My personal Politics L-O-C-K !!!!! Democratic Party Presidential Nominee

bigboydan · 01-09-06, 08:17 AM

i'm not into politics at all (could really care less)... but, what other canidate would they even consider running against the republicans ?

BTW,

John, i'm suprised your going to tie up your money for that long.

BuddyBear · 01-09-06, 11:26 AM

I don't know John...i follow politics relatively closely and I can tell you that Hillary is pretty popular right now....even among more Republican moderates. She does tend to be very polarizing but if her popularity soars then that is not a good sign b/c the Dems will nominate her thinking she is their only chance.

quarm_ · 01-09-06, 11:41 AM

yep thats a long time for a bet to run ^^

P.S. can you show imgv how to post wager confirmations?
Id love to see how much 94 units are :+eyes-8+:

tacomax · 01-09-06, 12:34 PM

Originally posted by quarm_

Id love to see how much 94 units are :+eyes-8+:

$94

BuddyBear · 01-09-06, 12:50 PM

who cares how much someone bets....that's the one thing i hate about sports forum is they criticize guys how much they bet...who cares if you bet $5 or $5000 on a game. The idea to get games right and IMGV is doing a pretty solid job lately.

tacomax · 01-09-06, 01:07 PM

Originally posted by BuddyBear

who cares how much someone bets....that's the one thing i hate about sports forum is they criticize guys how much they bet...who cares if you bet $5 or $5000 on a game. The idea to get games right and IMGV is doing a pretty solid job lately.

And I think it's pretty sad in the extreme when someone starts multiple forum flame wars for the heinous crime of disagreeing with their picks or for simply not kissing their ass.

I thought this was a serious forum, not a kindergarten.

SBR_John · 01-09-06, 01:19 PM

This works out to 40% return per year so yea, it ties some money up but its a nice return.

Buddy a ticket with Hillary as the headliner would be the death of the Demo party for a generation. The coat tail losses in congress would be unthinkable.

Other canidates? How about Kerry? and if he is too liberal you got Joe The Man Lierbman.

quarm_ · 01-09-06, 01:19 PM

Originally posted by tacomax

I thought this was a serious forum, not a kindergarten.

Good one Taco, switching from the SBR page to the forum is like travelling between worlds :+eyes-8+:

RamblinRoyce · 01-09-06, 01:34 PM

who mentioned imgv, i don't see anybody mentioning imgv. and no one cares about the $ amount, which is why you're supposed to use units. 1 unit for a weak bet and 5 units for a strong bet, maybe 10 units for a really strong bet. People should post in units. And 94 units, well that implies a 110% sure thing bet, rock solid and will never fail bet, which you know, happens all the time...

There's also McCain...and I agree, they shouldn't nominate Hillary unless they wanna lose...cuz realistically, all the red states have women who still wouldn't vote for her...and for every woman who wouldn't vote for Hilary, there are ten men who wouldn't in the reds...

SBR_John · 01-09-06, 04:47 PM

The Democrats main problem is:
There are no moderates that have a big name. Kerry is trying to become a moderate but its hard to hide from a 20 year voting record. My man man Joe L is too conservative. Heck maybe Al Gore has worked through his speech impediment and is ready to give it another roll. I mean, he did invent the internet.

bigboydan · 01-09-06, 04:47 PM

come on guy, keep it on the topic please

Senator7 · 01-09-06, 09:25 PM

I think the Dems will nominate Hillary Clinton in 2008 and it will be one of the biggest mistakes they have ever made. She's as polarizing a figure as you'll find in politics, but she's already basically locked up all of the superdelegates at the Democratic Convention. To win, a Democrat is going to have to turn one or two (Ohio or Florida) red states in 2004, blue in 2008. I don't think Hillary Clinton can do that.

Joe Lieberman could do it, but he's been blacklisted from the party for being the only Senate Democrat currently using his brain.

Evan Bayh is an intriguing choice and someone with broad appeal that could do well in the red states.

John Kerry and Al Gore have both lost and will forever have the loser label. If either of them is nominated in 2008, it will be Adlai Stevenson all over again.

John Edwards is alright, but he's beaten to death his "Two Americas" speech. Edwards doesn't have ideal experience either and by 2008, he'll have been out of the public scene for over three years.

The darkhorse Democrat is Russ Feingold. He championed campaign finance with John McCain, he was the lone vote against the Patriot Act, and he's got minimal skeletons in his closet. He's an incredible campaigner and, even though he's incredibly liberal, he's managed to hide it by painting himself as an independent or a maverick. His campaign ads are absolutey incredible as well. The other benefit in nominating Feingold is that it immediately turns a toss up state (Wisconsin) solidly blue in 2008. In his 2004 re-election, Feingold set a Wisconsin record for the amount of votes he received, even more than Tommy Thompson. The major problems for Feingold will be raising money for the primary and the fact that he's Jewish.

Just two cents from someone who does this for a living...

BuddyBear · 01-09-06, 10:04 PM

Pretty good read Senator.....I'd like Feingold to run personally. I think he actually stands for something and has done a pretty good job within his own party in separating himself from others.

I think Lieberman is a joke....he represents everything wrong with the Democratic Party....he is really a soft Republican and becoming more and more conservative.....had Gore chose someone besides Lieberman he would have won.

BuddyBear · 01-09-06, 10:06 PM

Originally posted by SBR_John

The Democrats main problem is:
There are no moderates that have a big name. Kerry is trying to become a moderate but its hard to hide from a 20 year voting record. My man man Joe L is too conservative. Heck maybe Al Gore has worked through his speech impediment and is ready to give it another roll. I mean, he did invent the internet.

People who say Kerry is a real liberal have no idea what they are talking about...just conservative repetition where you say something enough people begin to believe it even though it is not true (i.e. liberal media, judicial activism, etc...)

slacker00 · 01-09-06, 10:50 PM

I can't imagine a female U.S. president in my lifetime. (I expect to live another 50 years according to the actuarial tables.)

That said, I think Hillary is the best Democratic candidate right now. She'll never win the presidencey against Republican X, but she's stilt he best Democratic candidate. That's how sad the Democratic party is right now. I couldn't bet against her getting the Democratic nomination.

Senator7 · 01-09-06, 11:00 PM

Originally posted by slacker00

I can't imagine a female U.S. president in my lifetime. (I expect to live another 50 years according to the actuarial tables.)

That said, I think Hillary is the best Democratic candidate right now. She'll never win the presidencey against Republican X, but she's stilt he best Democratic candidate. That's how sad the Democratic party is right now. I couldn't bet against her getting the Democratic nomination.

She's not the best candidate the Dems have. At this point, its a toss up between Bayh, Feingold, and Barack Obama. The latter isn't ready to be President yet, but when he is, watch out. If the Dems are smart, they won't put him on the ticket as the VP, they'll wait and let him be "The Guy" in 2012. They wasted Edwards' political potential by putting him on the ballot as VP.

BuddyBear · 01-09-06, 11:14 PM

Originally posted by slacker00

I can't imagine a female U.S. president in my lifetime. (I expect to live another 50 years according to the actuarial tables.)

That said, I think Hillary is the best Democratic candidate right now. She'll never win the presidencey against Republican X, but she's stilt he best Democratic candidate. That's how sad the Democratic party is right now. I couldn't bet against her getting the Democratic nomination.

This always astonishes me when people say this...i am not sure whether this is some sexist attitude you have or just some practical notion you believe to be the case...but really how hard can it be to imagine a female U.S. president.

Countries like the Philipines, Indonesia, and even Pakistan have had female leaders...those are like Muslim countries where women have restrictions that make us laugh here in the U.S......now considering the U.S. is the most modern and advanced country in the world...it would seem to me that a female president is right around the corner sooner or later regardless of party affiliation.

tacomax · 01-09-06, 11:37 PM

Originally posted by BuddyBear

This always astonishes me when people say this...i am not sure whether this is some sexist attitude you have or just some practical notion you believe to be the case...but really how hard can it be to imagine a female U.S. president.

I think it's a bit harsh to jump on slacker00 on that point - he didn't divulge any attitudes in that post, he purely posted it how he saw it.

Personally I think it's pretty unlikely that the US will elect a gay, black President in the next 50 years but that doesn't mean that I'm racist/homophobic.

BuddyBear · 01-09-06, 11:40 PM

I am not jumping on him...but let me get this straight you can not imagine a female president in this country but somehow in a country as "backward" as Pakistan or a place like Indonesia a country that has the most Muslims in the world can have a female president.....Doesn't make any sense to me.

tacomax · 01-09-06, 11:50 PM

Personally I'd be hesitant to label other countries as "backward" and the US "the most modern and advanced country in the world" when the US has a pretty shoddy human rights record during the lifetime of a lot of american citizens.

Senator7 · 01-09-06, 11:52 PM

Actually, if she decided that she wanted to run, we could have a President in 2008 that's both black and a female...Condi Rice. There's a ton of support for her in GOP circles.

BuddyBear · 01-10-06, 12:06 AM

I mean what does it mean to be president anyway...it doesn't matter male or female....the president these days is basically a puppet for giant corporations or to the highest bidder. And in my opinion there is really little difference between democrats and republicans with the exception of a few issues here and there...

I use to get worked up over politics but then i had an epiphony....what does it matter who is president...it doesn't change my life....since Bush assumed his 2nd term in office absolutely nothing has changed for me and for most everyone else. Had Kerry won...nothing would have changed either. The only people who are really impacted by the Presidency are CEOs, big donors, and a handful of political elite who are trying to influence policy that benefits them and almost always harms consumers and American workers.

For regular Americans....the presidency is the farthest thing from their life. You think Bush (or Kerry for that matter) really give a **** about the average American....Hell, Bush Senior once went into a shopping market and didn't even know what a scanner was at the grocery store....you think he or Clinton care much about you???

You take a look at Bush or the "liberal" john kerry...both of whom are born into family's of wealth and political influence and sent off to fancy prep schools then to elite Ivy league insitutions where they even join the same sercret societies....secret societies that train you how to become a member of the ruling class....both of whom are surrounded by the same special interests who fund their campaigns and work hand in hand to insure a "successful" term for both you and themselves....that's how it works fellows.

IMO..you got to reject these parties....they are pretty much loser parties that have very little to offer the American people besides shameless and shallow rhetoric save a few people here and there.

SBR_John · 01-10-06, 12:10 AM

Buddy I have a narrow scope to judge these cats: you want to raise my taxes then you a Liberal, you want to cut my taxes then you a conservative.

I'm with seantor7 on this one. Hillary Clinton Senator from New York? The Dems would be absolutely destroyed and it would take a generation to recover from. That would literally be forfeiting Texas and Florida. Polls would certainly show the impending dissater, a landside like never seen before, so I have faith the democrats will not throw this election.

tacomax · 01-10-06, 12:17 AM

Originally posted by BuddyBear

I mean what does it mean to be president anyway...it doesn't matter male or female....the president these days is basically a puppet for giant corporations or to the highest bidder. And in my opinion there is really little difference between democrats and republicans with the exception of a few issues here and there...

I see your point, but you're missing the most important thing. If the president is a puppet then indeed it doesn't matter what their creed, sexuality or sex. But the president needs to get elected by the public in the first place.

Say you've got two men who have the same educational background, the same military service, similar policies etc. etc. One of them is white and straight, the other is black and openly gay. Are you saying that the American public won't discriminate between the candidates to any extent at all?

isetcap · 01-10-06, 12:23 AM

In many ways buddy I would agree with you. In fact your post contains a great deal of wisdom. But ponder this...

Would the response after 9/11 have been different if our leadership were different?
Would the situation in Iraq be the same under a different administration?

I know my answers to those 2 questions and for many Americans those are the issues that are polarizing the nation.

Beyond that, you are right; Republican/Democrat, it's all vanilla. The fact of the matter is, this country is ruled by its economy and its economy rules the world. That places us in the precarious position of being at least parially responsible for the outcome of just about everything that occurs on a world scale.

BuddyBear · 01-10-06, 02:04 AM

1) The response would have been the same to 9/11 IMO...what would have been different?

2) Not sure if it would be the same...but the Dems would have gone to Iraq too...regime change was a staple of the Clinton/Gore presidency....also with the way Lieberman is talking you have to wonder if he wouldn't have gone to Iraq himself. I don't think the Dems would have been as stupid to talk about WMD like the Reps have.

Originally posted by isetcap

In many ways buddy I would agree with you. In fact your post contains a great deal of wisdom. But ponder this...

Would the response after 9/11 have been different if our leadership were different?
Would the situation in Iraq be the same under a different administration?

I know my answers to those 2 questions and for many Americans those are the issues that are polarizing the nation.

Beyond that, you are right; Republican/Democrat, it's all vanilla. The fact of the matter is, this country is ruled by its economy and its economy rules the world. That places us in the precarious position of being at least parially responsible for the outcome of just about everything that occurs on a world scale.

slacker00 · 01-10-06, 06:56 AM

BuddyBear, no offense taken. I'd vote for Hillary in 2008. I'd vote for Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton or Liebermann if they were the Democratic Nominee. The only reason to vote republican is if you are extremely wealthy or extremely ignorant. Unfortunately, a majority of Americans seem to fit this profile.

I'm not racist, but the American political system is. The odds are stacked against you unless you are white, male, wealthy, and otherwise pedigreed. Don't shoot the messenger. American democracy is far from a true democracy.

Edit: Next American president will be white a white orthodox christian male. -10000

SBR_John · 01-10-06, 08:02 AM

You know its not about personal likes its about who can win. Gore was a dead heat which shows you what the American electorate is looking for. So the Dem's have two choices; they can cart out their own like Hillary or they can put out a candidate that is a moderate that can actually win.

With my bet, I am putting faith in the brass in the Democratic party that they will put out a candidate that has a chance to win.

bigboydan · 01-10-06, 08:24 AM

Originally posted by SBR_John

Gore was a dead heat which shows you what the American electorate is looking for.

John, the dem's sent mayor Daily down there to stuff the ballet boxes. so, i doubt it was as close as most people might have thought.

BuddyBear · 01-10-06, 11:31 AM

Originally posted by slacker00

BuddyBear, no offense taken. I'd vote for Hillary in 2008. I'd vote for Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton or Liebermann if they were the Democratic Nominee. The only reason to vote republican is if you are extremely wealthy or extremely ignorant. Unfortunately, a majority of Americans seem to fit this profile.

I'm not racist, but the American political system is. The odds are stacked against you unless you are white, male, wealthy, and otherwise pedigreed. Don't shoot the messenger. American democracy is far from a true democracy.

Edit: Next American president will be white a white orthodox christian male. -10000

Sorry Slacker...i hope I didn't offend you that was not the goal of my post....i just wanted to show that somehow in the most "advanced" society a female presidency is too unrealistic but in 3rd world Islamic societies that many consider "backwards" in this country, females have assumed the highest position in government.

In terms of who the next American president will be it really doesn't matter much to me as I've outlined above...next to nothing will change in my life....if it is a male it doesn't matter, it if it a female it won't change, if it is an animal it won't change....nothing will change in my life b/c of the Presidency.

Next American president will be white a white orthodox christian male. -10000

I would agree with this but I would think you need to add wealthy to the description or Ivy league educated would be another good one.

slacker00 · 01-11-06, 12:51 AM

Originally posted by SBR_John

You know its not about personal likes its about who can win. Gore was a dead heat which shows you what the American electorate is looking for. So the Dem's have two choices; they can cart out their own like Hillary or they can put out a candidate that is a moderate that can actually win.

With my bet, I am putting faith in the brass in the Democratic party that they will put out a candidate that has a chance to win.

I have no faith in the democratic party right now. There is no real unified objective, purpose or meaning in the party. It's bizarre that the Republicans scooped up the religious right, and the affluent giving an easy statement of purpose, "We believe in God and flex our capitalistic muscle.". The democratic party got "everyone else". The "everyone else" crowd is so varied in lifestyles, desires, and direction it's tough to have a representitive voice. I hate to be a downer, but Hillary might be the best bet, which is a pretty bad.

Hillary actually has a perfect pedigree except that she is female. I just can't see Redneck USA voting for a woman.

RamblinRoyce · 01-11-06, 01:56 AM

Hillary would be the best president of the group. but, as slacker pointed out, there's no way the average american will vote for her. The Repubes wouldn't even have to Rig it cuz there are nuff americans who wouldn't vote for her regardless of the fact that she's the most capable to handle the job.

As for the female "Presidents" in Pakistan and Phiippines, you think they were really presidents...guess they could be, their democratic system probably is more of a legitimate democracy than the US. But hey, I'm a happy sheep, so i don't care. I got an abundance of food, i can buy anything and everything i would ever need from butt floss to a pet rock... The rich will rig it up for whatever they want anyway. C'est La Vie. I wish Hillary would be president, but not likely.

SBR_John · 01-11-06, 09:03 AM

I hate to be a downer, but Hillary might be the best bet, which is a pretty bad.

Hillary actually has a perfect pedigree except that she is female. I just can't see Redneck USA voting for a woman.

Guys come on! Did Kerry, Gore, Edwards and Joe The Man Lieberman die and I didnt get the news? Maybe none of these guys cant win either but Hillary will cost he Dems 40-80 seats in the house and 6 senate seats at least. (..and most important is I'd lose my bet

)

bigboydan · 01-11-06, 09:10 AM

why beat around the bush here (pardon the pun

)

hilary is a women!! so, thats going to be a very tough decesion for the dem's to make. thats if they wanna win this election.