Can't it be both?
Just wondering... so you don't believe racism is going to play a big part in the general election? I think that's a bit naive Extra. Racism hasn't gone anywhere, its just become politically incorrect. So much so that racists have become quite adept at hiding their racism. Now, I understand people that don't agree with Obama because of policy, but I'm pretty damn sure a large part of why Obama WILL lose the general elections is due to racism.
When Barrack or his 527's throw a negative campaign ad, it wont be called mud slinging. It would be called hope slinging.
but when McCain throws a negative campaign ad, it will retain it's classic definition of "mud slinging", unless the democrats feel that term "mud slinging" has racial conatations, in which case the democrats will cut to calling McCain a racist.
Race is also a huge reason why he's the frontrunner. If you're going to use on issue to win, you must deal with all the consequences it comes with.
Barrack could have gone to a more left of center approach, but he's not helping himself.
so you're admitting to ing about the world going round and the seasons changing.
I've got no problem with the rotation of the earth and the tilt of its axis. I am very much for those.
seems more like you're problem lies with comprehending analogies.
Why is she still int he race?
What's her ultimate goal? Is this a way to force her way into the ticket as VP?
Manny, dan . . . your take please?
Persuasive as you may be, you can't convince me to be against the rotation and tilt of the earth. These beliefs are very important to me.
WHy do you about imagenary people against the rotation of the earth?
She's in it to win it.
I don't know of any people, real or imaginary, who are against it, but since you brought up the rotation of the earth for no particular reason I had to clarify my personal position about it.
yeah, racism isn't an issue in this election...
suuuure! it was the ears and the hairline that prompted the comparison...
you're right, and that's why it's easy to bait chumpadumper into stupid arguments.
She's in it to win it.
She certainly could be in it to win it. I don't see any way it could actually happen though.
Perhaps someone here could show us how the numbers could work.
seriously, though. Obama wont get to the 2025 without the votes of superdelegates. if by the end of the primary season, the split between the tally is within 80-20 points, hillary can use the demographics argument, the florida and michigan, and for the simple fact that obama can't win bellweathers and his point margin is superficial and is only a fraction of 1 percent.
obama doesn't have it locked up.
the tally is so close, obama's negatives are so glaring that hillary has a good chance to steal the nomination.
GO HILLDOG GO!
the only state obama has won convincingly is NC. hillary has won cali, texas, and newyork, wv, all convincingly.
So does that mean Hillary will win Texas in the general election?
No, but it does mean she can win ohio, florida, retain cali.
Ok.
I suppose it comes down how many Clinton supporters would not support Obama under any cir stances even though most of his policies are almost identical to hers.
Many Republicans here claim McCain will win easily either way, so I don't understand why they bother.
so now that you understand that neither candidate can win texas, you must now realize that other swing states with huge latino populations are at stake.
If Obamaist see the election as a foregone conclusion, why get so apprehensive if hillary is actually only running to pay off her debts.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote