Could you vote for Obama if ???

[Bob]

Ok, for those who know me, I'm a tad right leaning to say the least, but if I think a person has some central core belief system, who is not a poll tester, before they open their mouth and act, I can respect someone like Obama. I want to like him, for some reason. The fact that he has a strong “likeability factor” will be huge in 2008, and may be what puts someone over the top. I have heard him speak, and want to support someone who is willing to stick to their convictions, is not a prostitute, and does seem like a sell-out.

Look at the folks we have to choose from that are leading the pack (at least according to the numbers:

Hillary? She is the anti Obama. What is likable about her? I mean this sincerely -- her voice grates on my soul, like a chalkboard being scratched by 13 cats. I just think she epitomizes what is wrong with politics – how can you believe ANYTHING she says? How can you believe ANYTHING her husband says (in whatever role he is anointed to?)

Edwards? So he fights for the little guy, but seems so freaking removed economically from the little guy. I can’t trust the guy for some reason -- as he got to where he is by exploitation of suffering for his own personal gains.

Gore? When he drops 20 pounds and enters the race he will mix things up, and does seem to be riding the wave of the new druid religion, for good advantage. But as he flies around in private jets, lives in a mansion eating burgers, and has a huge carbon foot-print as he tells all of his followers to make sacrifices – as he continues to be one of the biggest hypocrites out there -- does anyone else see him a simply having too much baggage, and remember how just six years ago he was a sulking, Kajiniski look-alike, pseudo professor and laughing stock ?

Now the Repubs don’t fare well either.

Ron Paul? He has at least 40 votes from folks on this site, but aside from that, not much more. Libertinism, is great in theory, impossible in practice.

Romney? If he reminds me one more time about Regan I think I am going to Puke. Just be yourself, whoever that is. Did he flip/flop on Abortion? And if he did, is it another example of a person who tests the polls before knowing how to stand.

Giuliani? I guess I am still figuring him out, to be honest. Did he exploit 911 for personal gain? I am leaning toward a yes on that one.

McCain? He is one of the walking dead, who has spent his who political career being a gad fly.

So many choices….

At this point I think I will throw my vote away on Tencrado.

[Stormontheplains]

I can't vote for Obama, I would go Hillary or Edwards before him. I firmly believe that Fred Thompson will get the Republican vote. By the way, Obama speaks in generalizations all the time, never details.

[Rascal]

The issues that I'm focused on this election are:

Immigration, Taxes/Economy, Social Security/Medicare, and Iraq.

What I want is an actual plan to deal with the immigration problem, not a band aid like what is currently going through the senate. On taxes I want the cutbacks, tax cuts, subsidies, etc eliminated for oil and rich companies. I also want them to get tough with China and be very proactive in keeping US jobs here. On Social Security/Medicare I want an actual plan to deal with it not bankrupting this country. And Iraq I want a plan, but that depends on what happens between now and then so I left that for last. I also wouldn't mind hearing a candidate talk about reducing the funding on the military even if might cost me my job.

From the limited research I've done it appears Edwards and Bama gets the most of these on the democratic side.

For the Repubs I currently like Romney the most.

[W*GS]

Nota.

[TexanBob]

I can respect candidates who appear to think out a response rather than blurt out buzzwords and slogans, even if I disagree with their position.

What I find fascinating about the 2008 candidates is the silently bigotry that will take place in both major parties.

* How many Democrats would never vote for a black president?
* How many Democrats would never vote for a woman president?
* How many Republicans would never vote for a Mormon president?
* How many Republicans would never vote for an openly gay-rights president?

Nobody near the campaigns is going to give you anything but a politically-correct answer but such questions may indeed be a factor in how many votes the front-runners might get when the actual primaries are held and may impact strategies should any of them make it to the general election.

[Play2win]

The issues that I'm focused on this election are:

Immigration, Taxes/Economy, Social Security/Medicare, and Iraq.

What I want is an actual plan to deal with the immigration problem, not a band aid like what is currently going through the senate. On taxes I want the cutbacks, tax cuts, subsidies, etc eliminated for oil and rich companies. I also want them to get tough with China and be very proactive in keeping US jobs here. On Social Security/Medicare I want an actual plan to deal with it not bankrupting this country. And Iraq I want a plan, but that depends on what happens between now and then so I left that for last. I also wouldn't mind hearing a candidate talk about reducing the funding on the military even if might cost me my job.

From the limited research I've done it appears Edwards and Bama gets the most of these on the democratic side.

For the Repubs I currently like Romney the most.

I would be ecstatic if we could get a President that would accomplish those things at a B or even C grade level.

Just to accomplish those thing to a somewhat adequate level would send our economy back in motion. When the US economic machine is in motion it becomes self sustaining. As long as we are not giving it all back to the OIL companies, and other huge corporations, as long as the monies are being re-emitted back into the economy. This economy can feed itself. Once the American economy is doing well, many of the other problems go away. A good economy "fixes" America. Once our economy is doing well, we become well respected in the world, and that means the whole world becomes a better place to live in. I still believe it is all about getting **OUR** economy rolling again.

So, yeah, I would be thrilled if those things happened. :thumbsup:

[Bob]

I would be ecstatic if we could get a President that would accomplish those things at a B or even C grade level.

Just to accomplish those thing to a somewhat adequate level would send our economy back in motion. When the US economic machine is in motion it becomes self sustaining. As long as we are not giving it all back to the OIL companies, and other huge corporations, as long as the monies are being re-emitted back into the economy. This economy can feed itself. Once the American economy is doing well, many of the other problems go away. A good economy "fixes" America. Once our economy is doing well, we become well respected in the world, and that means the whole world becomes a better place to live in. I still believe it is all about getting **OUR** economy rolling again.

So, yeah, I would be thrilled if those things happened. :thumbsup:

Although I worry about our jobs being sold-out and crossing various international lines forever, the "economy" as a whole is not that bad. Unemployment is VERY low, Gas prices are high, but historicly I think they are still in line, inflation appears to be in check for now, standard of living is ok...more folks own thier own home than ever before.

I mean it is not ALL rosey, but I wonder if we are just getting a steady dose of Iraq every day, that makes people feel that everything else is crap as well, when maybe the numbers dont support that notion. The early 80's had high inflation, and very high interest rates, the 70's had varous gas price increases that compaired with prices now (taken into account inflation over the past 30 years) were worse.

A thought.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Although I worry about our jobs being sold-out and crossing various international lines forever, the "economy" as a whole is not that bad.

Hilarious!

That's a joke, right?

Maybe you missed this thread:

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=57133


Gas prices are high, but historicly I think they are still in line...

ROFL!

"We're at war with Eurasia. We've always been at war with Eurasia..."

[yavoon]

I can respect candidates who appear to think out a response rather than blurt out buzzwords and slogans, even if I disagree with their position.

What I find fascinating about the 2008 candidates is the silently bigotry that will take place in both major parties.

* How many Democrats would never vote for a black president?
* How many Democrats would never vote for a woman president?
* How many Republicans would never vote for a Mormon president?
* How many Republicans would never vote for an openly gay-rights president?

Nobody near the campaigns is going to give you anything but a politically-correct answer but such questions may indeed be a factor in how many votes the front-runners might get when the actual primaries are held and may impact strategies should any of them make it to the general election.

I posted this before but this "wont vote for a black guy" is crap statistically. mormons poll under blacks and women(like half as well). blacks poll at like 94% for "would u vote for him if he was qualified and black." the ppl who poll the absolute worst are homo's and atheists.

[cutthemdown]

I'm interested in immigration first and last. If Fred Thompson says he will close the border and send all illegals home then he has my vote. Right now Guilliani is more of a democrat. McCain to me isn't presidential. Romney seems fake and Paul's ideas are too libertarian for me. I like some things about Ron Paul but he would be too soft on terrorism IMO. On the Democrat side Obama just wants to tax the hell out of us I don't believe him for one minute when he says it will only be the rich. Hilliary has a plan to be President but not a plan for us. She doesn't care about us at all and would lie and do whatever it takes to get power or keep power. Edwards seems like he doesn't have what it takes, he seems squirrly to me. Gore at least acts like a President he would be the strongest out of the Dems IMO.

[mhgaffney]

Ron Paul? He has at least 40 votes from folks on this site, but aside from that, not much more. Libertinism, is great in theory, impossible in practice.

So many choices….
.

Libertinism? You mean libertarianism.

The best example -- is the man at the start of the Republican Party -- honest Abe Lincoln.

Back in the days of Lincoln Republicanism meant something. Honest Abe opposed US military intervention abroad. He was fiscally conservative and progressive on social issues. Today he would be strong on the environment.

His Emancipation Proclamation speaks to us even now. Without it there would have been no civil rights movement -- and no black athletes in pro football.

I suggest you take a closer look at Ron Paul. He is the closest thing to honest Abe we've seen in more than a century.

I'm sure the historians on this board will correct me if I'm wrong on the details.

Ron Paul is not sexy on screen -- but is that what we want? Haven't we been there and done that?

Google him -- you'll be pleasantly surprised.

[spdirty]

Libertinism? You mean libertarianism.

The best example -- is the man at the start of the Republican Party -- honest Abe Lincoln.

Back in the days of Lincoln Republicanism meant something. Honest Abe opposed US military intervention abroad. He was fiscally conservative and progressive on social issues. Today he would be strong on the environment.

His Emancipation Proclamation speaks to us even now. Without it there would have been no civil rights movement -- and no black athletes in pro football.

I suggest you take a closer look at Ron Paul. He is the closest thing to honest Abe we've seen in more than a century.

I'm sure the historians on this board will correct me if I'm wrong on the details.

Ron Paul is not sexy on screen -- but is that what we want? Haven't we been there and done that?

Google him -- you'll be pleasantly surprised.

If Honest Abe were president today you and LABF and every other lib would screetch 10 times as loud as you do with Bush. You go on and on and on and on about how much of a facist Bush is because of wiretapping and Gitmo, hell Abe actually DID take away our civil rights temporarily. Hell he would probably figure out how to take down the ACLU once they got to be enough of a pain in the ass to him.

[Spider]

I cant vote for Obama , only republican i can vote for is Ron Paul , the rest of the republicans are scumbags or ****ing liars , and trying to see who is the most Reaganist ........ goofy Bastards ........
Obama cant vote for , Hillary = I dont want another Clinton , Bush Clinton , Bush , then another Clinton , you can go **** yourself .....Edwards Maybe but I doubt it .........
Unless Gore runs I am voting for Ron Paul

[Rascal]

Ron Paul sounds interesting after reading his stuff, but no way he gets out of the primaries.

[Spider]

Ron Paul sounds interesting after reading his stuff, but no way he gets out of the primaries.

Thats up to us , I am tired of the ones with money telling me who to vote for

[BroncoBuff]

I like Hillary, but unless Gore gets in, I'm getting real interested in Michael Bloomberg.

He would self-finance his campaign, which would eliminate IOUs ... and he is the perfect storm of social liberalism/fiscal genius/libertarian populism.

[Crushaholic]

Thats up to us , I am tired of the ones with money telling me who to vote for

It's reality. I don't know when Wyoming's primary is, but I would venture to guess that several candidates will have dropped out by then. Kansas is in the same boat. We're trying to move our primary earlier in the year, but I don't know how successful it will be...

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

If Honest Abe were president today you and LABF and every other lib would screetch 10 times as loud as you do with Bush. You go on and on and on and on about how much of a facist Bush is because of wiretapping and Gitmo, hell Abe actually DID take away our civil rights temporarily. Hell he would probably figure out how to take down the ACLU once they got to be enough of a pain in the ass to him.

Lincoln would still have the advantage that he did almost everything else right, was a true statesman, etc.

Too bad the same can't be said re: the empty suit you've been backing the past seven years.

:D

[Bob]

Libertinism? You mean libertarianism.

The best example -- is the man at the start of the Republican Party -- honest Abe Lincoln.

Back in the days of Lincoln Republicanism meant something. Honest Abe opposed US military intervention abroad. He was fiscally conservative and progressive on social issues. Today he would be strong on the environment.

His Emancipation Proclamation speaks to us even now. Without it there would have been no civil rights movement -- and no black athletes in pro football.

I suggest you take a closer look at Ron Paul. He is the closest thing to honest Abe we've seen in more than a century.

I'm sure the historians on this board will correct me if I'm wrong on the details.

Ron Paul is not sexy on screen -- but is that what we want? Haven't we been there and done that?

Google him -- you'll be pleasantly surprised.

Who ever gets elected will be sexy on sceen. The irony is the many great leaders we have had in the past that would not have been able to get elected with today's media filter/medium. Lincoln (not exactly the most attractive guy who has ever lived.) Taft was a fart turd. FDR's physical disabilities would have been on display (like McCain's.)

I hope we can get a pretty suit with some substance and intellectual capasity under that suit as well, but if the message does not translate to a glossy image, they are dead on arrival. You love Ron Paul, I like Tencredo, but I will be very surprised in either gets the voter interest neede and traction (in the media who need a pretty face for ratings and $.)

[Rohirrim]

Who ever gets elected will be sexy on sceen. The irony is the many great leaders we have had in the past that would not have been able to get elected with today's media filter/medium. Lincoln (not exactly the most attractive guy who has ever lived.) Taft was a fart turd. FDR's physical disabilities would have been on display (like McCain's.)

I hope we can get a pretty suit with some substance and intellectual capasity under that suit as well, but if the message does not translate to a glossy image, they are dead on arrival. You love Ron Paul, I like Tencredo, but I will be very surprised in either gets the voter interest neede and traction (in the media who need a pretty face for ratings and $.)

Tancredo said he doesn't believe in evolution. I'd prefer a president who's scientific sensibilities were somewhere beyond the medieval era.

[mosca]

I like Hillary, but unless Gore gets in, I'm getting real interested in Michael Bloomberg.

He would self-finance his campaign, which would eliminate IOUs ... and he is the perfect storm of social liberalism/fiscal genius/libertarian populism.
:saywhat: Since when was Mike Bloomberg anything resembling a libertarian?

[TheDave]

Tancredo said he doesn't believe in evolution. I'd prefer a president who's scientific sensibilities were somewhere beyond the medieval era.


Cross anotherone off the list...

[Cito Pelon]

Ok, for those who know me, I'm a tad right leaning to say the least, but if I think a person has some central core belief system, who is not a poll tester, before they open their mouth and act, I can respect someone like Obama. I want to like him, for some reason.. . . . . . . . ..

Obama is someone I'm looking at closely. I like his convictions, he has backbone. Clinton just wants power. Edwards is weak. Richardson I like. The Republican candidates, well, I'm not a big fan of the Republican Party.

Clinton I believe is selling political favors like crazy to get the nomination, and I don't like that too much. For me right now, an Obama/Richardson ticket I'd like.

[spdirty]

Lincoln would still have the advantage that he did almost everything else right, was a true statesman, etc.

Too bad the same can't be said re: the empty suit you've been backing the past seven years.

:D

ROFL! There you go again, trying to link me to your president.

[W*GS]

I'd vote for Obama in return for $1 billion. Non-negotiable.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Gore, Paul, Obama in the at order............. so far.

[spdirty]

I'd vote for Obama in return for $1 billion. Non-negotiable.

sellout.

[Rascal]

Cross anotherone off the list...

See I'm not going to let stupid social issues like this or abortion or gay be anything more then very low influential on who I decide to vote for. I'm tired of letting these minor issues become so polarized by special interest groups that they become more important then ones that everyone should be considering. If the candidate has the right platforms for immigration, economy, etc like I mentioned but goes against my own personnal beliefs on abortion, evolution, gay marriage I won't care. I encourage more people to identify the platforms that are truly important to them and find the candidate that matches up the best and not let these small issues affect their judgement.

To single you out only Dave, but I was discussing this with friends/family this weekend and your post was the one I noticed first.

[W*GS]

My vote does have a price... Pretty steep, but then...

[TheDave]

See I'm not going to let stupid social issues like this or abortion or gay be anything more then very low influential on who I decide to vote for. I'm tired of letting these minor issues become so polarized by special interest groups that they become more important then ones that everyone should be considering. If the candidate has the right platforms for immigration, economy, etc like I mentioned but goes against my own personnal beliefs on abortion, evolution, gay marriage I won't care. I encourage more people to identify the platforms that are truly important to them and find the candidate that matches up the best and not let these small issues affect their judgement.

To single you out only Dave, but I was discussing this with friends/family this weekend and your post was the one I noticed first.

Under most circumstances i completely agree with you... Here is why i feel this way about this. Tancredo is either scientifically ignorant or lying.

(side note: I'm not trying to be condescending to believers in creationism nor do i want this thread to turn into another debate on the subject... It just my opinion)

With the current scope of the world... Our dependency on oil, Global Warming, Stem Cell Research etc. We need someone in Office who at the very least is intellectually honest when it comes to science. My best example of this is the current Stem Cell bill that is about to be Vetoed. We are talking about embryos from in-vitro clinics that will be destroyed if not used for research. I have no problem making ethical concessions to just the ones on the way to the trash bin... but we can not move forward in these VERY important areas with an intellectual dolt (like we have now) in charge.

Finding cures for diseases like Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, etc. could mean trillions of $'s to this country not to mention the benefits of curing people afflicted with these diseases. Imagine the benefits of being a world leader in renewable energies. Becoming an innovator and/or supplier in any of these new frontiers could mean 1,000's of new jobs in new industries. We may never get the old school manufacturing jobs back, but that doesn't mean we can't replace them.

On the other hand he could just be lying to get votes... again, JMO but i am real sick and tired of pandering to the extremes on either side of the fence for a couple of extra votes. We need a realist who is willing to forgo the the votes of the extreme right or left and create legislation that will benefit the majority of the people.

IMO Tancredo will be more of the same... That is exactly what we do not need.

[Atlas]

I think people that are leaning left should listen to what Biden has got to say. The guy is by far the smartest (on the issues) most experienced canidate either part will throw out there. He really knows his stuff. I'll vote for him in the Primary and I'll vote straight democrat this year like usual.

[broncos_mtnman]

notsofast Don't go thinking Obama is anything special just yet...

Heck, he even has to have Republicans help him with his campaign, as is evidenced in his consulting with Colin Powell concerning foreign policy.

He's a know-nothin' who has done-nothin' :thumbsdow

[epicSocialism4tw]

I like Ron Paul. Not because of his weird views on 911, but because he is willing to talk plain talk. I have seen some absolutely great interviews with this guy where he wastes absolutely zero time pandering to his party or another. Thats what I like to see.

At the same time, this type of approach wont get you far in politics. If the sharks dont eat him before he could get a nomination, he will be a lame duck president ala Jimmy Carter because he didnt play the game like a good ol boy.

[Spider]

I like Ron Paul. Not because of his weird views on 911, but because he is willing to talk plain talk. I have seen some absolutely great interviews with this guy where he wastes absolutely zero time pandering to his party or another. Thats what I like to see.

At the same time, this type of approach wont get you far in politics. If the sharks dont eat him before he could get a nomination, he will be a lame duck president ala Jimmy Carter because he didnt play the game like a good ol boy.

what weird views on 9-11 ?
I could go look it up , but I laid down 800 Miles saturday and 650 today , I am too freaking tired ;D

[ZachKC]

I can't vote for Obama, I would go Hillary or Edwards before him. I firmly believe that Fred Thompson will get the Republican vote. By the way, Obama speaks in generalizations all the time, never details.
Ha, if you haven't seen any of Obama's details then it means you don't want to. His Iraq Strategic exit strategy is very well laid out...if only the person in the White House right now had some kind of strategy....

[Atlas]

notsofast Don't go thinking Obama is anything special just yet...

Heck, he even has to have Republicans help him with his campaign, as is evidenced in his consulting with Colin Powell concerning foreign policy.

He's a know-nothin' who has done-nothin' :thumbsdow

Just like GW when he stole the elect.....errrr When he became president in 2000.

[Traveler]

I'm interested in immigration first and last. If Fred Thompson says he will close the border and send all illegals home then he has my vote.

Still trying to wrap my mind around this statement. It's a definitely a nice sound bite, but just how would you go about idenfiying/locating all the illegal aliens? Where is the money and manpower coming from?

Not trying to hijack the thread, just wondering how/why any candidate would make such a statement knowing the logistics involved would be to cumbersome.

[Spider]

Still trying to wrap my mind around this statement. It's a definitely a nice sound bite, but just how would you go about idenfiying/locating all the illegal aliens? Where is the money and manpower coming from?

Not trying to hijack the thread, just wondering how/why any candidate would make such a statement knowing the logistics involved would be to cumbersome.

Thompson loves to pander .... pretty much a yes man

[Bronco Bob]

I like Ron Paul. Not because of his weird views on 911, but because he is willing to talk plain talk. I have seen some absolutely great interviews with this guy where he wastes absolutely zero time pandering to his party or another. Thats what I like to see.

At the same time, this type of approach wont get you far in politics. If the sharks dont eat him before he could get a nomination, he will be a lame duck president ala Jimmy Carter because he didnt play the game like a good ol boy.

What is his views on evolution and global warming? That would go a lot
toward me deciding whether I want him for president.

[Garcia Bronco]

Obama is unqualified at this time for this position, though not as unqualified as the current guy, IMO. Edwards is a scumbag ambulance chaser, and I'll never vote for another Clinton or Bush. Rudy and McCain are ****ty choices also. Romney is a tolerable choice, IMO and that's about it. In short...all the candidates have a major suckatude flaw.

[Bob]

Tancredo said he doesn't believe in evolution. I'd prefer a president who's scientific sensibilities were somewhere beyond the medieval era.

As someone who is not a fan of evolutionism I could vote for a strict evolutionist if other charicter issues were ok, and positions on issues were in-line with mine -- if again, if I felt they were an honest person.

Now days we have to look at that person who represents MOST of your views on issues, and has a soul of some type -- but I am surprised that you feel so strongly on that one issue. Thats a new one (for me) as far as "one issue" that could exclude someone's vote. usually it is immigration, abortion, women's rights etc...

[Bob]

Under most circumstances i completely agree with you... Here is why i feel this way about this. Tancredo is either scientifically ignorant or lying.

(side note: I'm not trying to be condescending to believers in creationism nor do i want this thread to turn into another debate on the subject... It just my opinion)

With the current scope of the world... Our dependency on oil, Global Warming, Stem Cell Research etc. We need someone in Office who at the very least is intellectually honest when it comes to science. My best example of this is the current Stem Cell bill that is about to be Vetoed. We are talking about embryos from in-vitro clinics that will be destroyed if not used for research. I have no problem making ethical concessions to just the ones on the way to the trash bin... but we can not move forward in these VERY important areas with an intellectual dolt (like we have now) in charge.

Finding cures for diseases like Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, etc. could mean trillions of $'s to this country not to mention the benefits of curing people afflicted with these diseases. Imagine the benefits of being a world leader in renewable energies. Becoming an innovator and/or supplier in any of these new frontiers could mean 1,000's of new jobs in new industries. We may never get the old school manufacturing jobs back, but that doesn't mean we can't replace them.

On the other hand he could just be lying to get votes... again, JMO but i am real sick and tired of pandering to the extremes on either side of the fence for a couple of extra votes. We need a realist who is willing to forgo the the votes of the extreme right or left and create legislation that will benefit the majority of the people.

IMO Tancredo will be more of the same... That is exactly what we do not need.

But there are MANY folks who may not swallow all aspects of evolution, but may be for the types of research you are talking about. The hard thing is getting clear answers as to thier stance on many of these issues at this stage -- as no one wants to offend any potential voter. So, I guess we have to extrapulate the crap out of things to guess were some stand on varius issues... this may be teh scary thing for voting for those without a long voting record. The best predictor of the future with politicians is thier voting history.

[Bob]

notsofast Don't go thinking Obama is anything special just yet...

Heck, he even has to have Republicans help him with his campaign, as is evidenced in his consulting with Colin Powell concerning foreign policy.

He's a know-nothin' who has done-nothin' :thumbsdow

Nothing wrong with consulting...

My guess is that 80% he is talking to behind the scenes are democrats -- however, if anything we need someone who can talk with folks on the other side, who doesnt automaticly see them as the igorant enemy. We do not need another pres who surrounds himself with "yes" men and women.

[yavoon]

Still trying to wrap my mind around this statement. It's a definitely a nice sound bite, but just how would you go about idenfiying/locating all the illegal aliens? Where is the money and manpower coming from?

Not trying to hijack the thread, just wondering how/why any candidate would make such a statement knowing the logistics involved would be to cumbersome.

the concept among the go home crowd I believe is that if u clamp down real tight on the jobs, they will walk back home themselves. atleast a decent number of them.

[Stormontheplains]

If Obama changes his name, starts giving substance to his speeches, and changes his religion, he has my vote. I think Owens should have thrown his hat in.

[Garcia Bronco]

Nothing wrong with consulting...

My guess is that 80% he is talking to behind the scenes are democrats -- however, if anything we need someone who can talk with folks on the other side, who doesnt automaticly see them as the igorant enemy. We do not need another pres who surrounds himself with "yes" men and women.

True but the "My Baby Daddy" candidate doesn't have the experience.

[Rohirrim]

As someone who is not a fan of evolutionism I could vote for a strict evolutionist if other charicter issues were ok, and positions on issues were in-line with mine -- if again, if I felt they were an honest person.

Now days we have to look at that person who represents MOST of your views on issues, and has a soul of some type -- but I am surprised that you feel so strongly on that one issue. Thats a new one (for me) as far as "one issue" that could exclude someone's vote. usually it is immigration, abortion, women's rights etc...

There's no such thing as "evolutionism." It's not an "ism." It's not a belief. It's science.

Tancredo happens to be my congressman, unfortunately. The president is the leader of the nation. Frankly, in this day and age, I would be embarrassed to have a president who does not believe in evolution leading this nation. I could just see him at a meeting with world leaders discussing science. What does he believe in? Creationism? To me, that's like saying, "I sacrifice animals to Zeus." It's not the issue that bothers me. It's the indication of who Tancredo is by making such a statement. Anybody who says that doesn't belong anywhere near the WH. What other parts of science does he not believe in? Rocketry? Brain surgery? DNA research? Physics?

[Garcia Bronco]

There's no such thing as "evolutionism." It's not an "ism." It's not a belief. It's science.

Tancredo happens to be my congressman, unfortunately. The president is the leader of the nation. Frankly, in this day and age, I would be embarrassed to have a president who does not believe in evolution leading this nation. I could just see him at a meeting with world leaders discussing science. What does he believe in? Creationism? To me, that's like saying, "I sacrifice animals to Zeus." It's not the issue that bothers me. It's the indication of who Tancredo is by making such a statement. Anybody who says that doesn't belong anywhere near the WH. What other parts of science does he not believe in? Rocketry? Brain surgery? DNA research? Physics?


There is no concrete scientific proof of macro-evolution.

[Rascal]

Tancredo happens to be my congressman, unfortunately. The president is the leader of the nation. Frankly, in this day and age, I would be embarrassed to have a president who does not believe in evolution leading this nation. I could just see him at a meeting with world leaders discussing science. What does he believe in? Creationism? To me, that's like saying, "I sacrifice animals to Zeus." It's not the issue that bothers me.

Then you shouldn't ever vote for a Christian then.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

See I'm not going to let stupid social issues like this or abortion or gay be anything more then very low influential on who I decide to vote for. I'm tired of letting these minor issues become so polarized by special interest groups that they become more important then ones that everyone should be considering. If the candidate has the right platforms for immigration, economy, etc like I mentioned but goes against my own personnal beliefs on abortion, evolution, gay marriage I won't care. I encourage more people to identify the platforms that are truly important to them and find the candidate that matches up the best and not let these small issues affect their judgement.

To single you out only Dave, but I was discussing this with friends/family this weekend and your post was the one I noticed first.

^5 :thumbsup:

Awesome post.

It's encouraging to see that some people can learn from past mistakes (no sarcasm intended here - I'm dead serious.)

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

If Obama changes his name, starts giving substance to his speeches, and changes his religion, he has my vote. I think Owens should have thrown his hat in.

???

Why does he need to change his name?

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

notsofast Don't go thinking Obama is anything special just yet...

Heck, he even has to have Republicans help him with his campaign, as is evidenced in his consulting with Colin Powell concerning foreign policy.



Don't go thinking Powell is still a republi-con just yet - he just told the press a couple days ago (when asked if he'll back the republican in '08) that he'll support whomever he feels is the best candidate.

BTW, I'm guessing most voters (save for the extreme right-wing fringe) would consider Obama's willingness to reach across the aisle an asset.

[Stormontheplains]

???

Why does he need to change his name?

His name was one not to reflect the american culture. If his parents were true believers in the US, his name would reflect that. How many immigrants name their children America, Freedom? They do that to reflect thier feelings of moving and believing in this great country. To me that name reflects love of another country and sets of ideals. His middle name is hussain for god sakes

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

His name was one not to reflect the american culture. If his parents were true believers in the US, his name would reflect that. How many immigrants name their children America, Freedom? They do that to reflect thier feelings of moving and believing in this great country. To me that name reflects love of another country and sets of ideals. His middle name is hussain for god sakes

So changing his name to Billy Bob would make him more of an American?

IMO, the name isn't as important as what the man stands for.

[Stormontheplains]

So changing his name to Billy Bob would make him more of an American?

IMO, the name isn't as important as what the man stands for.

It does sound red neck and racist but it's not. I am judging his father more than him with the name, and wondering what convictions were taught to him as a child. Does the dad rank Muhammad number 1, if so I am against him and his up bringing.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

It does sound red neck and racist but it's not. I am judging his father more than him with the name, and wondering what convictions were taught to him as a child. Does the dad rank Muhammad number 1, if so I am against him and his up bringing.

But his father isn't running for public office - he is.

And I can't discriminate against a candidate on the basis of religion (or his father's religion) inasmuch as such discrimination flies in the face of everything America stands for (even if I don't agree with the tenets of the religion.)

[RkyMtnThunder]

I am a registered Libertarian who leans to the left on most social issues.


Obama - I also want to like this guy as well. But I dont really know as much about him as I should. I am not sure if I like him just cause he is not Hilary? lol

"Hillary? She is the anti Obama. What is likable about her? I mean this sincerely -- her voice grates on my soul, like a chalkboard being scratched by 13 cats. I just think she epitomizes what is wrong with politics – how can you believe ANYTHING she says? How can you believe ANYTHING her husband says (in whatever role he is anointed to?)"

I agree with what you are saying here. I cant put my finger on it exactly, but there is something I really dont like about this woman. I feel she would be similar to Bush in the fact that she really seems like a polarizing figure and I am tired of this partisan divide that serves and nothing more than a distraction among the people. I dont see Hilary being that candidate who bridges the gap.

"Edwards? So he fights for the little guy, but seems so freaking removed economically from the little guy. I can’t trust the guy for some reason -- as he got to where he is by exploitation of suffering for his own personal gains."

Any man who is into $400 hair cuts is not a champion for 'the little guy' no matter how much they try to say they are. I think this guy is a classic used car salesman type politician.


"Gore? When he drops 20 pounds and enters the race he will mix things up, and does seem to be riding the wave of the new druid religion, for good advantage. But as he flies around in private jets, lives in a mansion eating burgers, and has a huge carbon foot-print as he tells all of his followers to make sacrifices – as he continues to be one of the biggest hypocrites out there -- does anyone else see him a simply having too much baggage, and remember how just six years ago he was a sulking, Kajiniski look-alike, pseudo professor and laughing stock ?"

I didnt vote for him in 2000, I voted for Bush. In hindsight, I wished I voted for Gore instead as Bush has obviously been a disaster. However, I didnt vote for Gore before and although my respect for him has grown a bit since then, I need more than just an 'eco-friendly' candidate - and at this point, that seems to be his obvious platform strength.



"Ron Paul? He has at least 40 votes from folks on this site, but aside from that, not much more. Libertinism, is great in theory, impossible in practice"

I see that Paul has what looks to be a very strong internet grass roots support system. I hope everyone votes for him in the primary because the rest of the Republican field is abysmal to say the least. Libertarianism is great in theory, I agree 100% (of course!). I dont think its 'impossible' in practice though. I agree some of the Libertarian views are too radical for many, but since we have never had a Libertarian cabinet in the WhiteHouse to judge by - its 'impossible' to view it as 'impossible'. I think the American public is ripe for change as I believe most of us have grown tired of the 2 party system - their failures - the partisan divide - everything about it sucks


"Romney? If he reminds me one more time about Regan I think I am going to Puke. Just be yourself, whoever that is. Did he flip/flop on Abortion? And if he did, is it another example of a person who tests the polls before knowing how to stand."

Romney - no. No more bible thumpers in office. At least, not for a little while.


"Giuliani? I guess I am still figuring him out, to be honest. Did he exploit 911 for personal gain? I am leaning toward a yes on that one"

No - no more mob bosses. No one should trust this man as far as they can throw him.


"McCain? He is one of the walking dead, who has spent his who political career being a gad fly. "

There was once a time he might have won my vote. But that was before he lost his spine and started saying what he thinks everyone wants to hear. I do believe commander in chief should have military experience, especially in a time of war. But he has gotten old and I think he has lost his edge.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

notsofast Don't go thinking Obama is anything special just yet...

Heck, he even has to have Republicans help him with his campaign, as is evidenced in his consulting with Colin Powell concerning foreign policy.

WASHINGTON (AP) - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama has sought out former Secretary of State Colin Powell for advice on foreign policy matters.

While Powell served in the administrations of two Republican presidents, he said Sunday it was too early in the 2008 race to say whether he would back the GOP nominee.

"I'm going to support the best person that I can find who will lead this country for the eight years beginning in January of 2009," Powell said.

Powell was secretary of state under President Bush and Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman for the first President Bush.

Powell said he has met twice with Obama, the Illinois senator. "I've been around this town a long time and I know everybody who is running for office. And I make myself available to talk about foreign policy matters and military matters with whoever wishes to chat with me," Powell said.

Powell said he does not want to serve in elected office but was less certain about a return to some government post.

"I would not rule it out. I am not at all interested in political life if you mean elected political life. That is unchanged. But I always keep my eyes open and my ears open to requests for service," he said.

He was interviewed on "Meet the Press" on NBC.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070610/D8PM08A00.html



Ha!

[broncos_mtnman]

BTW, I'm guessing most voters (save for the extreme right-wing fringe) would consider Obama's willingness to reach across the aisle an asset.

What choice did he have? You're not going to find anyone wearing a Democrat label with any knowledge of foreign affairs.

Except how to "cut and run."

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

What choice did he have? You're not going to find anyone wearing a Democrat label with any knowledge of foreign affairs.

Except how to "cut and run."

Ha ha ha! ROFL!

Thanks for that moment of levity.

Yep - Bush and the repubs are the preferred source of wisdom on all things foreign policy.

That's the ticket.

Just look at their handling of Iraq if you're still not convinced.

:D

[Bronco Bob]

"Hillary? She is the anti Obama. What is likable about her? I mean this sincerely -- her voice grates on my soul, like a chalkboard being scratched by 13 cats. I just think she epitomizes what is wrong with politics – how can you believe ANYTHING she says? How can you believe ANYTHING her husband says (in whatever role he is anointed to?)"



Saw an article on MSNBC this morning about the polls. What Hillary has going
for her is the Democratic women's vote. Over 50% of the women support
Hillary, and even black women support Hillary over Obama. And women make
up the majority of the Democratic voters. So before any of the men have
a chance, they have to convince these women to vote for yet another
man after over 200 years of men as president when these women have
a chance to finally have one of their own as president. As far as being
competant, she's probably the best qualified of any of the Democrats
running, and most of the Republicans too for that matter. What slants
the the view against Hillary on the Orange Mane is the majority of people
posting here are men, and several of them are Republicans. So don't
take your dislike of her as a sign of who the people most likely to vote for
her. And as it stands now, she still has the majority of the Democratic voters.

[RkyMtnThunder]

What choice did he have? You're not going to find anyone wearing a Democrat label with any knowledge of foreign affairs.

Except how to "cut and run."

Wingnuts on either side of the isle arent playing with a full deck - including yourself. If you carry this strength of bias - you are blinded by it.

[BroncoBuff]

I like Ron Paul. Not because of his weird views on 911, but because he is willing to talk plain talk. I have seen some absolutely great interviews with this guy where he wastes absolutely zero time pandering to his party or another. Thats what I like to see.

Anybody know what Ron Paul's profession is?

Gynecologist. I'm serious.

[Bronco Bob]

Anybody know what Ron Paul's profession is?

Gynecologist. I'm serious.

So even before he ran for political office he was helping people out. :~ohyah!:

[epicSocialism4tw]

Anybody know what Ron Paul's profession is?

Gynecologist. I'm serious.


Yeah, I knew that.

GYN's have to be pretty frank. I guess it stuck with him.

[mosca]

Anybody know what Ron Paul's profession is?

Gynecologist. I'm serious.
He's a specialist in obstetrics and gynecology, judging from his wikipedia bio.

[Spider]

What choice did he have? You're not going to find anyone wearing a Democrat label with any knowledge of foreign affairs.

Except how to "cut and run."

its gotta take alot of work to be this stupid

[Traveler]

His name was one not to reflect the american culture. If his parents were true believers in the US, his name would reflect that. How many immigrants name their children America, Freedom? They do that to reflect thier feelings of moving and believing in this great country. To me that name reflects love of another country and sets of ideals. His middle name is hussain for god sakes

Gotta call bullsh!t on this take.

Please tell me you don't really believe this! I don't know you personally, so I can't and won't stand in judgement of you. That said, this reply can definitely be placed in the category of "racism."

Last I knew, America is made up of many cultures. And if a candidate must change his name to make you feel more comfortable with him, then the real problem lies with the person you look at in the mirror each day.

Not trying to start an argument here, just calling you out because you are subconciously labeling an individual in a negative manner because his name or cultural difference.

[mhgaffney]

Here's a piece about Obama by a black man who says the candidate has packaged himself to appeal to corporate America

and that he has abandoned his black roots.

In essence, Obama has pandered beynd shame.

The writer concludes that Obama is the anti thesis of everything that King and Malcolm and Jackson represent -- and is "a knife in our heart..."

I suspect he is correct. Something about Obama just never seemed right to me.

http://www.counterpunch.org/

[yavoon]

Here's a piece about Obama by a black man who says the candidate has packaged himself to appeal to corporate America

and that he has abandoned his black roots.

In essence, Obama has pandered beynd shame.

The writer concludes that Obama is the anti thesis of everything that King and Malcolm and Jackson represent -- and is "a knife in our heart..."

I suspect he is correct. Something about Obama just never seemed right to me.

http://www.counterpunch.org/

Uncle Tom slandering ahoy!

[mhgaffney]

The last thing we need is a black man trying as hard as he can to wear a white face.

[Bronco Bob]

The last thing we need is a black man trying as hard as he can to wear a white face.

Sort of a reverse minstrel show?

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

http://www.bartcop.com/june-07-poll-for-08.gif

[mhgaffney]

What I find curious about the poll is that Ron Paul is completely out of the picture -- even though he won the California GOP debate going away and finished a close 2nd in the South Carolina debate --

The media (the people who own the media) evidently have decided that Ron Paul is unacceptable and have simply erased him from the picture.

Of course, the American people are so hypnotized by this point that they didn't even notice.

The fix is in. We live in a country so corrupt -- there's no chance for an honest man.

Maybe a comet will smack earth soon and put us out of our misery.

Then life can recycle itself with families like arthropoda and insectivora.

I predict a rapid climb to intelligence -- in a mere 20 million years.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

The media (the people who own the media) evidently have decided that Ron Paul is unacceptable and have simply erased him from the picture.


Would those be the same people who decided Hillary Clinton would be the Democratic front-runner, by any chance? ;)

[Stormontheplains]

I believe that Obama is the Manchurian Candidate. I just get bad vibes about him.
Someone please define racism for me. I am against a culture, regardless of race. I would not elect a white, black, Asian, or Hispanic Muslim.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

I am against a culture, regardless of race. I would not elect a white, black, Asian, or Hispanic Muslim.

That would be discrimination on the basis of religion.

How un-American is that?

[epicSocialism4tw]

That would be discrimination on the basis of religion.
How un-American is that?

LOL

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

LOL

:puff:

[TheDave]

Then you shouldn't ever vote for a Christian then.

I don't believe there are as many "creationist" christians as you think...

As I've said before my wife considers herself a born-again christian and many of her friends are the same. Acording to my experience with them the strict "creationists" are definately in the minority.

[TheDave]

There is no concrete scientific proof of macro-evolution.

Wrong thread... fell free to let that one fly in one of the other 1,00 threads dedicated to this issue.

[Bronco Bob]

Would those be the same people who decided Hillary Clinton would be the Democratic front-runner, by any chance? ;)

Must be working, the latest poll by the American Research Group of June 9-12, 2007
has Hillary up a full 20 points over Obama.

Clinton - 39%
Obama - 19%
Edwards - 13%
Richardson - 5%
Biden - 3%

http://www.pollingreport.com/wh08dem.htm

Interestingly Hillary's numbers haven't changed that much,
in March they were virtually tied with Hillary at 34% and Obama at 31%
It's Obama who is fading away.

[mhgaffney]

Notice that the poll doesn't even mention the progressives Gravel and Kucinich.

Just like with the Reps -- leaving off Ron Paul.

The fix is in.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Notice that the poll doesn't even mention the progressives Gravel and Kucinich.

Just like with the Reps -- leaving off Ron Paul.

The fix is in.

Looks that way, unfortunately.

[Bronco Bob]

Notice that the poll doesn't even mention the progressives Gravel and Kucinich.

Just like with the Reps -- leaving off Ron Paul.

The fix is in.

Actually it does, if you follow the link.
But they are so far down, both at 1%,
that I was the one that didn't bother
to mention them, because the thrust of
the thread is how Obama is doing.
But just to round it off, Dodd is also at 1%
and Wesley Clark is at 2%.

[footstepsfrom#27]

I believe that Obama is the Manchurian Candidate. I just get bad vibes about him.
Someone please define racism for me. I am against a culture, regardless of race. I would not elect a white, black, Asian, or Hispanic Muslim.
Obama is not a Muslim, he's Christian. His father was Kenyan, which is where he got his name; and he spent about 5 years in his childhood living in Indonesia where he went to a Muslim school because it was all they had.

[footstepsfrom#27]

notsofast Don't go thinking Obama is anything special just yet...

Heck, he even has to have Republicans help him with his campaign, as is evidenced in his consulting with Colin Powell concerning foreign policy.

He's a know-nothin' who has done-nothin' :thumbsdow
Graduated from Columbia University...doctorate in law from Harvard...the only black editor of the Harvard Law Review in their 104 year history...professor of constitutional law at the University of Chicago...these things make him a "know nothin' who has done nothing"? You must have accomplished a lot in your life.

Read The Audacity of Hope...he's the brightest presidential candidate in years. On top of that, he's the only candidate who doesn't take PAC money, and he'll stop this idiotic war in Iraq.

Consulting with Colin Powel only shows he's smart.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Must be working, the latest poll by the American Research Group of June 9-12, 2007
has Hillary up a full 20 points over Obama.

Clinton - 39%
Obama - 19%
Edwards - 13%
Richardson - 5%
Biden - 3%

http://www.pollingreport.com/wh08dem.htm

Interestingly Hillary's numbers haven't changed that much,
in March they were virtually tied with Hillary at 34% and Obama at 31%
It's Obama who is fading away.
Obama's not fading. Check his prior campaigns and you'll find that he came from far down in the polls over the last few months to win, the last time against a self funded candidate who had $500 million.

Obama is also the only DEM candidate who polls are showing would defeat all Republicans in a general election. That will weigh large in the minds of party organizers as the election gets closer and they consider Hillary's huge negative numbers.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Could you vote for Obama if ???
Not only am I going to vote for him, I'm going to volunteer in his campaign...and I've never voted for a DEM in the presidential election before.

I considered Gore since I hate Bush, but he didn't appeal either at the time. Obama's the best candidate in this election, the one most likely to end the war, and scores major points on brains and ethics at this point, has a sold understanding on how to work with people he doesn't agree with and he doesn't take PAC money. He's also the right fit for the times, somebody who has a chance to restore our credibility abroad and repair the damage the current idiot has done.

[Garcia Bronco]

Wrong thread... fell free to let that one fly in one of the other 1,00 threads dedicated to this issue.

But there isn't concrete proof.

[Spider]

Not only am I going to vote for him, I'm going to volunteer in his campaign...and I've never voted for a DEM in the presidential election before.

I considered Gore since I hate Bush, but he didn't appeal either at the time. Obama's the best candidate in this election, the one most likely to end the war, and scores major points on brains and ethics at this point, has a sold understanding on how to work with people he doesn't agree with and he doesn't take PAC money. He's also the right fit for the times, somebody who has a chance to restore our credibility abroad and repair the damage the current idiot has done.
More power to you .........

[Bob]

Here's a piece about Obama by a black man who says the candidate has packaged himself to appeal to corporate America

and that he has abandoned his black roots.

In essence, Obama has pandered beynd shame.

The writer concludes that Obama is the anti thesis of everything that King and Malcolm and Jackson represent -- and is "a knife in our heart..."

I suspect he is correct. Something about Obama just never seemed right to me.

http://www.counterpunch.org/

So Obama isn't "black enough?" What does that mean & who decides? Does having roots in one's black history mean that you have to be a Dem of a certain cloth? I guess Alan Keyes and Thomas are not black as well as they do not conform to an artificial "standard" of what it means to be black. Feaking stupid. Hopefully he is an American first, and a black man somehere down the list.

[Bob]

That would be discrimination on the basis of religion.

How un-American is that?

There are a few folks (something like 26%) that wouldnt vore for Romney based on relgion alone. I have to wonder why this doesnt get in the way for the Dem leader of the house?

I dont think that Obama is a Muslim anyway -- is he? What makes a Muslim -- is it birth or is it belief? He was brought up under that religous belief system, but he clearly is not one of the radical muslims that many of us have concerns about.

[Bob]

I don't believe there are as many "creationist" christians as you think...

As I've said before my wife considers herself a born-again christian and many of her friends are the same. Acording to my experience with them the strict "creationists" are definately in the minority.

Have to admit to not having met too many strict creationists the literal "6 day" creation and young earth.

[Atlas]

I believe that Obama is the Manchurian Candidate. I just get bad vibes about him.
Someone please define racism for me. I am against a culture, regardless of race. I would not elect a white, black, Asian, or Hispanic Muslim.

I guess you're also against intellect and knowledge too. Since Obama is not a Muslim you obviously don't know what you're talking about.

[footstepsfrom#27]

So Obama isn't "black enough?" What does that mean & who decides? Does having roots in one's black history mean that you have to be a Dem of a certain cloth? I guess Alan Keyes and Thomas are not black as well as they do not conform to an artificial "standard" of what it means to be black. Feaking stupid. Hopefully he is an American first, and a black man somehere down the list.
It goes without saying that the left margin of the black power political machine won't accept this guy. Don't fall into the trap of thinking they control the rest of the voting demographic. He will do extremely well among black voters.

[Bob]

Must be working, the latest poll by the American Research Group of June 9-12, 2007
has Hillary up a full 20 points over Obama.

Clinton - 39%
Obama - 19%
Edwards - 13%
Richardson - 5%
Biden - 3%

http://www.pollingreport.com/wh08dem.htm

Interestingly Hillary's numbers haven't changed that much,
in March they were virtually tied with Hillary at 34% and Obama at 31%
It's Obama who is fading away.

Well, if I wanted a dem in office I sure wouldnt vote for Clinton -- dead republicans will crawl over glass to vote against her...

From a strategy standpoint I think you will need to get millions more votes just for the simple fact that she is hated so much.

Also, I have a hard time believing all of these polls.

[Bronco Bob]

Also, I have a hard time believing all of these polls.

Pollingreport.com's motto is:

The only poll that counts is the one in November 2008.
(But who wants to wait that long?)

[Atlas]

Well, if I wanted a dem in office I sure wouldnt vote for Clinton -- dead republicans will crawl over glass to vote against her...

From a strategy standpoint I think you will need to get millions more votes just for the simple fact that she is hated so much.

Also, I have a hard time believing all of these polls.

I think you might be right, Clinton is a democartic favorite but I don't think she is electable for President. Obama who isn't as strong within the party might carry more weight in a general Presidential election, but who knows.

You know there are places in this country that would never vote for a "****er" to be President.

[Bronco Bob]

Obama's not fading. .

To go from 31% to 19% in only four months in the American Research Group poll
sure sounds like a fade to me.

Even the Gallup poll, which actually had Obama ahead of Hillary at one point,
now has Hillary back in a double digit lead over Obama, 33% to 21%.

http://www.pollingreport.com/wh08dem.htm

[Bronco Bob]

It goes without saying that the left margin of the black power political machine won't accept this guy. Don't fall into the trap of thinking they control the rest of the voting demographic. He will do extremely well among black voters.

Black male voters. Hillary still the favorite of black women, as she is with Democratic women in general.

[footstepsfrom#27]

To go from 31% to 19% in only four months in the American Research Group poll
sure sounds like a fade to me.

Even the Gallup poll, which actually had Obama ahead of Hillary at one point,
now has Hillary back in a double digit lead over Obama, 33% to 21%.

http://www.pollingreport.com/wh08dem.htm
Polls this far out are pretty worthless. In two prior elections he came from far back to win. It's the 1st quarter and it's 3-0 Hillary...no big deal.

I also think he will do better with black female voters as time goes on. More importantly though, are how many under 30 voters register for this election.