Merged Thread: Romney Drops Out; Can McCain Defeat Democrats?

I'm not saying anyone is more likely. (Even though I know you were addressing dmek). I feel like no matter who runs this country they have to be willing to reach across party lines from time to time to unite and be overall successful.

Although I don't agree with that 100 year war thing..

If you're looking for someone to reach across party lines in D.C., look to Hillary and not Obama. After all, Hillary is the compromiser. Outside of D.C., Hillary is a "divider" and Obama draws support from both parties, but I think that's largely a function of his charisma and speaking abilities. I think Obama will likely lose some of his luster after he is in the White House and starts implementing some of his policy objectives.

For example, take Iraq. Some 66% of the American public is "against the war." However, the GOP base gets very upset when people use the word "withdrawal" or "re-deployment." Obama is the candidate most likely to withdraw our troops the fastest, regardless of the "conditions on the ground." When U.S. troops start withdrawing from Iraq and as the progress made by the surge evaporates, expect to see a lot of people up in arms and quite upset with Obama.

I'm still an Obama supporter, but I'm not sure he will be able to unite the country in the way many people think he can. He's certainly going to be a big improvement over GWB, but I don't think he will be the next JFK.

From all the rhetoric I've been hearing amongst the candidates...

I really can't believe that anyone is going to literally bring all of the troops home within four years. A decrease in troops... maybe, but a total withdrawal seems unlikely to me.

I know it's a popular buzz topic that's been floating around, but I just can't make sense of it. The place is a wreck, and it would cause widespread chaos if we just straight up dipped out.

I'm not saying we should stay in Iraq 100 years... I'm just saying that I don't think it's likely any of the candidates will withdraw all of the troops within four... otherwise we'll be back in in even less time.

I think it's doable somewhere between 4-8 years. The worse thing we could do is just yank everyone all at once. Hopefully its a small slow withdrawl over time.

If you're looking for someone to reach across party lines in D.C., look to Hillary and not Obama. After all, Hillary is the compromiser. Outside of D.C., Hillary is a "divider" and Obama draws support from both parties, but I think that's largely a function of his charisma and speaking abilities. I think Obama will likely lose some of his luster after he is in the White House and starts implementing some of his policy objectives.

For example, take Iraq. Some 66% of the American public is "against the war." However, the GOP base gets very upset when people use the word "withdrawal" or "re-deployment." Obama is the candidate most likely to withdraw our troops the fastest, regardless of the "conditions on the ground." When U.S. troops start withdrawing from Iraq and as the progress made by the surge evaporates, expect to see a lot of people up in arms and quite upset with Obama.

I'm still an Obama supporter, but I'm not sure he will be able to unite the country in the way many people think he can. He's certainly going to be a big improvement over GWB, but I don't think he will be the next JFK.

I'm an Obama supporter as well but I hope if he did get into office and puts a staff together they advise him to slowly withdrawl instead of just pulling everyone really fast.

I've talked to a few guys who are in/were in the military and some who are currently stationed overseas (democrats) and they absolutely, do NOT want Hillary in the White House at all and they've been siding with Obama.

Anyone know why this is?

I'm an Obama supporter as well but I hope if he did get into office and puts a staff together they advise him to slowly withdrawl instead of just pulling everyone really fast.

I've talked to a few guys who are in/were in the military and some who are currently stationed overseas (democrats) and they absolutely, do NOT want Hillary in the White House at all and they've been siding with Obama.

Anyone know why this is?

The Clinton White House was perceived, rightly or not, as very anti-military. There were stories about men in uniform being pulled aside and told to wear their civilian clothes at the White House since staffers didn't like military men. Whether those stories are true or not, they are out there and most people in the military believe them. Moreover, by most accounts Bill wasn't particularly comfortable with military matters. Like LBJ, Bill was a President specializing in domestic matters who didn't like being sidetracked with messy foreign affairs.

Unfortunately for Hillary, she inherits Bills rep among military folk. It's kind of ironic since Hillary is more hawkish and conservative than Obama.

Do you think Obama is more likely than McCain to work across party lines? If you do, please explain why
if any republican can work with democrats, its McCain. i really believe that's why the conservatives look at him to be more on the liberal side. the war is really a thorn in Americas side, and McCain sees no reason to end it. the majority of America wants an end in sight. to ignore them creates a division. i agree on a time table, although not a public one. right now the Iraqi government has no sense of urgency to take over their own country. as long as the united states is there, it seems like they don't mind us baby sitting their country

right now the Iraqi government has no sense of urgency to take over their own country. as long as the united states is there, it seems like they don't mind us baby sitting their country


how do you know this ? do you live in iraq, do you work for the iraq government , are you involved in the meetings between our government and the iraq government ? please don't just tell me that you heard it or read it somewhere.

how do you know this ? do you live in iraq, do you work for the iraq government , are you involved in the meetings between our government and the iraq government ? please don't just tell me that you heard it or read it somewhere.

Perhaps the discussion that is solely related to Iraq and does not explicitly tie in with the primaries should go to the thread re: the insurgency (http://www.redskinswarpath.com/parking-lot/22515-fight-against-insurgence.html).

its really time for a democrat in the white house


there will be. between hillary , obama and mccain. one of those dems will win. thus flushing our nation further down the toilet.

hucklebee is really the only rep. still in the race. and he is quickly being pushed aside.

there will be. between hillary , obama and mccain. one of those dems will win. thus flushing our nation further down the toilet.

We are in a bad economic state. We are mired in two conflicts that seem endless. Our reputation as a "beacon of light" to the world has been tarnished as our international standing is perhaps at its lowest point ever. I think it's hard to make the case that the Dems can screw things up much more.

As for Republicans disliking McCain so much, what gives? The man grew up idolozing Goldwater, who wasn't exactly a flaming liberal. His voting record in the Senate suggests that he is actually among the more conservative Senators. He served in the military and endured torture for 5 years when he could have left his confinement early. So, he's not conservative because he actually thinks for himself and sometimes departs from the party line?