Warpath

Warpath (http://www.thewarpath.net/forum.php)
-   Parking Lot (http://www.thewarpath.net/forumdisplay.php?f=7)
-   -   Democratic Debate (http://www.thewarpath.net/showthread.php?t=22291)

DynamiteRave 01-31-2008 10:16 PM

Democratic Debate
 
I missed it cause of work!

If anyone watched please give me feedback on how each candidate did and who won? (or tied)

Much appreciated! :D

RobH4413 02-01-2008 08:42 AM

Re: Democratic Debate
 
It was a fairly civil debate. I think Obama took home with him the issue on the war. He kept reinforcing that it was more important to be right on Day 1 of voting, then being present... or something to that effect.

He basically alluded to the fact that Hilary voted to give GB authority to go to war, and Obama was opposed from the start.

They battled on health care.

Obama said it wasn't fair to mandate health care, but Hilary pointed out that he was mandating it for children, so what's the difference. Basically a lot of back and forth on some of the same issues.

I kind of was in a cough medicine induced coma during most of the debate, so if I didn't get it all... someone else please fill in.

Sheriff Gonna Getcha 02-01-2008 09:47 AM

Re: Democratic Debate
 
It was very boring and uninformative. Don't worry, you didn't miss a thing.

FRPLG 02-01-2008 10:41 AM

Re: Democratic Debate
 
[QUOTE=RobH4413;416003]It was a fairly civil debate. I think Obama took home with him the issue on the war. He kept reinforcing that it was more important to be right on Day 1 of voting, then being present... or something to that effect.

He basically alluded to the fact that Hilary voted to give GB authority to go to war, and Obama was opposed from the start.

They battled on health care.

Obama said it wasn't fair to mandate health care, but Hilary pointed out that he was mandating it for children, so what's the difference. Basically a lot of back and forth on some of the same issues.

I kind of was in a cough medicine induced coma during most of the debate, so if I didn't get it all... someone else please fill in.[/QUOTE]

I like Obama much more than Hillary but his holier than thou routine about this war is tiresome. Nobody at the time was screaming too much about this and I would staunchly argue that being right on Day 1 is not what is important. It is being right NOW. Because NOW is the only thing that can be affected. Day 1 is gone and past. Get over it. Let's not focus on Day 1, let's focus on solutions to the problem.

And can anyone honestly say they think he wouldn't have voted for the war at the time? I have serious doubts about that. He seems like a team player and would have boarded that ship along with a lot of other Dems.

saden1 02-01-2008 11:25 AM

Re: Democratic Debate
 
Did I miss something? Is Jason Alexander running for president?

Sheriff Gonna Getcha 02-01-2008 11:45 AM

Re: Democratic Debate
 
[QUOTE=FRPLG;416034]I like Obama much more than Hillary but his holier than thou routine about this war is tiresome. Nobody at the time was screaming too much about this and I would staunchly argue that being right on Day 1 is not what is important. It is being right NOW. Because NOW is the only thing that can be affected. Day 1 is gone and past. Get over it. Let's not focus on Day 1, let's focus on solutions to the problem.

And can anyone honestly say they think he wouldn't have voted for the war at the time? I have serious doubts about that. He seems like a team player and would have boarded that ship along with a lot of other Dems.[/QUOTE]

Well 21 of 50 Dems in the Senate voted against the resolution authorizing the use of the military force. Moreover, Obama did make public statements denouncing the resolution. So, I think it's fair to say he would have voted with the other 21 Dems to reject the resolution. Moreover, I do think his vote is significant insofar as it demonstrates his past judgment, which itself is indicative of how he will act in the future.

For the record, I support the surge and oppose Obama's withdrawal plans. So, I'm not biased in favor of Obama when it comes to his views on Iraq.

dmek25 02-01-2008 01:44 PM

Re: Democratic Debate
 
it all seems like it boils down to weather or not you agree with the united states being in Iraq. both the Dem's will withdraw troops if elected. none of the republicans want this. i personally think its time to make Iraq accountable( there's that word again) for their own country, and bring our boys home

Sheriff Gonna Getcha 02-01-2008 01:55 PM

Re: Democratic Debate
 
[QUOTE=dmek25;416114]it all seems like it boils down to weather or not you agree with the united states being in Iraq. both the Dem's will withdraw troops if elected. none of the republicans want this. i personally think its time to make Iraq accountable( there's that word again) for their own country, and bring our boys home[/QUOTE]

I support the surge and our continued presence in Iraq. I oppose surrender, withdrawal, re-deployment or whatever you want to call it. However, I'm also an Obama supporter. Go figure.

As for "accountability," I think that's another way of saying "We'd like to abandon you now." I still have yet to figure out why so many people who want us to rush into places like Darfur and who wanted us to go to Rwanda are also saying we should get out of Iraq. We created a humanitarian mess in Iraq, we have the troops there, we made commitments to Iraqi allies, and it's in our national interest to see our commitments through. We didn't create a mess in Darfur, we don't have the troops there, the UN would oppose a UNILATERAL intervention there, we don't have any commitments to the Sudanese people in the Darfur region, and it's not in our national interests to be there. I can't perform the mental gymnastics that the anti-Iraq/pro-Darfur crowd goes through.

If Hillary or Obama win the general election, withdraw our troops from Iraq, and Iraq then descends into an even worse state, more damage will be done to the Democratic Party and our nation than I think most people realize. It took us 30 years to recover from Vietnam and it's legacy is "if you kick America in the teeth, they run away." Leaving Iraq would only feed the [I]erroneous[/I] perception that this country and Democrats are weak at the knees.

dmek25 02-01-2008 03:38 PM

Re: Democratic Debate
 
i agree with most of what you say. but because George Bush rushed into Iraq without a clear plan, or vision, he took a bad situation and made it worse. there should be a non public time table for withdraw. this will make the Iraqi people understand that sometime in the near future, they will be governing their country. as long as the united states, and the other coalition members continue to stay, Iraq basically sits back and enjoys being baby sat. with the sad shape that our economy is in right now, im sure the money used to fund the war could easily be used elsewhere. i think where the republican machine miscalculated was they thought there could be stability in the middle east. not in our lifetime, maybe never

GTripp0012 02-01-2008 03:44 PM

Re: Democratic Debate
 
Maybe the bigger issue about Obama is that when it came time to vote for the authorization of military force, he didn't have a vote, because he wasn't relevant on the political scene until 3.5 years ago.

He probably wasn't the best candidate for George Ryan's seat in the senate, and I'm really not sure what he has done to show he's ready to be president.

I don't know who I'm supporting to win the democratic nomination, but IMO, there's not a whole lot of reasons to think that either one of them is a better candidate than McCain/Romney.

Sheriff Gonna Getcha 02-01-2008 04:07 PM

Re: Democratic Debate
 
[QUOTE=GTripp0012;416152]I don't know who I'm supporting to win the democratic nomination, but IMO, there's not a whole lot of reasons to think that either one of them is a better candidate than McCain/Romney.[/QUOTE]

I actually think Romney and Hillary are very similar. They are both very bright, accomplished, and come from well-to-do backgrounds. They are also both political whores who will say or do just about anything for a vote. I understand that politicians appeal to their base during the primaries and the center before the general election, but those two have got it down to an art form. IMO, they are characterless and have no backbone. McCain and Obama are not without their flaws, but I can at least respect them.

Obama in particular seems interesting because, whether or not he is all flash, he inspires. In politics, perception is reality. Obama is perceived, rightly or wrongly, as an inspiring "transcendant" personality who can unite Americans and heal many of the wounds caused by Bush abroad. A true "uniter" who we Americans, and the international community, can rally behind is something we desperately need right now.

SmootSmack 02-01-2008 04:13 PM

Re: Democratic Debate
 
[QUOTE=GTripp0012;416152]He probably wasn't the best candidate for George Ryan's seat in the senate, and I'm really not sure what he has done to show he's ready to be president.[/QUOTE]

Just think, what if Ditka had run against Barack and won

Sheriff Gonna Getcha 02-01-2008 04:17 PM

Re: Democratic Debate
 
[URL="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/27/AR2007022700160_pf.html"]Among[/URL] Romney's inconsistencies:

_In his two previous campaigns, Romney said that regardless of his own personal beliefs, abortion should be safe and legal. Now, he describes himself as pro-life and argues that Roe v. Wade should be replaced with state abortion regulations.

_In his Senate race, he wrote a letter promising a gay Republican group he would be a stronger advocate for gays and their rights than his liberal opponent, Edward M. Kennedy. Now he emphasizes his opposition to gay marriage and civil unions.

_Then a registered independent, Romney voted in the 1992 Democratic presidential primary for Paul Tsongas. Two years later, he said he did so because he favored the Massachusetts senator's ideas over those of Bill Clinton, and was sure President George H.W. Bush would be renominated. Now, Romney says he backed the candidate he thought might be the weakest opponent for Bush.

_In his first two campaigns, Romney emphasized his support of gun-control measures. In 1994, he said: "I don't line up with the NRA." Now, he is a card-carrying National Rifle Association member. He joined the organization in August.

_Romney used to distance himself from President Reagan. Now he casts himself as a conservative in the mold of Reagan.

Sorry to threadjack.....back to the Dems.

GTripp0012 02-01-2008 04:23 PM

Re: Democratic Debate
 
[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;416166]I actually think Romney and Hillary are very similar. They are both very bright, accomplished, and come from well-to-do backgrounds. They are also both political whores who will say or do just about anything for a vote. I understand that politicians appeal to their base during the primaries and the center before the general election, but those two have got it down to an art form. IMO, they are characterless and have no backbone. McCain and Obama are not without their flaws, but I can at least respect them.

Obama in particular seems interesting because, whether or not he is all flash, he inspires. In politics, perception is reality. Obama is perceived, rightly or wrongly, as an inspiring "transcendant" personality who can unite Americans and heal many of the wounds caused by Bush abroad. A true "uniter" who we Americans, and the international community, can rally behind is something we desperately need right now.[/quote]I'm not really high on Romney either, but I can at least respect his economic knowledge, and having a future in Michigan business management, it would actually be personally beneficial to me if Romney was president.

But a lot of the arguments that I make about Obama and his inexperience hold true for Romney too. I have serious questions about Romney's ability to lead and make good decisions for the international good, which of course is where the president holds the most power.

Perception is pretty important, possibly even more important than the issues themselves, but I would still feel way more comfortable supporting Obama eight years from now if he has solved some problems in his home state and has continued to gain respect and establish a political background, as opposed to now when he has done none of the above.

Then again, as long as Blagojevich is the Governor in Illinois, there's not a whole lot that can be done from the senate outside of damage control.

Hillary, I think, would be a stronger leader than Bill was, but I just can't get over the fact that I don't think she's all that intelligent. I think she vastly underestimates the intelligence of the masses (but perhaps not as much as I once thought) by claiming two years ago to be totally uninterested in the presidency while she lined up contributions for her upcoming campaign.

I can support a lot of what Hillary says, but I just can't get over the fact that she may not have the ability to adjust to the parts of her plan for this country that reality is going to totally shit on.

So, I keep going back and forth on this Hillary vs. Obama thing, almost to the point of an apathy. No matter who wins, I just can't get behind either of them.

Hopefully McCain wins the Republican nomination so I have someone I can actually support in this election, because otherwise, I'm just going to be totally apathetic about the whole process, and probably vote for Romney if I'm not busy on that Tuesday in November.

GTripp0012 02-01-2008 04:26 PM

Re: Democratic Debate
 
[quote=SmootSmack;416167]Just think, what if Ditka had run against Barack and won[/quote]LOL. He would have won.

I have no idea if Mike Ditka knows anything about politics. If he thinks through domestic issues the same way he thinks through present day football analysis, it probably wouldn't have been a good thing if he had run.

wolfeskins 02-01-2008 04:31 PM

Re: Democratic Debate
 
[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;416170][URL="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/27/AR2007022700160_pf.html"]Among[/URL] Romney's inconsistencies:

_In his two previous campaigns, Romney said that regardless of his own personal beliefs, abortion should be safe and legal. Now, he describes himself as pro-life and argues that Roe v. Wade should be replaced with state abortion regulations.

_In his Senate race, he wrote a letter promising a gay Republican group he would be a stronger advocate for gays and their rights than his liberal opponent, Edward M. Kennedy. Now he emphasizes his opposition to gay marriage and civil unions.

_Then a registered independent, Romney voted in the 1992 Democratic presidential primary for Paul Tsongas. Two years later, he said he did so because he favored the Massachusetts senator's ideas over those of Bill Clinton, and was sure President George H.W. Bush would be renominated. Now, Romney says he backed the candidate he thought might be the weakest opponent for Bush.

_In his first two campaigns, Romney emphasized his support of gun-control measures. In 1994, he said: "I don't line up with the NRA." Now, he is a card-carrying National Rifle Association member. He joined the organization in August.

_Romney used to distance himself from President Reagan. Now he casts himself as a conservative in the mold of Reagan.

Sorry to threadjack.....back to the Dems.[/quote]


sounds to me like he came to his sences. each one of those changes are for the better,imo.

skinsguy 02-01-2008 04:45 PM

Re: Democratic Debate
 
It comes down to this. Which candidate (if any) will actually attempt to do what they campaign on? Which will actually help to provide affordable and affective health care for all people? Who will actually pay attention to the country's population in rural areas and not just the people's needs in big cities? Who will also work on bringing in decent paying jobs to these rural areas? I've heard a lot of promise from these candidates, but I'm not sure if what they campaign on is actually possible. We'll see though. Obama does seem like the most convincing candidate to me, and normally tend to side with Republicans.

I think we all agree we want change. We want our freakin' gas prices to be lowered if nothing else!

saden1 02-01-2008 04:53 PM

Re: Democratic Debate
 
[quote=wolfeskins;416177]sounds to me like he came to his sences. each one of those changes are for the better,imo.[/quote]

61 year old man coming to his senses? :doh:

Sheriff Gonna Getcha 02-01-2008 04:55 PM

Re: Democratic Debate
 
[QUOTE=skinsguy;416180]It comes down to this. Which candidate (if any) will actually attempt to do what they campaign on? Which will actually help to provide affordable and affective health care for all people? Who will actually pay attention to the country's population in rural areas and not just the people's needs in big cities? Who will also work on bringing in decent paying jobs to these rural areas? I've heard a lot of promise from these candidates, but I'm not sure if what they campaign on is actually possible. We'll see though. Obama does seem like the most convincing candidate to me, and normally tend to side with Republicans.

I think we all agree we want change. We want our freakin' gas prices to be lowered if nothing else![/QUOTE]

I don't care too much about what each politician says they will do in office. That sounds crazy, but (a) politicians often say things for the sake of securing votes, not because they actually mean what they say, (b) Presidents can't pass legislation without the help of that thing called Congress, and (c) candidates rarely reveal the specifics of their policy objectives and the devil is in the details.

I am FAR more concerned with any given candidate's intelligence, judgment, and integrity (by integrity I don't mean whether they get BJs or oppose gay marriage, I mean that they are principled and possess a clear identity independent of the voters). I'm more concerned about the President being able to deal with issues we don't anticipate.

GTripp0012 02-01-2008 05:01 PM

Re: Democratic Debate
 
[quote=skinsguy;416180]I think we all agree we want change. We want our freakin' gas prices to be lowered if nothing else![/quote]It may sound crazy, but gas prices really need to be raised...to like six bucks a gallon. The value of gas (long-term) is way above the three dollars we are paying for it right now, and unless the government is going to finance oil companies when the prices skyrocket, the free market really, really needs to give massive and widespread incentive to consumers to cut down on gas.

Of course, setting a minimum price of 6 dollars a gallon may not do that. People may opt to spend a higher percentage of their earnings on gas as opposed to cutting down on usage. I don't really have the answer to this one, but the government probably should intervene here and force people who have the option of using less gas, to do so.

For me, I can drive to my college campus (8 miles from my residence) if time is not a luxury, or I can walk 12 minutes (in single degree weather) to the bus stop and bus to class for free. If the government set a price [I]floor[/I] on gas at 6 per gallon, [U]I would lose the luxury of driving[/U] to save a few minutes, and be forced to use the bus but for emergency situations.

I don't know how many people who have jobs are in similar situations to me, but [B]the sustainability of personal vehicles for those who absolutely have no other option but to drive[/B] would be better if gas was fixed at 6 dollars a piece for the next 30 years, as opposed to relatively inexpensive for the next five, and then completely non affordable after that.

And this is probably the only issue in the world where I would support a price floor or any form of government restriction. You have to alter the habits of the masses quickly, and thats like the only thing the free market won't account for.

/end of totally off topic, but totally necessary rant.

skinsguy 02-01-2008 05:02 PM

Re: Democratic Debate
 
[QUOTE=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;416183]I don't care too much about what each politician says they will do in office. That sounds crazy, but (a) politicians often say things for the sake of securing votes, not because they actually mean what they say, (b) Presidents can't pass legislation without the help of that thing called Congress, and (c) candidates rarely reveal the specifics of their policy objectives and the devil is in the details.

I am FAR more concerned with any given candidate's intelligence, judgment, and integrity (by integrity I don't mean whether they get BJs or oppose gay marriage, I mean that they are principled and possess a clear identity independent of the voters). I'm more concerned about the President being able to deal with issues we don't anticipate.[/QUOTE]

True. I mean, you want someone who you have confidence in that can handle the unexpected. I don't believe it stops there though. That might be enough for someone who's well secure financially and they're overall concern is security. For me, there's got to be more than that. 99% of what politicians promise won't come true, but it would be nice to find someone who at least tries to fullfill half of those promises (whether if they're successful or not.) I think that is where I feel integrity is granted. Not in their success in fulfillment , but in their effort.

skinsguy 02-01-2008 05:06 PM

Re: Democratic Debate
 
[QUOTE=GTripp0012;416188]It may sound crazy, but gas prices really need to be raised...to like six bucks a gallon. The value of gas (long-term) is way above the three dollars we are paying for it right now, and unless the government is going to finance oil companies when the prices skyrocket, the free market really, really needs to give massive and widespread incentive to consumers to cut down on gas.
[/QUOTE]

You're right. That does sound crazy, but I understand the logic somewhat. The problem is, only a very select people will be able to afford that. And, there are only select areas that have public transportation. There's too many fine details that would make that a bad idea.

GTripp0012 02-01-2008 05:13 PM

Re: Democratic Debate
 
[quote=skinsguy;416193]You're right. That does sound crazy, but I understand the logic somewhat. The problem is, only a very select people will be able to afford that. And, there are only select areas that have public transportation. There's too many fine details that would make that a bad idea.[/quote]I know. But if someone doesn't take some insane action soon, driving a car that runs on gasoline is likely going to become a luxury that only the top 5% (in terms of income) of Americans will have. For the rest of us schlubs, we would all be forced to abandon gasoline usage altogether, due to prices ranging from 12-15 dollars a gallon.

Like in every other issue, the free market will work itself out no matter what course of action we take. The problem here is that it will be at the expense of the poor who are 100% reliant on personal transportation to keep their jobs. I would imagine that's a lot of people.

Anyway, I'm going to stop there because this isn't the right place (thread-wise) to continue.

saden1 02-01-2008 05:31 PM

Re: Democratic Debate
 
I see a day where gas prices are so ridiculous that most white collar workers work from home. This is the 21'st century, the only people that need to be commuting to work should be those that need to be at their workplace (blue collar and service sector worker).

Sheriff Gonna Getcha 02-01-2008 05:38 PM

Re: Democratic Debate
 
Interesting topic, but maybe we should start a separate thread? Sorry to play thread cop, but enough people have been complaining lately about "thread integrity."

RobH4413 02-01-2008 06:20 PM

Sorry to jump on the hijack bandwagon...
 
I've always been criticized for my personal opinion that gas should be heavily taxed. If there's something that needs to be done, our demand for oil needs to curtail... and fast.

There needs to be policy change, and I've always felt that a huge gas tax (or easing off any subsidies) would make sense. Take the earnings (or savings) and pump them into alternate forms of energy, nuclear power plants, pro-environment cars etc...

There is one solid fact... We need to get off this addiction to oil. We need to change lifestyle. For both foreign policy, and economic reasons... it makes sense to behind the drivers seat, and not rely on foreign resources.
-------

wolfeskins 02-01-2008 06:49 PM

Re: Democratic Debate
 
[quote=saden1;416182]61 year old man coming to his senses? :doh:[/quote]

i guess he's a slow learner :embarrass

DynamiteRave 02-01-2008 11:34 PM

Re: Democratic Debate
 
Ann Coulter has voiced her support for Hilary Clinton if McCain gets the Republican nomination (which he probably will).

If Ann, "I-hate-everyone-except-for-myself" Coulter supports Hillary.. Somethings terribly wrong with that picture.

FRPLG 02-01-2008 11:45 PM

Re: Democratic Debate
 
[QUOTE=DynamiteRave;416262]Ann Coulter has voiced her support for Hilary Clinton if McCain gets the Republican nomination (which he probably will).

If Ann, "I-hate-everyone-except-for-myself" Coulter supports Hillary.. Somethings terribly wrong with that picture.[/QUOTE]
Must be getting damn cold in Hell. Oh yeah look out for flying porcine.

dmek25 02-02-2008 10:13 AM

Re: Democratic Debate
 
why does Coulter hate McCain so much? because she all but despises the Clintons. and she is a nut job, anyhow

Monksdown 02-02-2008 03:00 PM

Re: Sorry to jump on the hijack bandwagon...
 
[quote=RobH4413;416213]I've always been criticized for my personal opinion that gas should be heavily taxed. If there's something that needs to be done, our demand for oil needs to curtail... and fast.

There needs to be policy change, and I've always felt that a huge gas tax (or easing off any subsidies) would make sense. Take the earnings (or savings) and pump them into alternate forms of energy, nuclear power plants, pro-environment cars etc...

There is one solid fact... We need to get off this addiction to oil. We need to change lifestyle. For both foreign policy, and economic reasons... it makes sense to behind the drivers seat, and not rely on foreign resources.
-------[/quote]
Could not possibly agree with you more.

DynamiteRave 02-03-2008 07:03 PM

Re: Democratic Debate
 
Well Maria Shriver is endorsing Obama.

I love how someone tried to tell me that by Maria Shriver endorsing Obama it just gives her and Arnold (Not going to spell that out) less credibility. Basically trying to tell me that you should only marry someone who affiliates within your own political party.

...:doh:

Sheriff Gonna Getcha 02-03-2008 11:00 PM

Re: Democratic Debate
 
[QUOTE=dmek25;416318]why does Coulter hate McCain so much? because she all but despises the Clintons. and she is a nut job, anyhow[/QUOTE]

Because most party-line and far right members of the GOP think he's a sellout liberal in conservative clothes. It just makes me like him that much more.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:10 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site has no official affiliation with the Washington Redskins or the NFL, we're just a bunch of fans talking football

Page generated in 0.06459 seconds with 8 queries