Nonsense? You mean like just acting like you don’t get what I’m saying when you clearly just disagree with it? That’s straight up disingeuous bullshit, and it’s fucking tired. No, you got me, Plato. There isn’t a secret leadership council that keeps an objective score on the leadership attribute of every American politician active today. There isn’t a scoreboard, or a ranking system. It is entirely subjective, it is entirely my opinion, and has been ackowledged as such. Repeatedly. Want it in all caps? How many times does it need to get said?
But I’ll tell you what. Because it will make you feel good, I’ll just reverse my position completely. Hillary Clinton is every bit the leader John McCain is. It’s the truth! And when America doesn’t agree, it’ll be the fault of a) dumb hick red state voters who don’t got no college, b) a vast media conspiracy or c) big corporate intere$ts. Her not winning will not in any way be evidence of a bunch of people that can’t figure out how to lead, but think they should get to be in charge anyway.
Please do, because it will then be clear that you took my response to the issue of McCain’s honesty and decency and deceitfully tried to portray it as my opinion of his qualifications for the presidency.
Your characterizations of her positions on health care and Iran.
Your portrayal of the equivalence of Clinton and McCain left out a meaningful condition on Clinton’s part. I found that deceitful, as I did your attempt to switch the context of my observation regarding McCain’s affairs.
An opinion that you don’t even care to rethink given a decent argument. I couldn’t give 2 shits about hillary clinton. But I won’t vote for john mccain because he has shown the exact opposite of leadership. He’s given in to every segment of the Republican party that I loathe. The religious right, the corporate lobby and the war-hawks. He used to hold a principled stand against the ridiculous things some televangelist and evangelical pastors say - now he courts them for endorsements. He opposed the Bush tax cuts because they disproportionately benefited the wealthy and were unwise during a time of war - now they’re the keystone to his economic policy. He lambasted our involvement in Somalia during the 90s and railed against us being occupiers and said that the US shouldn’t be in the business of nation-building - and yet here he is in full-on support of rebuilding Iraq as a democracy. He hasn’t stuck to any principles. He hasn’t shown commitment to any ideals. And he hasn’t inspired republicans to follow him - recall conservative talk-show hosts railing against him, recall him ‘winning’ primaries with only 31% of the vote, recall members of his own party saying having his temper in the oval office sent shivers down their spine. He has not in any way shape or form been a charismatic leader during his presidential campaign.
I want a president who will respect individual rights. I want a president who will regulate businesses to protect equality and those individual rights. I want a president who can open a history book and comprehend what happens when we muck in other countries’ governments and directly support or force regime change. I want a president who understands that ‘free trade’ as most republicans describe it, really isn’t free trade. I want a president who gives a shit about how we treat all people, not just Americans. I want a president who knows a thing or 2 about fiscal responsibility, the economy and cares about paying down the national debt. Neither Hillary Clinton, nor John McCain fit all these, but she sure as hell hits more points than McCain does.
However, it has nothing to do with the past few months. I just don’t trust Hillary in any way, and I like McCain. Heading in, I thought we were going to get a Clinton-Giuliani race – puke. I’ve got an electoral hard-on for the upcoming Obama-McCain contest.
That’s twice now that I’ve addressed your “McCain leadership” claim and twice that you’ve refused to engage in any semblance of a real debate. Not once have I belittled you - this is the 3rd time you’ve done it to me. I expect that at redstate - not so much here.
No, it’s just the first time you’ve been remotely honest about your intentions in this thread. You don’t like John McCain. Congrats, no one gives a shit, including me.
But you have. You’ve belittled me by presuming to waste my time with your ridiculous pretenses. You want to debate that I like John McCain more than Hillary? Why? I said I did. There is no debate. Yes, I think and feel that he’s a better leader and will vote accordingly. Yes, I think most of the country will agree with me. No, my gut reasctions are not points of fact subject to empirical proof or disproof as might be the color of the sky or speed of sound. It is an opinion, a preference, and finding yourself in disagreement with it, you set about it like a thing that can be undone if only you can find a reasonable, logical way to confront it.
You’ve wasted my time to amuse yourself on a point of disagreement which cannot be factually evaluated. Do not think your lack of direct insults makes you any less insulting.
I wanted to discuss WHY you thought McCain was a better leader. Yes it’s your opinion. I thought maybe you had based it on something. But you haven’t really. My intention was to have an intelligent debate on McCain’s leadership. Last time I checked, this thread was about what Obama supporters would do if we had to pick between Hillary and McCain.
Don’t pretend to know my intentions or act like I wasted your time by holding a gun to your head. Nothing I have done has forced you to respond to these posts. That’s your own choice. If you feel you’ve wasted your oh so precious time, you have no one to blame but yourself.
God help me if Obama loses the nomination, McCain gets elected, and this country starts to free fall instead of doing the nice little coily downspiral it’s been doing for the last 8 years. Because I probably will have to punch anyone who says that they voted for McCain instead of Hillary because they like him. Nevermind that he’s starting to sound just as delusional as Bush, plans to stay the course on the ridiculous tax cut idea, knows shit about the economy, and is in no big rush to get us out of war. By gollee, he’s nice dammit!
I don’t like Hillary very much, but I’m gonna vote for her if Obama should lose the nom. She may send the nation to hell in a handbasket, but at least she’s saying she won’t. McCain, on the other hand, is all but walking around with a sandwich board announcing that he is going to carry Bush’s “let’s see how many more fucked up things I can do” mantle. More pretending that universal healthcare = evil socialism. More throwing money at the oil crisis issue instead of seriously investing in alternative techonology. More saber rattling that makes us look like warmongering idiots. More lip service about the economy and not doing anything about it except giving folks tax rebate bandaids.
Lots of big names, but they’re too old and injury-prone, and they have too shaky a bullpen. Besides, being rich as pro athletes tend to be, they lean Republican anyway (the few non-immigrants on the roster do, that is).
Thorns of a terrible dilemma for this Independent. Yeah you can dangle Hillary’s platform in front of me, and I can go and nod my head here and there in assent as I go down the list, but frankly my fear is that she will take all the unchallenged precedents that the Bush administration has concocted to make end runs around separation of powers and whatnot, and run like hell with them. I just get the feeling that she is a rabid powermonger with very little concern for the country.
With McCain I have the opposite problem: who the fuck am I voting for? The “maverick” who clearly positioned himself in opposition to many core Repo beliefs a decade ago? The guy who was the major mover WRT the Patriot Act? The mealymouthed flipflopper who has spent most of campaign shamelessly kissing up to the far right of his own party? What will he do if he is elected? Tell Limbaugh/Coulter/et al. to piss off and forsake the likes of Rumsfeld/Cheney from taking positions of power in his administration? Or just wimpily pass the buck on most of this current administration’s sins for another 4 years? I find it impossible to make an informed choice if I’m considering voting for him.
In 1996 I voted for Nader because I had come to loathe Slick Willy, but didn’t trust Dole to set himself apart from the rabid rightwingers. [In 2000 I went for Gore, an easy choice for me] This time I may very well be casting my lot for the corpse of Pat Paulsen, because neither of these two appears ready to do what is necessary to save our civilization. If LarryCurly and Moe are my only two (2 1/2) viable choices, then I have every right to abstain or log a protest vote, don’t I?
You have every right no matter those that will howl against you. Do what you think is right. You will not be doing it in ignorance but in informed disgust.
I will vote for Hillary if it came to it, but if McCain was still the McCain of 2000 I would vote for him in a heart beat over Hillary. He has by catering to the right lost many in middle.
Meanwhile I will continue to hope Obama gets the nomination and I can go vote for someone for President I actually like for the first time since the first time I voted.
Co-presidency hell; Bill might advise, but if he even tried to act all equal and shit, Hillary will wield the CIC pimp-hand with a quickness.
I was under the impression that most immigrants, once given access to the American Dream (success and financial security) tend to go conservative, i.e., Republican.
I’d vote Clinton. I’d hold my nose. I’d probably feel ill. But I’ll vote Clinton, because another four or eight years of outright Republican rule will probably destroy this country.
The sad thing is that as far as their stated policies go, Clinton and Obama really AREN’T that far apart. It’s the candidates’ histories outside of their political policies that make me so antithetical to Clinton. She’s DLC, that pseudo-Democratic, pro-corporate, Republican-lite organization. She loves lobbyists like a fat kid loves cake. She isn’t good for the party (neither was Bill when he was in office). But god help me, she’s better for the country than another outright Republican.
And again, and again, except that we need not specify Clinton in our concerns. The past 7 years have shown us that the rules and firewalls that we, or at least I, presumed were solid, if not sacrosanct, are about as sturdy as the levees in New Orleans. If we have anyone, or any group, in control of the executive who does not feel they need to adhere to the generally understood boundaries around the office, and their party in Congress lacks the integrity to hold them in check, and the other party lacks the power or the balls to do anything to force adherence, then we the people are sunk. We have no Fourth Estate to serve as the people’s check on the government. I worry that Bush has opened a Pandora’s Box in his zeal to broaden the executive, and I don’t see how we can do anything about it if our representatives don’t.