Hispanics already tend to vote Democratic, and aren't likely to vote for John McCain (R) over Barack Obama (D), especially given the Republican party's blatant antipathy toward immigrants, legal or otherwise.
I'm not so certain about that.
Don't forget that the failed 'reform' bill was named 'McCain-Kennedy'.
The party leadership wanted the bill passed.
Hell, Bush urged its passage, but in the end it was the average voter in both parties who jammed the phone lines to DC and clogged their representative's mailboxes that made it fail.
In the end, the whole immigration bill debacle among the Repubs was the Republican right wing base versus the 'Rockefeller Republicans', and the big business wing lost that round.
As far as the Democrats go, my Democratic Congressman made it clear that he would never vote for that bill no matter what form it took.
"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."- General Sir Charles Napier
Androsphinx wrote:I was just thinking - wouldn't Bill Richardson make a good VP for Obama. Seeing how Obama has been doing poorly with women (but wouldn't against McCain) and Hispanics (which he might well do, seeing how he's black, and the hispanic community has been moving to the right in recent years), as well as providing some real experience of executive power?
Plus he doesn't really look or sound Hispanic, which would negate to a certain extent the problem of running with two minority candidates.
That IS a really good choice!
He was also ambassador to the UN, heavily interested in foreign affairs, and was involved with personal negotiations with Saddam Hussein over some kidnappings (IIRC, it's been a while), and I think also some of the North Korea business over the years. I'm not sure how close he is to the Clintons, though.
I'd admit my bias as an interested foreigner - Clinton scares and disturbs me, and Obama's rhetoric sounds empty, if not actively false (although I'd take him in a shot). I hoped that Richardson would do better, and in a weaker field he might have done. I have heard that he's quite close to the Clintons, which might be a sticking point. But on the other hand it's hard to find Democrats, especially outside the Kennedy north-east circle, who haven't been involved with the Clintons in recent years. We'll see.
"what huge and loathsome abnormality was the Sphinx originally carven to represent? Accursed is the sight, be it in dream or not, that revealed to me the supreme horror - the Unknown God of the Dead, which licks its colossal chops in the unsuspected abyss, fed hideous morsels by soulless absurdities that should not exist" - Harry Houdini "Under the Pyramids"
"The goal of science is to substitute facts for appearances and demonstrations for impressions" - John Ruskin, "Stones of Venice"
On a tangential note, I caught the movie Primary Colors last night which only helped remind me some of the reasons why I hate Hillary and the Clintons in general.
I think Richardson might be a good choice but thinking he might help with the Hispanic vote is being a bit naive, The Hispanic vote is not monolithic and its childish to think because Richardson is Hispanic means all Hispanics will vote because he's one. Maybe there's a group that is turned off because he's Mexican (too numerous to count), others may hate the fact that he's democratic to begin with (Cubans), others won't vote because he is lined up with a black man.
Hispanics are too wide ranging a group to just tack on certain monolithic attributes because unlike blacks and many other minority groups Hispanics are actually a series of minority groups lumped into one category.
Wherever you go, there you are.
Ripped Shirt Monkey - BOTMWriter's GuildCybertron's FinestJustice League
This updated sig brought to you by JME2
SancheztheWhaler wrote:If Obama is the nominee, he's going to need somebody who can provide some credibility on the foreign relations and national defense fronts, and bring a more centrist political agenda to the table. The ideal candidate would be a white guy, so as to not completely scare the shit out of white people over the age of 50. Somebody like Wesley Clark would probably be ideal - although Clark is a Clintonite so it would be tough to convince him - he's white, male, relatively conservative (for a Democrat), and brings a tremendous level of credibility on the national defense front.
Every sentence in this paragraph says something sad about the US ...
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing
"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC
"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness
"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.
Stravo wrote:On a tangential note, I caught the movie Primary Colors last night which only helped remind me some of the reasons why I hate Hillary and the Clintons in general.
I think Richardson might be a good choice but thinking he might help with the Hispanic vote is being a bit naive, The Hispanic vote is not monolithic and its childish to think because Richardson is Hispanic means all Hispanics will vote because he's one. Maybe there's a group that is turned off because he's Mexican (too numerous to count), others may hate the fact that he's democratic to begin with (Cubans), others won't vote because he is lined up with a black man.
Hispanics are too wide ranging a group to just tack on certain monolithic attributes because unlike blacks and many other minority groups Hispanics are actually a series of minority groups lumped into one category.
Fair enough, I don't know so much about that. But when you look at Obama's weaknesses - women (will probably not be an issue against McCain), hispanics, lack of executive experience, lack of foreign policy experience, from the north and backed by the north-east section of the Democrats - Richardson seems to fill a lot of gaps.
"what huge and loathsome abnormality was the Sphinx originally carven to represent? Accursed is the sight, be it in dream or not, that revealed to me the supreme horror - the Unknown God of the Dead, which licks its colossal chops in the unsuspected abyss, fed hideous morsels by soulless absurdities that should not exist" - Harry Houdini "Under the Pyramids"
"The goal of science is to substitute facts for appearances and demonstrations for impressions" - John Ruskin, "Stones of Venice"
Stravo wrote:On a tangential note, I caught the movie Primary Colors last night which only helped remind me some of the reasons why I hate Hillary and the Clintons in general.
I think Richardson might be a good choice but thinking he might help with the Hispanic vote is being a bit naive, The Hispanic vote is not monolithic and its childish to think because Richardson is Hispanic means all Hispanics will vote because he's one. Maybe there's a group that is turned off because he's Mexican (too numerous to count), others may hate the fact that he's democratic to begin with (Cubans), others won't vote because he is lined up with a black man.
Hispanics are too wide ranging a group to just tack on certain monolithic attributes because unlike blacks and many other minority groups Hispanics are actually a series of minority groups lumped into one category.
Fair enough, I don't know so much about that. But when you look at Obama's weaknesses - women (will probably not be an issue against McCain), hispanics, lack of executive experience, lack of foreign policy experience, from the north and backed by the north-east section of the Democrats - Richardson seems to fill a lot of gaps.
Except that Richardson lacks charisma and nobody gives him any credit for his foreign policy experience... plus he's kind of a doofus. A southerner would give Obama better results than a southwesterner; the West Coast and the Northeast are already going to vote Democratic, so Obama just needs to pick up some of the "Red" states in the Midwest and the South to win the election, and a New Mexico governor isn't going to help with that.
In Brazil they say that Pele was the best, but Garrincha was better
Stravo wrote:On a tangential note, I caught the movie Primary Colors last night which only helped remind me some of the reasons why I hate Hillary and the Clintons in general.
I think Richardson might be a good choice but thinking he might help with the Hispanic vote is being a bit naive, The Hispanic vote is not monolithic and its childish to think because Richardson is Hispanic means all Hispanics will vote because he's one. Maybe there's a group that is turned off because he's Mexican (too numerous to count), others may hate the fact that he's democratic to begin with (Cubans), others won't vote because he is lined up with a black man.
Hispanics are too wide ranging a group to just tack on certain monolithic attributes because unlike blacks and many other minority groups Hispanics are actually a series of minority groups lumped into one category.
Fair enough, I don't know so much about that. But when you look at Obama's weaknesses - women (will probably not be an issue against McCain), hispanics, lack of executive experience, lack of foreign policy experience, from the north and backed by the north-east section of the Democrats - Richardson seems to fill a lot of gaps.
Except that Richardson lacks charisma and nobody gives him any credit for his foreign policy experience... plus he's kind of a doofus. A southerner would give Obama better results than a southwesterner; the West Coast and the Northeast are already going to vote Democratic, so Obama just needs to pick up some of the "Red" states in the Midwest and the South to win the election, and a New Mexico governor isn't going to help with that.
Yes, if we were going on experience, qualifications, and international prestige, it'd be a slam-dunk for Richardson . . . but a good running mate is someone who will help get the presidential hopeful elected, and Richardson's name-recognition, showings in the polls, and primaries have struggled to climb out of the single-digits.
GrandMasterTerwynn wrote:Yes, if we were going on experience, qualifications, and international prestige, it'd be a slam-dunk for Richardson . . . but a good running mate is someone who will help get the presidential hopeful elected, and Richardson's name-recognition, showings in the polls, and primaries have struggled to climb out of the single-digits.
If you look at the rest of the Dem field the only person other than Clinton and Obama that got his name in any sort of recognition was Edwards and he brought absolutely nothing to the table with Kerry in '04 so Obama would be a fool to put him on the bototm of the ticket.
Again Obama is already incredibly well positioned to win the entire NE, NW, the upper midwest as well as California. What he needs to win is either the Southwest (tough with McCain out of Arizona), the lower midwest (specifically Ohio), or Florida. Richardson igves him power with Hispanics which negates the move of hispanics to the Republican ticket and probably gurauntees Florida which is huge in the electroal math. Conversely going with someone like Tim Kaine out of Virgina probably gets him Ohio.
Women aren't going to vote heavily Republican even if Hillary isn't the nominee and the christers aren't going to be out in force for McCain no matter how much Bush tries to whip them up (in fact he is probably hurting McCain's chances by providing the eventual nominee with a shitload of "McCain is just like Bush" ammo). What this means is that Obama doesn't need to work too much at securing the base as much as making sure the Republicans don't get theirs up in critical states. Richardson negates Florida and Kaine probably negates Ohio (and may bring Virginia which has a decent number of votes) so either of those two is fine.
SDNet World Nation: Wilkonia
Armourer of the WARWOLVES
ASVS Vet's Association (Class of 2000)
Former C.S. Strowbridge Gold Ego Award Winner MEMBER of the Anti-PETA Anti-Facist LEAGUE
"I put no stock in religion. By the word religion I have seen the lunacy of fanatics of every denomination be called the will of god. I have seen too much religion in the eyes of too many murderers. Holiness is in right action, and courage on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves, and goodness. "
-Kingdom of Heaven
This might just be very unlikely due to the fact that he was already the democratic frontrunner once, but wouldn't a Obama/Kerry ticket do the trick?
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------ My LPs
Thanas wrote:This might just be very unlikely due to the fact that he was already the democratic frontrunner once, but wouldn't a Obama/Kerry ticket do the trick?
That's just begging for a whole heaplod of "swiftboaters" to come back to the forefront and we have to relize the entire 2004 election cycle without ever focusing on the current cycel. So short answer is yes he would do the trick but it isn't nearly as strong a pick as many other choices (Daschale or Edwards is a better choice than Kerry off the top of my head of leading WASPs for the VP spot).
SDNet World Nation: Wilkonia
Armourer of the WARWOLVES
ASVS Vet's Association (Class of 2000)
Former C.S. Strowbridge Gold Ego Award Winner MEMBER of the Anti-PETA Anti-Facist LEAGUE
"I put no stock in religion. By the word religion I have seen the lunacy of fanatics of every denomination be called the will of god. I have seen too much religion in the eyes of too many murderers. Holiness is in right action, and courage on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves, and goodness. "
-Kingdom of Heaven
DrMckay wrote:Although an ideal VP for Obama IMO, has Wesley Clark expressed any interest in the position.
I'm gonna throw in my 2 cents and suggest Bill Bradley-if he's still in "the game."
Clark endorsed Hillary some months ago, and has campaigned for her (I remember reading that he was in Nevada, and maybe also NH). He's a possible for her, but not really for Obama.
"what huge and loathsome abnormality was the Sphinx originally carven to represent? Accursed is the sight, be it in dream or not, that revealed to me the supreme horror - the Unknown God of the Dead, which licks its colossal chops in the unsuspected abyss, fed hideous morsels by soulless absurdities that should not exist" - Harry Houdini "Under the Pyramids"
"The goal of science is to substitute facts for appearances and demonstrations for impressions" - John Ruskin, "Stones of Venice"
Thanas wrote:This might just be very unlikely due to the fact that he was already the democratic frontrunner once, but wouldn't a Obama/Kerry ticket do the trick?
That's just begging for a whole heaplod of "swiftboaters" to come back to the forefront and we have to relize the entire 2004 election cycle without ever focusing on the current cycel. So short answer is yes he would do the trick but it isn't nearly as strong a pick as many other choices (Daschale or Edwards is a better choice than Kerry off the top of my head of leading WASPs for the VP spot).
I think if he was chosen this time around he'd be pretty quick to respond to any hint of "swiftboating", he's probably spent the past 4 years regretting it afterall. He'd be a decent choice since I don't really get any sense that their's any hatred towards Kerry out there and he'd do well in the VP debate. One problem may be that he's close friends with McCain, with McCain even having been his first pick for the VP nod in 2004.
"If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one? "
-Abraham Lincoln
The wife and I just got back from Washington State's Democratic caucus - two votes for Obama. I was surprised at the turnout - lots of people - and lots and lots of Obama supporters.
In Brazil they say that Pele was the best, but Garrincha was better
CmdrWilkens wrote:That's just begging for a whole heaplod of "swiftboaters" to come back to the forefront and we have to relize the entire 2004 election cycle without ever focusing on the current cycel. So short answer is yes he would do the trick but it isn't nearly as strong a pick as many other choices (Daschale or Edwards is a better choice than Kerry off the top of my head of leading WASPs for the VP spot).
I think if he was chosen this time around he'd be pretty quick to respond to any hint of "swiftboating", he's probably spent the past 4 years regretting it afterall. He'd be a decent choice since I don't really get any sense that their's any hatred towards Kerry out there and he'd do well in the VP debate. One problem may be that he's close friends with McCain, with McCain even having been his first pick for the VP nod in 2004.
The problem isn't whether or not the swiftboating would impact negatively because just by existing it would be bad. The time spent refuting and attacking such claims is time NOT spent getting before the voters with the issues. Simply put just having such a well prepared organization willing to attack the bottom of the ticket means an Obama/Kerry run would have to spend time it won't have (since the Demcratic candidate will NOT be known for sure until the convention, there simply aren't enough delegates realistically up for grab to make the super delegates irrelevant) fighting them and not getting their platform out. If the goal is to have a well known and respected WASP on the bottom of the ticket Daschale, Kaine, and Edwards all have fewer shortfalls than Kerry.
The other thing is that Kerry bring no strength outside of the liberal states so he won't be effective at winning swing states. This makes him as useless on an Obama ticket as Edwards was on Kerry's.
SDNet World Nation: Wilkonia
Armourer of the WARWOLVES
ASVS Vet's Association (Class of 2000)
Former C.S. Strowbridge Gold Ego Award Winner MEMBER of the Anti-PETA Anti-Facist LEAGUE
"I put no stock in religion. By the word religion I have seen the lunacy of fanatics of every denomination be called the will of god. I have seen too much religion in the eyes of too many murderers. Holiness is in right action, and courage on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves, and goodness. "
-Kingdom of Heaven
Went to the Louisiana primary; couldn't vote because I was somehow regged Independent when I got my ID. Stupid closed primary.
I went to the Baton Rouge High School across the highway to try to vote, but apparently my precinct poll was at the Catholic High School down the street the other way; oh well, I like its bells which I can hear from my house! I also asked about voter turnout; the pollers just gushed about how big it was at both places. This bodes well for Democracy in general and Obama in particular, who's been blitzing the airwaves here. Curiously, I saw a shitload of Ron Paul spa^H^H^Hsigns within sight of the CHS. I LOLed!
I voted yes on a new casino directly because of the nasty attack ads by preexisting casino boats afraid of facing real competition. Competition is good; politics used to further monopolies is for voting down or shooting with the Lupara. Nasty attack ads deserve to be punished as well. I suspect the casino act will pass.
Einhander Sn0m4n wrote:Went to the Louisiana primary; couldn't vote because I was somehow regged Independent when I got my ID. Stupid closed primary.
I went to the Baton Rouge High School across the highway to try to vote, but apparently my precinct poll was at the Catholic High School down the street the other way; oh well, I like its bells which I can hear from my house! I also asked about voter turnout; the pollers just gushed about how big it was at both places. This bodes well for Democracy in general and Obama in particular, who's been blitzing the airwaves here. Curiously, I saw a shitload of Ron Paul spa^H^H^Hsigns within sight of the CHS. I LOLed!
I voted yes on a new casino directly because of the nasty attack ads by preexisting casino boats afraid of facing real competition. Competition is good; politics used to further monopolies is for voting down or shooting with the Lupara. Nasty attack ads deserve to be punished as well. I suspect the casino act will pass.
How is the primary in LA looking? I've read some reports that said there was a low voter turnout.
Einhander Sn0m4n wrote:Went to the Louisiana primary; couldn't vote because I was somehow regged Independent when I got my ID. Stupid closed primary.
I went to the Baton Rouge High School across the highway to try to vote, but apparently my precinct poll was at the Catholic High School down the street the other way; oh well, I like its bells which I can hear from my house! I also asked about voter turnout; the pollers just gushed about how big it was at both places. This bodes well for Democracy in general and Obama in particular, who's been blitzing the airwaves here. Curiously, I saw a shitload of Ron Paul spa^H^H^Hsigns within sight of the CHS. I LOLed!
I voted yes on a new casino directly because of the nasty attack ads by preexisting casino boats afraid of facing real competition. Competition is good; politics used to further monopolies is for voting down or shooting with the Lupara. Nasty attack ads deserve to be punished as well. I suspect the casino act will pass.
How is the primary in LA looking? I've read some reports that said there was a low voter turnout.
Confirmed expected low. However, my 'boots on the ground' report hints at overwhelming surprise, and Comrade Kos is saying an Obama sweep as a result.
I didn't think Obama would do as well as he is doing in Washington. Reports are suggesting that he'll win the state (as well as Nebraska) by a 2 to 1 margin.
Shinova wrote:Yahoo news says Obama won Nebraska and Washington.
Louisiana was called for him a couple of hours ago. Huckabee won Louisiana and Kansas; Washington is still too close to call, but right now McCain's up by a couple of points.
Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things... their number is negligible and they are stupid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower
Moron wrote:"I know the pundits, and I know what they say: The math doesn't work out," Huckabee said Saturday morning at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington. "Well, I didn't major in math, I majored in miracles. And I still believe in those, too."
What a fucking moron. Huckabee needs to fry, now. I don't give a shit that McCain "sold out the uniform". Baptist Minister is a hundred times more dangerous.
Moron wrote:"I know the pundits, and I know what they say: The math doesn't work out," Huckabee said Saturday morning at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington. "Well, I didn't major in math, I majored in miracles. And I still believe in those, too."
What a fucking moron. Huckabee needs to fry, now. I don't give a shit that McCain "sold out the uniform". Baptist Minister is a hundred times more dangerous.
Ah, I like the idea of Obama going against an easy target like Fuckabee. McCain's a bit tougher, but not by a whole lot.
What's hilarious is Suck-at-fuck said he's staying until someone gets the magic number. If I remember right he even said the number.
So like it or not he is using math, only when it's convenient.
Clinton uses numbers in every damn speech. Edwards used numbers all the time. Obama doesn't use numbers in his speeches, but he doesn't dismiss them and he does say numbers when he's not giving a speech.
Compare it to dumbshit Republicans who can't even understand Obama != Osama or x > y. I'm willing to bet that in general Republican core constituents have difficulty understanding a large number of variables larger than oh say one, proving their idiocy.
