Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I heard on either FOX or CNN, can't remember which on or by who, that Hillary Clinton was the real loser in this debate. At first it struck me as an odd statement, but that it started to make sense to me. Like her or loathe her, Sarah has completely stolen Hillary Clinton's thunder.
I am sorry, but I dont see how Hillary is relevant at all. What, so now that Clinton lost, no woman is suppose to do anything to outshine her? That is so ridiculous. I like Clinton, she is a million times better than Obama, and I am sure she would strongly disagree with that assessment. Please explain how she lost considering she is not even on any ticket, and she clearly supports Obama for president? You act like Palin came riding in to steal her thunder when it was Barack Obama who did that.
I think Hillary "lost" when Obama "won" the nomination.
I heard on either FOX or CNN, can't remember which on or by who, that Hillary Clinton was the real loser in this debate. At first it struck me as an odd statement, but that it started to make sense to me. Like her or loathe her, Sarah has completely stolen Hillary Clinton's thunder.
No, the real loser was Barack Hussein Obama, II. He did not pick Hillary and forfeit his changes of winning the election legally. Obama's only chance now is to use ACORN to commit massive voter fraud. That is Obama's only chance of winning. Unless Obama's crew commits massive voter fraud (talking about 10,000 - 100,000 votes), he will lose. Illegal aliens, dead people, people registering to vote under 30+ names.... That's the strategy.
No, my friend. This is the tale of two ladies: the one Obama didn't pick and the one Mccain did.
You better get used to McCain and Palin. They will be running the White House come Jan 20, 2009.
No, the real loser was Barack Hussein Obama, II. He did not pick Hillary and forfeit his changes of winning the election legally. Obama's only chance now is to use ACORN to commit massive voter fraud. That is Obama's only chance of winning. Unless Obama's crew commits massive voter fraud (talking about 10,000 - 100,000 votes), he will lose. Illegal aliens, dead people, people registering to vote under 30+ names.... That's the strategy.
Vote suppression schemes favoring republicans are estimated to cost 4.5 million votes in this election.
Steve_TN, I becareful what you wish for. Hillary is a powerful woman, the Clinton name is perhaps the most powerful in the nation in this election year 2008. What worries me if why she has been so quiet lately, its atypical of her.
Regarding the choice of Palin as VP ... John McCain had 2 choices, one to tackle the issue of the economy, as by choosing Mr. Foreign Policy Joe Biden, Obama choose to tackle his incompetence of Foreign Policy. McCain could've handily choose a CEO, however he detested Romney and as known as a "Maverick", he took the "Hail Mary" pass ... literally. During the primaries in the Rust Belt state such as West Virginia, Ohio, Michigan, etc. polls showed there were many middle-class democrat and female voters discontent with the choice of Obama over Clinton. In a close race as it currently still is anywhere between 1%-6% difference between Obama and McCain, if McCain or rather Palin take over up to 5% of the female votes in key states, it can shift the tide for McCain, in a seemingly poor year for the GOP.
But more importantly although a "hail mary" pass may be an attempt of desperation. It may seem McCain had more up his sleeves than just the pass, perhaps more like a punt fake and then a pass. See clearly 2008 was not a year of ration and contemplating issues but that of a slogan "change" and the "likeable" celebrity image which Obama won on. Palin an unknown governor until today happened to also be able to compete with the unknown yet popular image of Obama. Clearly she is inexperienced but it was not an issue that would backfire as you would have it Obama was equally inexperience. Now we Americans aren't voting for the VPs, but as the media would have you believe, perhaps some are.
I don't think Hillary is the loser in this debate, she was given the chance to do so against Biden and Obama in the primaries, which as you may remember neither Obama nor Clinton got enough delegate votes to claim the nomation. I think Americans are the losers by choosing with their emotions over ration in an all too important decisions. Not only does the feds have a bigger government with Obama or McCain, but whoever wins may win as minimal a division as 5% difference in the popular votes. Initial candidates such as Hillary Clinton or Ron Paul although strikingly different in their politics may have been better choices to unite this division as well as balance the scale of power in Washington.
Steve_TN, I becareful what you wish for. Hillary is a powerful woman, the Clinton name is perhaps the most powerful in the nation in this election year 2008. What worries me if why she has been so quiet lately, its atypical of her.
Regarding the choice of Palin as VP ... John McCain had 2 choices, one to tackle the issue of the economy, as by choosing Mr. Foreign Policy Joe Biden, Obama choose to tackle his incompetence of Foreign Policy. McCain could've handily choose a CEO, however he detested Romney and as known as a "Maverick", he took the "Hail Mary" pass ... literally. During the primaries in the Rust Belt state such as West Virginia, Ohio, Michigan, etc. polls showed there were many middle-class democrat and female voters discontent with the choice of Obama over Clinton. In a close race as it currently still is anywhere between 1%-6% difference between Obama and McCain, if McCain or rather Palin take over up to 5% of the female votes in key states, it can shift the tide for McCain, in a seemingly poor year for the GOP.
But more importantly although a "hail mary" pass may be an attempt of desperation. It may seem McCain had more up his sleeves than just the pass, perhaps more like a punt fake and then a pass. See clearly 2008 was not a year of ration and issues but that of a slogan "change" and the "likeable" celebrity image which Obama won on. Palin an unknown governor until today happened to also be able to compete with the unknown yet popular image of Obama. Clearly she is inexperienced but it was not an issue that would backfire as you would have it Obama was equally inexperience. Now clearly we Americans aren't voting for the VPs, but as the media would have you believe, perhaps some are.
I don't think Hillary is the loser in this debate, she was given the chance to do so against Biden and Obama in the primaries. I think Americans are the losers by choosing with their emotions over ration in all too important decisions. Not only does the feds have a bigger government with Obama or McCain, but whoever wins may win as minimal a division as under 5% difference in the popular votes, in once again a very divided nation. Initial candidates such as Hillary Clinton or Ron Paul although strikingly different in their politics may have been better choices to unite this division as well as balance the scale of power in Washington.
I would of felt alot better with Hillary and Paul as the candidates.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
