST

His record as a senator is unremarkable because he is banking on that not hurting him when he runs for President...

So Edwards has "actual plans to address actual issues" but he couldn't be bothered to try to further any of t

thefadd: Re: I'm In, He's In, She's In, We're All In

Wed, 24 Jan 2007 15:54:02 EST

Yes. The middle class is a term that makes a wide swath of Americans feel included. Historically if you look at surveys, most people from the "working poor" up through just about anyone who can't live off their investments alone considers themselves "middl

uncarved block: The Big Questions

Wed, 24 Jan 2007 14:29:53 EST

It's been a bit of cliche for decades that the anointed front runner two years out rarely wins the presidency, or else we'd have had at least one term from Dick Gephardt by now. That was then, though, and whether or not a Bill Richardson can r

humorlesscretin: Re: It's wide open...

Wed, 24 Jan 2007 14:21:32 EST

My feeling is that his "true colors" are what he campaigned on in his initial Senate runs in Arizona, and his first try for the Presidency in 2000 - a middle of the road, pragmatic approach that favors the (year 2000) status quo, but wants to make it wo

port1080: Re: It's wide open...

Wed, 24 Jan 2007 13:23:02 EST
I beg to differ. If he's willing to serve the people he's been courting, he'd be another 4 years or worse. If he's not willing to serve the people he's courting, then why put on that kind of show in full public view?

My feel

humorlesscretin: Re: I'm In, He's In, She's In, We're All In

Wed, 24 Jan 2007 11:29:57 EST
I want a "someone else" option on the poll next time.
Seconded. I'm not voting in the primary (registered Independent and none of these candidates interest me enough to get me off the fence), and come the election I'll likely vote Dem even

humorlesscretin: Re: It's shut

Wed, 24 Jan 2007 11:17:11 EST
This will be a referendum on the last 4 years if Democrats have any campaigning skill at all.
If the Democrats had any campaigning skill at all, we'd be discussing the followup to President Gore or Kerry.

humorlesscretin: Re: It's wide open...

Wed, 24 Jan 2007 11:16:52 EST
It's a shame, because I think he would make a decent President
I beg to differ. If he's willing to serve the people he's been courting, he'd be another 4 years or worse. If he's not willing to serve the people he's co

zyxwvutsr: Re: Kucinich? Really?

Wed, 24 Jan 2007 09:19:18 EST

I can't say that I have any opposition to any of his "ten key issues"
His key issues are okay as a laundry list, but on each of them he's either short on specifics, or the specifics he provides are comical. One especially com

zyxwvutsr: Re: I'm In, He's In, She's In, We're All In

Wed, 24 Jan 2007 08:45:45 EST

As contrasted, I suppose, with your support of a fumble-tongued spoiled rich kid liar?
Are you referring to John Kerry? I don't think he lies more than most politicians, and certainly less than some I can think of.

zyxwvutsr: Re: I'm In, He's In, She's In, We're All In

Wed, 24 Jan 2007 08:43:47 EST

Edwards was the only candidate who didn't do the tired "I support the middle class" crap, and straight-up went for discussing how working class families' lives were being impacted
Do you really draw a distinction between "the

Acefantastik: Re: Kucinich? Really?

Wed, 24 Jan 2007 05:48:45 EST
Actually, many states have "open" primaries, in which anyone can vote. McCain counts on non registered independents in states such as New Hampshire, for example.

Acefantastik: Re: Kucinich? Really?

Wed, 24 Jan 2007 05:47:07 EST
I'm a big fan of Kucinich. Of course I understand the political irony of rooting for a man who won't likely win (and I can't vote for him, as a member of the Pacific Green Party), but I really do feel that Kucinich and Sharpton in 2004 most closely repre

Thalia: Re: I'm In, He's In, She's In, We're All In

Wed, 24 Jan 2007 04:21:25 EST
I want a "someone else" option on the poll next time. I hope not to have to vote for any of these folks. If this is all there is, I'll vote for Hillary Clinton, but I sincerely hope we can find a nice midwestern governor in the mold of Bill Cli

Thalia: Re: Kucinich? Really?

Wed, 24 Jan 2007 04:12:49 EST
Yup, anyone registered for that party. This is the reason my husband is registered as a Republican. He changed registrations so he could vote against Bush II. In other words, registration doesn't mean affiliation in terms of belief.

rEvolution inAction: Re: Kucinich? Really?

Wed, 24 Jan 2007 02:58:59 EST
You're speaking about RL right? cuz I'm Canadian.. as much as that means.. and I'm one of the three who voted for Hillary.
Oh, here's a question about American politics.. who votes in primaries? (just registered party members, right?)

rEvolution inAction: Re: I'm In, He's In, She's In, We're All In

Wed, 24 Jan 2007 02:54:01 EST
I get the feeling that 'fumble-toungued' is the only real difference... It's his smile.. it doesn't look genuine.. not at all..

Toby Flip: Re: Kucinich? Really?

Wed, 24 Jan 2007 02:34:25 EST
Actually, I think everybody on this site is a Canadian running in emulation mode.
(disclaimer: I actually am Canadian so could somebody vote for Kucinich on my behalf?)

charlies: Re: I'm In, He's In, She's In, We're All In

Wed, 24 Jan 2007 01:41:30 EST
"Edwards is basically a slick-talking ambulance-chaser made good..."
As contrasted, I suppose, with your support of a fumble-tongued spoiled rich kid liar?

Thalia: Re: I'm In, He's In, She's In, We're All In

Tue, 23 Jan 2007 21:02:10 EST
Edwards was the only candidate who didn't do the tired "I support the middle class" crap, and straight-up went for discussing how working class families' lives were being impacted. He was also the only candidate who actually had a working class backg

rEvolution inAction: Re: I'm In, He's In, She's In, We're All In

Tue, 23 Jan 2007 19:49:35 EST
He never seemed all that slick talkin.. unless you consider a used car salesman to be slick talkin.. I guess I did enough sales to recognize teh difference between a sale and an ideal.

zyxwvutsr: Re: I'm In, He's In, She's In, We're All In

Tue, 23 Jan 2007 19:26:36 EST

I was an Edwards supporter in the last campaign...
I'm always puzzled when someone admits that they support (or used to) Edwards. What has he ever done to justify your support?
Edwards is basically a slick-talking ambulanc

thefadd: Re: I'm In, He's In, She's In, We're All In

Tue, 23 Jan 2007 17:51:20 EST
I was an Edwards supporter in the last campaign and one strength he has going for him this time around is that he's recruited Howard Dean's web guy. But it is sort of true that I backed him out of a lack of fantastic candidates last time. With apologies to

MayorBob: Re: Kucinich? Really?

Tue, 23 Jan 2007 17:10:29 EST
That's gotta be the work of the Keebler Elves who bake all their cookies in the little treesandthings.

profwhat: Senate logjam

Tue, 23 Jan 2007 16:27:34 EST
By my count, here are the current U.S. Senators who have either announced, or are generally seen as hoping to run:
Biden
Brownback
Clinton
Dodd
Hagel
Kerry
McCain
Obama
That's 8. Meaning, almost 10% of the Senators a

profwhat: It's shut

Tue, 23 Jan 2007 16:02:30 EST
I beg to differ. Although there are lots of candidates, there are fewer plausible candidates than before. Hillary and Obama are on their way to out-fund raising everyone else on the Dems side. On the Republicans, McCain has a stron

wetkarma: Kucinich? Really?

Tue, 23 Jan 2007 15:25:56 EST
I know that I've pointed out before the TnT tilts left, but with the current poll giving Kucinich the lead I have to wonder what crack you guys are smoking.
For those of you who voted Kucinich, please, enlighten me.

cloudofdust: Re: It's wide open...

Tue, 23 Jan 2007 15:23:42 EST
It seemed to me that McCain really changed around the time of the Republican National Convention in 2004. I keep wondering if he made a deal with Republican powers that be. Something along the lines of "carry Bush's water for the next four years and you're

MayorBob: She's the automatic frontrunner.

Tue, 23 Jan 2007 15:11:05 EST
Her announcement of being in an exploratory mode finds her with an early lead among the Democratic pack. Of course that poll tells you nothing about the "negatives

port1080: It's wide open...

Tue, 23 Jan 2007 14:59:57 EST
This is a really unique race, because it's the first time in, well, damn near forever that the sitting President or Vice-President is not in the race. While there are some theoretical front-runners in both parties, none of them are so dominant that a surp

rEvolution inAction: Re: I'm In, He's In, She's In, We're All In

Tue, 23 Jan 2007 14:56:24 EST
Ok so John Edwards is a crazy mofo. He sucked Cheney's ICBM in the last debate.. he couldn't even beat someone who eats kittens and shoots his own friend in the face (that did happen afterwards.. but still it was obvious). Richardson.. well I thought he wa