Mrs. Clinton or Mr. Obama

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by Dylflon

Strangler, I wasn't arguing with you per se so much as I was expressing my distaste that being left leaning is automatically a thing that can break the deal for you as a politician in the states even after the 8 years you all just went through.

I don't think left leaning is something that can break you in the US. Barak is not left leaning, his voting record and stated beliefs would put him more sprinting left and digging a foxhole. A socialist by any other name is still a socialist.

Americans in general share strong opinions about a few issues:

1) Freedom - Any healthcare program that removes the ability of the common person to choose their own doctor, specialist, etc. will be shot down. Its too personal a choice. You can translate that to any social program aimed at the middle class. I believe that there should be a more comprehensive plan, but completely socializing it would be a disaster and most Americans realize this. Thats why the Clinton plan was utterly squashed in the 90's.

2) Sovereignty - In the end Americans do not care what France, England, Germany, Canada, etc. think about what America should do. We like to have a dialogue open, but in the end Americans believe that our leader's responsibility is to national interests, and not international interests. Diplomacy is going to be a HUGE weaknes for Barak

3) Safety - People are tired of Iraq, but most Americans realize we cannot leave anytime soon. Barak needs to come to that if he expects to win.

These are concerns that the average American has, IMO, and until Barak can move himself away from those ideas, involve consumer choice in a national healthcare plan, guarantee he will choose what is in America's best ineterests before those of the UN and come up with a reasionable plan for withdrawing from Iraq, he will not win any national election. At least thats how I see it.

[Jason1]

Okay, heres the reality: People in the country want a change, and that is what Obama is promising. Most people dont read into it as much as you do Professor, nobody is going to know or care just how liberal he actually is.

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by Jason1

Okay, heres the reality: People in the country want a change, and that is what Obama is promising. Most people dont read into it as much as you do Professor, nobody is going to know or care just how liberal he actually is.

Well we'll see in November, I guess. People wanted a change in 2004, too, and they still voted for Bush who won by one of the largest public vote margins (not electoral votes) in history.

By just saying "people want change" and will vote blindly to get it, you insult their intelligence. Even in 2006 the big swing towards the Democrats had more to due with centrist Dems running than the leftists winning a mandate. The voting public will want to know what kind of change they will be electing, and once that it revealed, Obama is in trouble if he doesn't move more towards the center.

[Jason1]

Originally Posted by Professor S

Well we'll see in November, I guess. People wanted a change in 2004, too, and they still voted for Bush who won by one of the largest public vote margins (not electoral votes) in history.

In 2004, the war was still in its early stages and not nearly as many people were opposed to it. Also, there are a lot of people out there that were worried about a presidential change in the middle of a war. Its a whole different story now. That and Kerry was a terrible candidate for presidency.

But yes, time will tell.

[Dylflon]

Originally Posted by Professor S

Well we'll see in November, I guess. People wanted a change in 2004, too, and they still voted for Bush who won by one of the largest public vote margins (not electoral votes) in history.

By just saying "people want change" and will vote blindly to get it, you insult their intelligence. Even in 2006 the big swing towards the Democrats had more to due with centrist Dems running than the leftists winning a mandate. The voting public will want to know what kind of change they will be electing, and once that it revealed, Obama is in trouble if he doesn't move more towards the center.

Also the year they introduced electronic voting machines.

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by Dylflon

Also the year they introduced electronic voting machines.

And don't forget that freemasons run the country and we never landed on the moon.

[Typhoid]

Originally Posted by Professor S

And don't forget that freemasons run the country and we never landed on the moon.

Maybe just the northern states.

[Bond]

Obama officially moved ahead of Clinton with his win in Virginia tonight.

[The Germanator]

Yep, and MSNBC says he wins D.C. All indications say he'll win Marlyland too. Should be another clean sweep and maybe this will start to sway the superdelegates his way as well. Hillary still has good opportunities in Texas, Ohio, and PA, but all this momentum may win it for Barack.

[Bond]

He's speaking at my university right now... was going to go but have a midterm tomorrow.

Great guy, but still a socialist.

[GameMaster]

I just put a Hillary sticker on my front door.

[Dylflon]

Originally Posted by Professor S

And don't forget that freemasons run the country and we never landed on the moon.

Oh Strangler. Try and belittle me if you must. It only strengthens my resolve.




also:

Health Care: Barack states on his web site, www.barackobama.com and in numerous debates, that he plans to create a national health care program. What sets his program apart from others proposed is that the plan would be for everyone, not just a select few. He would then go a step further to create a National Health insurance Board for those who would like to buy their own private insurance. By doing so, the prices of the health care plans would be better regulated. ( Speech on Tuesday, January 22nd after winning South Carolina primaries) ( www.barckobama.com) ( Wednesday, January 23rd, 2008 issue of The UNF News: Candidates Platforms at a Glance)


Iraq: Almost every candidate agrees that some type of withdrawal of our troops needs to take place in Iraq. However they seem to disagree on how it should take place and how long we should allow . Barack Obama states that his time frame is 16 months. However, he would keep some troops in Iraq to protect the United State employees already in position in the country in the Embassy and other diplomatic positions. He then would move a step further to create a Middle East Compact in order to create an international group that would address issues in Iraq, including violations of humanitarian issues. ( Wednesday, January 23rd, 2008 issue of The UNF News: Candidates Platforms at a Glance)

Economy: Barack Obama will concentrate on initiatives that will make American workers more competitive in the work place market of the 21st century. Immediately, he would provide an additional tax break for Americans. The tax break is called the " Making Work Pay Tax Credit." Individuals would receive an additional $500 in their pockets and a family would receive $1000. It is felt that this extra cash in the hands of Americans would help to stimulate the economy as Americans would have a bit of extra cash to use for bills and to spend on extras. ( www.barackobama.com)

Education: Obama's first step would be to revise the No Child Left Behind policy. He states that the policy is a step in the correct direction . However there often is not funding to support the plan. He also feels that children should not be spending most of their years, learning to fill in bubbles on a test. As a previous teacher, I can attest that the standardized state tests are the main focus of education now. The way the policies read, the schools with the highest standardized test scores are the schools that get the most money. So districts, principals and teachers area ll forced to focus mainly on helping children to bring their scores up on these tests. obama questions if this technique is true education. I tend to agree with him. Also, Obama realizes that more and more Americans are unable to go to college because of the cost of higher education. He proposes adding a 44,000 tax credit called the American Opportunity Tax Credit that will offset the first $4,000 that a parent or student spend on higher education. He also would look into a similar plan that California has where city or Junior colleges are often free to the cities residents. His plan would provide for all community colleges to allow free tuition to most of it's students.
(Debates) (www.barckobama.com)

[Professor S]

I stand corrected, Dyflon. Those platforms from Obama aren't vague at all. I am now completely comfortable that someone with almost no experience to run the the most powerful and influential nation in the world on four fucking paragraphs that have no detailed policies or plans to implement them.

Questions:

IRAQ: How will Barak pull us out of Iraq? What if the insurgency increases its rate of attacks and gets empowered by the announcement that we're leaving? Does he have a contingency plan? Who does he plan on working with in his compact? What are his plans in dealing with Iran's goring nuclear capabilties? Dos he view Iran as a possible threat? The dems haven't had to answer much about Iraq or terrorism in their debates so far, and they will be hard pressed on the subjects in the general election.

Healthcare: How will he better regulate healthcare companies? If they are regulated, what is the estimate cost of privately bought insurance once the entire structure is reformatted? Under the public plan, what choices do the American people have? Can I choose my own doctor? Will drugs be price fixed? If drug companies and health care innovators are guaranteed government money and there is no profit motive for innovation, who will create the innovations needed to save lives in the 21st century? How does he think the government can do a better job with Healthcare when every time it's tried its failed horribly (a legitimate question)? What about torte reform? Does he want to place a pain and suffering cap on lawsuits so that malpractice insurance can reach reasonable levels and that cost isn't passed on to the consumer?

Economy: The whole of his economics platform is a $500-$1000 tax break? Thats the most pathetic platform I've ever heard. What about repealing the estate tax that rips hard earned family wealth from people just because they died and in essence taxes the same money twice (my family lost my Grandmother's farm because of it. They had to take out a second mortgage to pay $100,000 in taxes). What about dropping the corporate tax to levels consistent with the rest of the world so that companies will stay or move into the US instead of leaving ot shipping jobs overseas? What about simplifying out tax system so regular people don't have to hire someone to dig through all the new laws and regulations? Will he also tighten tax law so that people who owe, pay, and don't hide in tax shelters (exactly why raising taxes on the rich does nothing to increase revenues)? How would he address the Real Estate situation? What would he do to promote US ownership businesses and slow down the pruchase of American companies by foreign investors?

Education: I agree that focusing on testing is a mistake in education, but the solution isn't throwing more money at it, its fixing the problems. State programs already fund failing schools beyond local tax means, and that has never stopped them from failing. The real problem is that the areas that need the most education place no value on it. Here's a microcosm of the problem: Glen Mills Schools - Its a publicly funded school for troubled youth, and it works. 98% of the students graduate and never commit a crime again. The school also offers FREE COLLEGE TUITION to any graduate who wants it. Less than 2% take them up on it. You would be better off taking to money and starting a public awareness program that illustrated the power of eduction to someones future.


I know what you're saying: People in general don't think this much about elections... but the New Media DOES. Pundits and reporters will be digging for secrets 24/7 and asking questions that the American people should be asking themselves. Barak will have to be more substantive.

[Jason1]

Originally Posted by Professor S

IRAQ: How will Barak pull us out of Iraq? What if the insurgency increases its rate of attacks and gets empowered by the announcement that we're leaving? Does he have a contingency plan? Who does he plan on working with in his compact? What are his plans in dealing with Iran's goring nuclear capabilties? Dos he view Iran as a possible threat? The dems haven't had to answer much about Iraq or terrorism in their debates so far, and they will be hard pressed on the subjects in the general election.

Okay, first off I think I can speak for a lot of people, with my views on these questions. First off, who cares how we get out of Iraq. As long as we DO IT so American dollars and more importantly lives, stop being wasted for nothing. What if the insurgancy increases its rates of attack? Who cares! We'll be gone so it wont really matter. What if the country goes to complete hell after we leave? Who cares, it allready is anyways and us being there dosent seem to be helping.

And as for Nuclear threats, yadda yadda, we are the most powerful nation in the world and thats not going to change with Barack or anyone else in office. These people that are honestly worried about national security are out of their minds. Those people over there are crazy, dont get me wrong, but until they actually threaten us with a real threat, as in bringing their force to other countries or stateside (which will NEVER happen, this isnt WWIII and never will be), we have no business being over there, end of story. Whats really sad about the whole thing is that we stopped Saddam Hussein, who had nothing to do with 9/11, but we still cant find Bin Laden.

[Dylflon]

Originally Posted by Jason1

Okay, first off I think I can speak for a lot of people, with my views on these questions. First off, who cares how we get out of Iraq. As long as we DO IT so American dollars and more importantly lives, stop being wasted for nothing. What if the insurgancy increases its rates of attack? Who cares! We'll be gone so it wont really matter. What if the country goes to complete hell after we leave? Who cares, it allready is anyways and us being there dosent seem to be helping.

And as for Nuclear threats, yadda yadda, we are the most powerful nation in the world and thats not going to change with Barack or anyone else in office. These people that are honestly worried about national security are out of their minds. Those people over there are crazy, dont get me wrong, but until they actually threaten us with a real threat, as in bringing their force to other countries or stateside (which will NEVER happen, this isnt WWIII and never will be), we have no business being over there, end of story. Whats really sad about the whole thing is that we stopped Saddam Hussein, who had nothing to do with 9/11, but we still cant find Bin Laden.

It's not so much that they can't. They just aren't trying very hard.