2008 Primaries Thread 2: THE QUICKENING

compromise on vital shit = betrayal.

for ILXpundits, compromise NEVER equals betrayal. Hence Wm J Clinton was in some ways "a great president."

I spent that entire Errol Morris film wanting to kick McN in the face.

lickyhoods

how so Morbius? everyone on ILX is pretty bitter about HRC's compromising

the likelyhood of the Earth spontaneously turning into a giant Skittle

SO NOT GONNA HAPPEN.

"everyone" = "most people" sorry

i think you guys are very charitable and sophisticated regarding the moral triage that must take place on a daily basis for national politicians from illinois who are seeking a higher office and i patiently await your extension of the same courtesy to national politicians from new york

i dont understand why its necessary to hold politicians to a higher standard of integrity than i hold myself

otm!

i will start getting mad about politicians compromising when i bike everywhere and give 30% of my income to the poor

Yes Tracer Hillary and Obama are exactly the same.

Obama never spent the 80s on the streets of Chicago as an organizer and activist, and even if he had it probably never impacted the way he would lead.

...

max voted to raise his cred-card rate to 30%?? I don't beeleeve it!

morbs, u a legendary crank! never change xoxo

HRC never spent years as a corporate lawyer, never voted for a war she didnt think would happen, and never pandered on issues like fuckin flag burning for political gain

there's pandering to interest groups and there is PANDERING to interest groups, Hillary's been in capslock mode for a minute

If Hillary and Barack are exactly the same, where is he hiding the tits and where is she hiding the dick?

i patiently await your extension of the same courtesy to national politicians from new york

Has been extended. Numerous times. Feeding hand now has little holey bite marks all over it. Lesson learned.

never pandered on issues like fuckin flag burning for political gain

Actually, this strikes me as a pretty harmless form of pandering - a symbolic vote that will never go anywhere.

If Hillary and Barack are exactly the same, where is he hiding the tits and where is she hiding the dick?

she's not really hiding it LOLOOOLOL

there's pandering to interest groups and there is PANDERING to interest groups, Hillary's been in capslock mode for a minute

True. For the record, my aunt was an Edwards fan. Not sure where she stands now.

If Hillary and Barack are exactly the same, where is he hiding the tits and where is she hiding the dick?

POLL

(Personally I think HRC and BO are close enough to each other that many of the objections raised to either are manifestations of subconscious racial/gender biases.)

yeah and i think you're nuts Dan

close enough except for IRAQ

lol now im on Morbs side

im voting for barack mostly b/c he went to my college

xp: and number of tenured DLC scum on their Blackberrys

I think you're nuts if you believe you can divorce the "black vs white"/"man vs woman" issues from this contest.

Everything I say or do manifests my many racial and gender biaseees. It's sort of my trademark.

i didnt say that, i think its so reductionist that it is RONG to singularly credit preference in a candidate along those lines though xp

I think the fact is that both Obama and Clinton are laying out nearly identical policy platforms for what they hope to accomplish in office, and that either one will have to compromise significantly to get even a fraction of what they want to accomplish done. The question is, who will be able to strike the best compromise possible and make it happen? I tend to think Clinton has demonstrated more of the skills necessary to shepherd these things through a legislature, but Obama may have better ability to use the bully pulpit to get public opinion on his side. So which factor would be more significant?

there are lots of factors both conscious and subconscious impacting this thing, and certain elements weigh in more than for others. If I've been a supporter of Barack since before he even won the Dem primary in the run for Senate how does that long term 'affiliation' weigh against my supposed hatred against women?

Deej maybe you should learn to read before you participate in these threads?

many of the objections

yeah sorry missed this

misread rather

hahaha I wondered

what i think is so interesting about the reactions to hillary is that they fall into two broad categories: 1) she's too partisan and won't work across the aisle to solve america's problems constructively, i.e. she's a divider, not a uniter like obama; 2) she's a corporate crony, hawkish and right-wing, and has betrayed whatever convictions she once had (as a corporate lawyer?). the people who feel either one of these things feel them passionately. either one of these positions is right and the other is wrong, or the positions are more complex than is being made out, in which case the passion for one or the other is misplaced.

I think they are both true to varying degrees? She's like the anti-Obama that way; he works from the left but speaks to the center, she works from the center but speaks as an uber-partisan

I think both are true in a way - I think she's too divisive as a figure to be effective in uniting people - nothing to do with whether or not she herself is a "uniter" in terms of goal/personality. xp

or maybe i like hillary and think she would be a good president but i just like obama more!

one thing i do side with hillary on is health care, cuz we all know that whatever proposal a dem makes will get seriously watered down, so why not start at a further point to the left? i would guess that hillary's plan, if it went through congress, would end up looking exactly like obama's. i dunno what obama's would look like by the time congress cut it up.

btw, is there any chance for the dems to replace the congressional leadership after the election?

or maybe i like hillary and think she would be a good president but i just like obama more!

This is pretty much my position.

yeah ill co-sign on that

Thirded

Agreed.

He'll be a better one-term prez than she'd be.

what i think is so interesting about the reactions to hillary is that they fall into two broad categories: 1) she's too partisan and won't work across the aisle to solve america's problems constructively, i.e. she's a divider, not a uniter like obama; 2) she's a corporate crony, hawkish and right-wing, and has betrayed whatever convictions she once had

-- Tracer

Only the second bothers me (the lawyer bit is a non-issue).

The first doesn't bother me, 'cuz I don't hear much talk about how (or see any indication that) she won't work across the aisles. She obviously will and isn't radically partisan. What I do hear said is that Republicans, both voters and her fellow politicians, hate her with an irrational, virulent fury. This makes her a problematic nominee, and may fortell a difficult presidenct. When she's called a "divider", it has less to do with her than with other people's reactions to her.

That said, I'll be perfectly happy to vote for her, if she gets the nom.

"presidency", that shoulda read

i dunno i want to agree w/ max dan ned ygs team of :-) but i think the iraq vote still kinda cancels out what good will i had for her ... i don't doubt that she's 'on our side' but in the context of a genuinely bad decision her modestly compromised decisions stand out more

http://barackobamaisyournewbicycle.com/

I wouldn't go so far as "like," I would accept Hillary as the nominee and vote for her vs. McCain but I'm not sure she's really on the right side of some issues I think are important. one example was that she seemed to go waffley on torture in one of the debates ("well I'd have to be in the commander in chief's shoes" or some such). I find her much more hawkish than Obama.