TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Democrats Snatching Defeat from Victory Again
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Democrats Snatching Defeat from Victory Again

post #1 of 28
Thread Starter 
I used to be a Republican, I don't consider myself part of either party anymore, but I have seen this so many times before. Democrats have a sure thing and they are shooting themselves in the foot again. I have heard Hillary say twice that she brings all this experience to the campaign, McCain brings a lifetime of experience and Obama brings a speech from 2002. It's like she is saying if it isn't me then it should be McCain. Now a senior policy advisor to Obama and a Harvard professor goes over to Britain and tells a member of the British press that Hillary is a monster. If she is truly a foreign policy expert she should know that she shouldn't go to another country and air campaign dirty laundry to a member of their press. Now I am hearing things like older women saying that if the nomination is stolen from Hillary they will vote for McCain. African Americans are saying that if Obama doesn't get the nomination they are staying home on election day. Neither candidate can win the nomination through elected delegates, it simply is no longer possible, so one of those groups are going to be very hard for the Democrats to get back in November. They should know this stuff will come back in the campaign in the fall and the Democrats will cry victim that the GOP is playing dirty again. The Democrats will have done it to themselves they just handed the ammunition to the Republicans.
post #2 of 28
I wouldn't worry to much. Many said the same thing about McCain but now that he has clinched the nomination many are getting behind him.

McCain IS the best candidate. He is moderate, Bi-Partisan AND has (as you said) a lifetime of experience. I don't understand how people could vote for Obama with, absolutely, no experience.
post #3 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
I wouldn't worry to much. Many said the same thing about McCain but now that he has clinched the nomination many are getting behind him.

McCain IS the best candidate. He is moderate, Bi-Partisan AND has (as you said) a lifetime of experience. I don't understand how people could vote for Obama with, absolutely, no experience.
post #4 of 28
This is why I'm not voting for any of the above. We had a very good candidate - the media killed him. America will suffer by whoever is picked at this point. Sad. Maybe America will wake up next time and really listen to what the candidates are saying and not saying - and vote for truth
post #5 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenKitty45 View Post
This is why I'm not voting for any of the above. We had a very good candidate - the media killed him. America will suffer by whoever is picked at this point. Sad. Maybe America will wake up next time and really listen to what the candidates are saying and not saying - and vote for truth
The media didn't kill any of the candidates. And I agree with Cindy - the best candidate was chosen. I did listen to what the candidates said and didn't say, and I can still stand up and say proudly that I do support McCain.

Why is it because your guy wasn't chosen by the general public now we're all idiots who didn't vote for the "truth"? If there were only one "truth" then we wouldn't even need 2 parties!

But back to the OP, the Dems do this a lot. And yes, then they blame the GOP. I mean, as soon as Obama fired back at Clinton she says he's acting like Ken Starr. Who was, as we all know, part of the vast right-wing conspiracy that was persecuting poor Bill and Hillary. But then there's also talk about them being running mates. Tell me how this is congruous in any way?
post #6 of 28
Huckabee lost out fair and square. Anyway, Huckabee did not have a snowball's chance in
you-know-where of winning the Presidency.

So, because he didn't get the nomination, you won't vote? That seems a tad counter productive don't you think? But, tis your decision.
post #7 of 28
Everyone has an idea of who their own personal best president would be, and only rarely does a candidate match it. McCain is the only republican who might win and who went for the candidacy.

IF the election turns out to be Clinton v McCain, most people of the fringes are going to be unhappy. I'm as likely to vote for McCain as for her, if he can drop the pandering and go back to what he used to be. Clinton just isn't liberal enough for me to see the difference between the two of them except on a couple of issues. The same is true of the far-right; McCain isn't Christian enough, or isn't conservative enough, or whatever people are calling it these days.

In a way, that might be better. The country should be run by someone capable of representing the majority and not the extremists. I'm sick of the polarization and quite ready for the fringe to retreat back to the fringe.

That said. People are constantly complaining about how inbred politics is, how much it's about who your friends are, how it's in the interests of lobbyists who have paid them off, etc. And now we have a candidate who doesn't take money from them, who isn't deeply entrenched in the politics of politics, and people say he doesn't have enough experience.
post #8 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zissou'sMom View Post
I'm as likely to vote for McCain as for her, if he can drop the pandering and go back to what he used to be. Clinton just isn't liberal enough for me to see the difference between the two of them except on a couple of issues.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who sees little difference.

I am a bit disturbed by Obama's lack of experience, because whoever is elected will have an impossible job cleaning up after Bush, and I'd rather see somebody, i.e., McCain or Clinton, who won't be in politics all that much longer suffer that defeat, if that makes sense.
post #9 of 28
personally, i think the Dems have given the Reps the election by choosing 2 non-candidates. prejudice is still relatively strong [at least in the south] to the point that there are many who will NOT vote for a black man or a woman, regardless of whether the candidate is qualified. they may not admit to this, but voting is confidential, & i think the eventual outcome will reflect this.
post #10 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by laureen227 View Post
personally, i think the Dems have given the Reps the election by choosing 2 non-candidates. prejudice is still relatively strong [at least in the south] to the point that there are many who will NOT vote for a black man or a woman, regardless of whether the candidate is qualified. they may not admit to this, but voting is confidential, & i think the eventual outcome will reflect this.
On the other hand, having a female/half-minority candidate may mobilize people who normally don't vote.
post #11 of 28
Didn't say I was not voting - I said I was not voting for any of the candidates that are running now.

And if you don't care that a candidate is ok with abortion, embryonic stem cell, or will not push for a federal marriage amendment and more/less condones gay marriages, then vote for the above candidates. When you find out what really is going on and where we are headed, then you might reconsider your position.

I'm sticking to MY values and none of the candidates running have the values I have and care about.

And don't count Huckabee out - he will eventually get to be president and he will turn America around in the right direction.
post #12 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenKitty45 View Post
And if you don't care that a candidate is ok with abortion, embryonic stem cell, or will not push for a federal marriage amendment and more/less condones gay marriages, then vote for the above candidates.
I can see that our opinions are diametrically opposed, as I won't vote for a candidate who doesn't meet the above "qualifications". McCain seems to be waffling a bit there, so he might just disqualify himself as far as my vote is concerned.
post #13 of 28
I agree with jcat. I don't really believe in abortion, however, I do think it's the woman's right to choose. However, I'm very PRO Stem cell research as well as allowing Gay Unions. But like jcat said, McCain does seem to be waffling a bit, and that's not good. It seems like he's trying to get the approval of the HARD LINE Conservatives. I HOPE it's just "talk" in order to try to get their approval, but I hope if he does get elected, he'll stick to his original guns.
post #14 of 28
EMBROYNIC stem cell does nothing. The best rests have been from adult stem cells. When you use the unborn stem cells, you are killing a human life. Its been proven that unborn stem cells are doing no good; yet science is still experimenting with it.

McCain is trying to win over the Huckabee supportors with his "promises" and changing his values - but we can see thru him. 99% of the Huckabee supportors will not be voting for McCain, or the Democrats. He's not gonna get the conservatives like he thinks he will
post #15 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenKitty45 View Post
EMBROYNIC stem cell does nothing. The best rests have been from adult stem cells. When you use the unborn stem cells, you are killing a human life. Its been proven that unborn stem cells are doing no good; yet science is still experimenting with it.
I agree that if we can get them from somewhere aside from embryos, it's probably better, but I would like to see any proof at all of your assertion that embryonic stem cells are "doing no good".
post #16 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
McCain IS the best candidate. He is moderate, Bi-Partisan AND has (as you said) a lifetime of experience. I don't understand how people could vote for Obama with, absolutely, no experience.
I don't know if McCain is the best candidate. All he seems to care about is the war and he doesn't even know that much about the economy - which he even admitted to the media.

Our economy isn't exactly in prime shape at this point and having someone run the country who knows very little about it isn't going to help.

At this point, I am tired of all the mudslinging and do not know who will be able to run this country with all the mess Bush will leave behind.
post #17 of 28
I'll do some research this afternoon on the cell stuff Hope and find some sites for you
post #18 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zissou'sMom View Post
I agree that if we can get them from somewhere aside from embryos, it's probably better, but I would like to see any proof at all of your assertion that embryonic stem cells are "doing no good".
actually, stem-cell research, embryonic or otherwise, is not illegal... it's just not government-funded.
post #19 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenKitty45 View Post
I'll do some research this afternoon on the cell stuff Hope and find some sites for you
I would like to see this research as well. Embryonic stem cells are the most primitive cells and able to generate all tissue types. Adult stem cells are already pre-programmed for certain tissue types and do not have the progenator capabilities of embryonic cells.

If there is proof that more research has been completed with Adult cells vs Embryonic cells , is most like due to the death or mutation of the original embryonic lines without the development of new ones. Cell lines cannot be kept alive indefinitely in the laboratory.

Also, embryonic stem cells can be harvested from the umbilical cord of live healthy newborns, so this is not an abortion issue. http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7864

As Laureen has pointed out, President Bush has refused to fund any Stem Cell research, no matter what the line origination.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
I wouldn't worry to much. Many said the same thing about McCain but now that he has clinched the nomination many are getting behind him.

McCain IS the best candidate. He is moderate, Bi-Partisan AND has (as you said) a lifetime of experience. I don't understand how people could vote for Obama with, absolutely, no experience.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcat View Post
I can see that our opinions are diametrically opposed, as I won't vote for a candidate who doesn't meet the above "qualifications". McCain seems to be waffling a bit there, so he might just disqualify himself as far as my vote is concerned.
I agree with questioning McCain as the best candidate. Right now he is looking no different to me than John Kerry. McCain has changed his position so many times in the past 6 years I don't know what he stands for. I can't vote for someone who I have no idea if they will be Jekyl or Hyde once in the Presidency.

He will soon get the MoveOn.org's version of Swiftboating that Kerry got. We all must remember the Kerry is also a decorated war veteran. Which btw, I don't think is necessary qualification to be president of this country. Just because he was a prisoner of war doesn't mean he would be a good President.

Neither man knows what it is to be the middle class. People are complaining about Obama's money, McCain and his wife have a 40 million dollar trust fund. They are the furthest away monetarily from the average American. As a result he is completely out of touch with the economic disaster that is just beginning to hit our country.

McCain has a nasty temper. Anyone else see him berating that reporter yesterday for calling him on a lie? I have little faith in his ability to effectively communicate/negotiate with other foreign leaders.

Having military bases in Iraq is one thing, being in a 100 year war that is bankrupting this country is another. Four years ago he was all over Bush's case about the war, then a month later he was Bush's best buddy during the campaign, trying to get that more liberal, independent vote. I said then, watch he will run for president in 2008. All of it is a long planned out game to the politicos.

Bottom line, at this point I don't trust McCain. I don't think he has any more experience in getting things accomplished than the other two.
post #20 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denice View Post
I used to be a Republican, I don't consider myself part of either party anymore, but I have seen this so many times before. Democrats have a sure thing and they are shooting themselves in the foot .
never been a member of any party.But like they did with kerry, The dem are putting up people that as a whole i dont think avg person will vote for.

Often during work , i will walk into the mfg break area, and drink some coffee with UAW guys back there. Granted its almost a given the UAW will endorse hillary or obama. But almost to the person , in the break room, all have admitted they would not vote for hillary or obama.
post #21 of 28
Here's one site about the cell research - will look for more later

http://www.religioustolerance.org/res_stem.htm
post #22 of 28
Everyone seems to forget, like Laureen said, NO ONE is against stem cell research. The debate is if stem cell research should be FEDERALLY FUNDED.

Golden, if conservatives, or Republicans write-in the candidate they want and don't vote for the Republican candidate, all they are doing is giving the democratic candidate their vote, pure and simple. They may as well vote for the Democratic nominee and be done with it.

Don't you remember 1992? Clinton got in because so many Republicans voted for Ross Perot? If you want a replay of that, so be it.
post #23 of 28
We will see what happens between now and November. I trust God - he's not done yet
post #24 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by kittymonsters View Post
I would like to see this research as well. Embryonic stem cells are the most primitive cells and able to generate all tissue types. Adult stem cells are already pre-programmed for certain tissue types and do not have the progenator capabilities of embryonic cells.

If there is proof that more research has been completed with Adult cells vs Embryonic cells , is most like due to the death or mutation of the original embryonic lines without the development of new ones. Cell lines cannot be kept alive indefinitely in the laboratory.
Real quick, I remember seeing this article a year ago about 15 insulin-dependent volunteers in Kenya. After 3 years all but two diabetics were no longer insulin dependent. This is a quote from the article:
Quote:
The scientists in the study used an immature stem cell, a master cell that can create the more specialised ones in an animal or human. Stem cells from human embryos have the potential to create any type of human cell.
Going back to the original poster's statement, for one I think its really stupid for anyone to say that if they're candidate is not one of the nominees they're going to stay home that day. That's abusing your right to vote...there is always the "Fill in the blank" option. I always dislike reading about blacks, women, and other non-white males, saying "if this doesn't happen I'm not going to vote" So you're ancestors fought all that time to allow you the right to vote and you're just going to sit home that day. Ridiculous.
post #25 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by laureen227 View Post
actually, stem-cell research, embryonic or otherwise, is not illegal... it's just not government-funded.
I never said (or thought) it was illegal. I'm not sure where you got that from.
post #26 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
Everyone seems to forget, like Laureen said, NO ONE is against stem cell research. The debate is if stem cell research should be FEDERALLY FUNDED.

Golden, if conservatives, or Republicans write-in the candidate they want and don't vote for the Republican candidate, all they are doing is giving the democratic candidate their vote, pure and simple. They may as well vote for the Democratic nominee and be done with it.

Don't you remember 1992? Clinton got in because so many Republicans voted for Ross Perot? If you want a replay of that, so be it.
I guess I look at it that they're Federally Funding a War that the MAJORITY of us don't want, and don't believe in. I think it would be MUCH better to use Federal Funds to finance something that can SAVE millions of lives.

Here's the one thing I REALLY don't understand about the Republican Viewpoint. Republican's have no problem with our money being wasted on this War, but just freak out if the money could be used to HELP others. I JUST don't get it.
post #27 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenKitty45 View Post
We will see what happens between now and November. I trust God - he's not done yet
hoping you're right...
i voted one year for a write-in candidate. he [of course] didn't even come close to winning - i don't think they even posted his numbers. i really liked him, but haven't done that since. now, if i don't like anyone, i'll vote for the one i dislike the least.
Zissou'sMom - i think my post was directed at someone else... but i've slept since then, so i most definitely could be wrong. the most arguments i hear about it are from people saying we should allow it. it is allowed, just not federally funded. that's what i meant - i probably misunderstood [i do that a lot!].
post #28 of 28
I have no problem with stem cell research - its the "embryonic" part I object to as you are killing a person.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Democrats Snatching Defeat from Victory Again