and he definitely doesn't represent the people any better than Obama - they try to paint him as an elitist, but McCain isn't exactly down on his luck, either, what with seven homes and all that money his wife has.
You know, I've always found that "elitist" stuff just a little sketchy. Don't we want an elite person serving in the White House? I would rather have an elitist running things than my next door neighbor. They became elite in the field of politics for a reason. Whether or not we want to admit it, most politicians know what they're doing.
Quote from Highroller »
No, none of those make him a capable Commander-in-chief. I'm relying more on the fact that that he's already made better decisions than Obama on foreign policy and it's not even November.
While I agree that good foreign policy decisions should be way up there on the list of things that one requires of a president, I wouldn't want to vote for someone based solely on that. Personally, I'd rather have a president who can finally shift their focus to domestic problems, such as the economy.
Quote from r3p3nt »
Ah, well we shouldn't expect to see any kind of pre-convention bounce. Right after the convention should be when the impact on the polls is largest. Another thing to keep in mind is that it is right at this time that we will also see any kind of Biden impact (which is why it will be hard to decide upon exactly what his impact was).
Eh, I never put much stock into the reaction of polls to the conventions. I think that the biggest test that undecided people should focus on is how each person fares during the debates that they have against one another. And debates that actually have substance. That's the main reason why I supported Obama during the democratic primaries: Remember the one democratic debate (I think it was sometime in April or something), when the "moderators" spent close to 45 minutes or so talking about flag pins and other irrelevant topics? Once a policy question was raised, Obama was like, "Finally! A relevant question!" Probably not how it really happened. That's just how my brain remembers it.
Quote from Ahasver »
The point is that it's ridiculous to claim Obama will be saving anything (which is what a lot of people think). Both candidates plan on spending heavily. Period.
I think that it would be a bit naive to think that any potential president, Democrat or Republican, wouldn't plan to spend a whole mess of money on something. The key issue is what they plan to spend that mess of money on. Both Obama and McCain talk about alternative energy (well, McCain less so, what with wanting to expand offshore drilling and all); that's gonna take a lot of money. And that's just one example.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Official Bouncer & Clan Rep of the Greek Alliance!
Many thanks to:
Sig: CharlieD at Limited Edition Signatures
Avvy: XenoNinja at HotP Studios
I think that it would be a bit naive to think that any potential president, Democrat or Republican, wouldn't plan to spend a whole mess of money on something.
Exactly, many people think Obama is going to bring the troops home, cut taxes, and have a surplus in the budget. It's just not true. I realize that everyone here (on this thread) isn't thinking in that fashion, but many are.
The key issue is what they plan to spend that mess of money on. Both Obama and McCain talk about alternative energy (well, McCain less so, what with wanting to expand offshore drilling and all); that's gonna take a lot of money. And that's just one example.
First off, both canidates want to expand offshore drilling. The big difference between the two is that Obama has a primary focus on new alternative fuel technologies (like wind power by his claims), while McCain wants to open up more Nuclear power plants accross the country (which is a great thing). Both energy plans are extremely costly, but have other benefits (such as the out of control rate of blackouts accross the country).
That aside, the ony big difference in spending is on social programs. People are claiming the Obama wants to pull out of Iraq, but he wants a speedy withdrawl out of Iraq and into Afganistan. That is going to be extremely, extremely costly. McCain is going to focus on Iraq over Afganistan, also extremely, extremely costly. Both have expensive tax reform and energy plans, and are promising the moon to the unemployed.
I think the weakness of both canidates is in an area I hoped to see improvement. They both want to spend waaay too much, and the country needs to cut costs. The next four years of either canidate is just going to be hell, and they will probably only last a single term either way.
First off, both canidates want to expand offshore drilling.
To say obama wants to expand offshore drilling is misleading of his actual views. He just recognizes that in order to get what he wants (alternative fuel sources), he needs to make some compromises in a senate which barely has a majority of democrats.
I think the weakness of both canidates is in an area I hoped to see improvement. They both want to spend waaay too much, and the country needs to cut costs. The next four years of either canidate is just going to be hell, and they will probably only last a single term either way.
Honestly, defecit spending is not that bad if done properly and applied to the right areas. Look at the great depression, defecit spending was one of the tools FDR used to build confidance in the economy again and get people jobs.
To say obama wants to expand offshore drilling is misleading of his actual views. He just recognizes that in order to get what he wants (alternative fuel sources), he needs to make some compromises in a senate which barely has a majority of democrats..
Somewhat true. It's more a reflection of Obama backing out of previous beliefs. He wants the alternative fuels, but it was brought to his attention that alternative fuel research does nothing for the current need. This is his compromise.
Honestly, defecit spending is not that bad if done properly and applied to the right areas. Look at the great depression, defecit spending was one of the tools FDR used to build confidance in the economy again and get people jobs.
Yeah, but neither canidate if FDR, and we will not be seeing any major turnarounds in the next few years. Everything was entirely different back then, and the red tape is infinately longer now than it was back then. Also, the economic stimulus of both canidates are things that sound nice, but will have no big impact.
You know, I've always found that "elitist" stuff just a little sketchy. Don't we want an elite person serving in the White House? I would rather have an elitist running things than my next door neighbor. They became elite in the field of politics for a reason. Whether or not we want to admit it, most politicians know what they're doing.
Just to clear something up, there is a difference between Elite and Elitist. Being elite is preferable - more experienced, more knowledgeable, wiser, better connected, etc.
Being Elitist means thinking you are better simply because of your status or perceived abilities and that you can no longer relate to those of lower status. Both of these candidates are considered Elite to any of us in the realm of politics, but the argument of Elitism has to do with how they relate to Joe-Blow-You-And-Me.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Decks
Commander
Ezuri, Renegade Leader (Aggro/Combo - Favorite) Skullbriar, the Walking Grave (Sac and Grave hijinks) Azusa, Lost but Seeking (Landfall hijinks) Kaalia of the Vast (Heavily modded)
OK, you read a different article from a different tax group's findings. Whoop-dee-doo.
First off, these figures are the only ones I have ever seen thrown around, period. I have yet to see anyone say McCain's plan doesn't put us more into debt. I at least give sources.
Second, I already mentioned it dealt with taxes, not spending.
The point is that it's rediculous to claim Obama will be saving anything (which is what a lot of people think). Both canidates plan on spending heavily. Period.
It is McCain NOT Obama who claims to balance the budget (Sources are fun), furthermore it is the republicans who claim to be small government and low spending, not the democrats. Far more think McCain will balance the budget, its a claim he has been making a lot. Your beef should be on McCain, not Obama here.
First off, these figures are the only ones I have ever seen thrown around, period. I have yet to see anyone say McCain's plan doesn't put us more into debt. I at least give sources.
Second, I already mentioned it dealt with taxes, not spending.
So, I continue to talk about spending... and you counter with tax plans. You're right Obama's tax plan is cheaper. At first glance I thought it was on spending.
It is McCain NOT Obama who claims to balance the budget (Sources are fun), furthermore it is the republicans who claim to be small government and low spending, not the democrats. Far more think McCain will balance the budget, its a claim he has been making a lot. Your beef should be on McCain, not Obama here.
OK.... so I was saying both candidates are going to spend irresponsibly, and I don't think either have good fiscal plans, and you criticize me for not saying McCain claims he will balance the budget when it's obvious he can.
And I disagree with you. People think McCain will spend more because he plans on spending a lot of money on the Iraq war, and think that Obama's "responsible governmental spending" means he will balance the budget. I know you are hardcore for Obama, but I'm not a particular fan of either. I also never claimed to be, there's just more arguements made for Obama that irks me.
No one here tried to claim McCain would balance the budget. And also, republicans and democrats are both big government at this point. I have no ties to either parties, and have voted straight democratic for the past few years.
So...the DNC is underway...and yet there is no chatter in this thread...:raise:
What did everyone think of Hillary Clinton's speech? Were you convinced? I know I wasn't. Check this out. It pretty much sums up my thoughts so far. Then again...I am a McCain fan and a devoted Republican...so I guess my opinion doesn't matter.
So...the DNC is underway...and yet there is no chatter in this thread...:raise:
What did everyone think of Hillary Clinton's speech? Were you convinced? I know I wasn't. Check this out. It pretty much sums up my thoughts so far. Then again...I am a McCain fan and a devoted Republican...so I guess my opinion doesn't matter.
That was about the same thoughts I had too. It's unfair to say Hillary did a great job, though. She had to in order to be convincing at all. She had to be preparing this speech with her staff since june. All in all, Obama is slowly loosing the luster he had with the media and with the public. He has to do something drastic.
Speaking of which. The republicans have stumbled upon a much stronger link between Ayers and Obama (can't remember all they said off the top of my head). The add is over the top, and yet will probably strike home.
The republicans have stumbled upon a much stronger link between Ayers and Obama (can't remember all they said off the top of my head). The add is over the top, and yet will probably strike home.
The ad that the Obama campaign and others claim violates the McCain-Feingold act?
The Obama-Ayers is blown up much more than it deserves to be. Association does not equal subscription.
The Obama-Ayers is blown up much more than it deserves to be. Association does not equal subscription.
It also doesn't need to be ignored. Who you associate with can show alot about your character. Also..."Blown Up" is probably a poor choice of words when defending a link between Obama and Ayers.
The ad that the Obama campaign and others claim violates the McCain-Feingold act?
Technically it doesn't, although it is right on the border.
The Obama-Ayers is blown up much more than it deserves to be. Association does not equal subscription.
You're right, but association is association, and Obama has that red flag. He's already tried the denial of association route, and that bought him enough time until now. He's had, and will continue to have, trouble explaining that concept to voters. Especially when his message is strongly founded on his associations as a politician.
It also doesn't need to be ignored. Who you associate with can show alot about your character.
Depending on the level of association. Do I quit the PTA because a convicted thief is also on the PTA? If the guy no longer steals and has ideas about how to make the school better why does my character get impugned?
So...the DNC is underway...and yet there is no chatter in this thread...:raise:
What did everyone think of Hillary Clinton's speech? Were you convinced? I know I wasn't. Check this out. It pretty much sums up my thoughts so far. Then again...I am a McCain fan and a devoted Republican...so I guess my opinion doesn't matter.
I highly disagree. Clinton couldn't have done a better job. She said she supported Barack Obama, and then listed reasons why. Healthcare was the biggest, followed by economical reasons like raising minimum wage and sending less jobs over seas. She also mentioned the importance of pulling out of iraq and providing health care for our veterans.
She wont persuade all of her former supporters (some of them are still bitter and irrational) but I think she did more enough to convince majority of them.
Depending on the level of association. Do I quit the PTA because a convicted thief is also on the PTA? If the guy no longer steals and has ideas about how to make the school better why does my character get impugned?
You wouldn't have to, the guy would probably be kicked out the first time a bake sale register was short.
Also, Ayers not only still thinks he is right, he thinks they didn't go nearly far enough. It'd be closer to your analogy if the theif was caught while you knew him on the PTA, and you not only stayed friends with him, you had no problem that he stole from you employer. The you got angry because your employer finds it shady you still talk with him.
Obama has a pretty strong personal connection with the guy, and ignoring that would be a mistake by his campaign.
Also, Ayers not only still thinks he is right, he thinks they didn't go nearly far enough.
He's entitled to his opinion, no matter how wrong and deranged it might be. EDIT: What I mean is Ayers position cannot be automatically subscribed to Obama.
It'd be closer to your analogy if the theif was caught while you knew him on the PTA, and you not only stayed friends with him, you had no problem that he stole from you employer. The you got angry because your employer finds it shady you still talk with him.
Why do you assume Obama and Ayers are friends? Serving on a board with someone and going to meetings with them does not automatically constitute friendship.
This is the assertion I don't get. What strong personal connection?
When they served on the board together, they were known for teaming up together to present new ideas. It wasn't like they just saw each other at opposite ends of the table and nodded to each other once a week. They had a working relationship.
A working relationship is still considered a fairly strong personal connection. No, it doesn't mean he agrees with the man, but it's not like Obama didn't know his future goal. If he felt that strongly for his political goals, then he wouldn't work so closely with him unless he had a personal reason to. It's not like Obama needed the support.
*EDIT*
I'm not trying to say Obama agrees with the man. Nor do I think it should be a reason not to vote for him. I'm just saying he has a personal relationship with a red flag in the matters of national security. It's going to be an issue for him. Why else would he be fighting the commercial itself, and not the message?
I highly disagree. Clinton couldn't have done a better job.
She talked about herself. No surprise there.
She talked about voting for Obama to defeat McCain. Well, of course.
She made no actual endorsement of Obama otherwise. No 'He's ready'. No 'He could be a great commander in chief.' No 'He's ready for the 3AM call.' Nada. She basically made no attempt at all to address any of the reservations her supporters cite as reasons not to support him.
As far as I am concerned...this is just further proof that there is bad blood between the Obama's and the Clintin's and that Hillary's support for Obama is nothing more than a stunt for 2012.
As far as I am concerned...this is just further proof that there is bad blood between the Obama's and the Clintin's and that Hillary's support for Obama is nothing more than a stunt for 2012.
I think there's bad blood between the Clintons and any Democrat who doesn't fall at their feet to lick their boots. Slick Willie's whole "Candidate X" speech showed that. Instead of using his fame and good will to try and unite the party, he has to get another dig in at the fellow who had the gall to beat his wife in a series of elections. Classy.
I think Hillary is definitely positioning herself for a 2012 run should McCain win in November. If Obama wins, he would get the Dem nomination again barring something totally unforeseen, and I don't know how relevant a nearly-70 Hillary will be in 2016.
I thought it was pretty good. Much better then I expected. Realize that it was aimed at PUMAS not yourselves, and I believe it will bring a majority of them around to Obama come November.
Did anyone watch Schweitzer's speech? I thought it was amazing.
Hillary's speech was really good. It was not designed to convince Republicans like you guys who are criticizing her speech, it was designed to convince her supporters to vote for Obama. And it did a great job of that.
Well isn't that a bit unfair to all the leopards and jaguars out there? J/K :p.
Her speech did everything it needed to do - it showed her supporters that they need to stop being a bunch of whiny losers and get united to defeat their common opponent, McCain. It also showed enough support for Obama without making it look like she collapsed inward. She needed to preserve her own strength of character too, and yes she is setting herself for a potential 2012 pounce. As for her being almost 70 by then, McCain is 81 now, I don't think it's too much to say she could still have a shot if Obama fails this time.
And Schweitzer's speech was definitely something else, he's certainly a character with lots of personality, I think he was a good choice to speak.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Decks
Commander
Ezuri, Renegade Leader (Aggro/Combo - Favorite) Skullbriar, the Walking Grave (Sac and Grave hijinks) Azusa, Lost but Seeking (Landfall hijinks) Kaalia of the Vast (Heavily modded)
Ok...maybe I am poking the bear here but...was Slick Willie's speech a little color by numbers? I pictured him reading a paper with bullets on it so he would make sure to cover all the weak spots that people pointed out from Hillary's speech.
Also...the chick that was crying at the end of the speech made me giggle.
You know, I've always found that "elitist" stuff just a little sketchy. Don't we want an elite person serving in the White House? I would rather have an elitist running things than my next door neighbor. They became elite in the field of politics for a reason. Whether or not we want to admit it, most politicians know what they're doing.
While I agree that good foreign policy decisions should be way up there on the list of things that one requires of a president, I wouldn't want to vote for someone based solely on that. Personally, I'd rather have a president who can finally shift their focus to domestic problems, such as the economy.
Eh, I never put much stock into the reaction of polls to the conventions. I think that the biggest test that undecided people should focus on is how each person fares during the debates that they have against one another. And debates that actually have substance. That's the main reason why I supported Obama during the democratic primaries: Remember the one democratic debate (I think it was sometime in April or something), when the "moderators" spent close to 45 minutes or so talking about flag pins and other irrelevant topics? Once a policy question was raised, Obama was like, "Finally! A relevant question!" Probably not how it really happened. That's just how my brain remembers it.
I think that it would be a bit naive to think that any potential president, Democrat or Republican, wouldn't plan to spend a whole mess of money on something. The key issue is what they plan to spend that mess of money on. Both Obama and McCain talk about alternative energy (well, McCain less so, what with wanting to expand offshore drilling and all); that's gonna take a lot of money. And that's just one example.
Many thanks to:
Sig: CharlieD at Limited Edition Signatures
Avvy: XenoNinja at HotP Studios
Exactly, many people think Obama is going to bring the troops home, cut taxes, and have a surplus in the budget. It's just not true. I realize that everyone here (on this thread) isn't thinking in that fashion, but many are.
First off, both canidates want to expand offshore drilling. The big difference between the two is that Obama has a primary focus on new alternative fuel technologies (like wind power by his claims), while McCain wants to open up more Nuclear power plants accross the country (which is a great thing). Both energy plans are extremely costly, but have other benefits (such as the out of control rate of blackouts accross the country).
That aside, the ony big difference in spending is on social programs. People are claiming the Obama wants to pull out of Iraq, but he wants a speedy withdrawl out of Iraq and into Afganistan. That is going to be extremely, extremely costly. McCain is going to focus on Iraq over Afganistan, also extremely, extremely costly. Both have expensive tax reform and energy plans, and are promising the moon to the unemployed.
I think the weakness of both canidates is in an area I hoped to see improvement. They both want to spend waaay too much, and the country needs to cut costs. The next four years of either canidate is just going to be hell, and they will probably only last a single term either way.
To say obama wants to expand offshore drilling is misleading of his actual views. He just recognizes that in order to get what he wants (alternative fuel sources), he needs to make some compromises in a senate which barely has a majority of democrats.
Honestly, defecit spending is not that bad if done properly and applied to the right areas. Look at the great depression, defecit spending was one of the tools FDR used to build confidance in the economy again and get people jobs.
Somewhat true. It's more a reflection of Obama backing out of previous beliefs. He wants the alternative fuels, but it was brought to his attention that alternative fuel research does nothing for the current need. This is his compromise.
Honestly, defecit spending is not that bad if done properly and applied to the right areas. Look at the great depression, defecit spending was one of the tools FDR used to build confidance in the economy again and get people jobs.
Yeah, but neither canidate if FDR, and we will not be seeing any major turnarounds in the next few years. Everything was entirely different back then, and the red tape is infinately longer now than it was back then. Also, the economic stimulus of both canidates are things that sound nice, but will have no big impact.
Just to clear something up, there is a difference between Elite and Elitist. Being elite is preferable - more experienced, more knowledgeable, wiser, better connected, etc.
Being Elitist means thinking you are better simply because of your status or perceived abilities and that you can no longer relate to those of lower status. Both of these candidates are considered Elite to any of us in the realm of politics, but the argument of Elitism has to do with how they relate to Joe-Blow-You-And-Me.
Commander
Ezuri, Renegade Leader (Aggro/Combo - Favorite)
Skullbriar, the Walking Grave (Sac and Grave hijinks)
Azusa, Lost but Seeking (Landfall hijinks)
Kaalia of the Vast (Heavily modded)
Standard
Waiting for Innistrad...
Extended
Hah!
Modern
Living End Cascade (RGB)
Legacy
Burn
Vintage
None
Casual
WB Aggro-Control
Green Stompy
Pink Floyd (UWr Wall Control)
Lunch Box (Fatty ramp)
D-Bag (White Control)
Level 13 Task Mage
First off, these figures are the only ones I have ever seen thrown around, period. I have yet to see anyone say McCain's plan doesn't put us more into debt. I at least give sources.
Second, I already mentioned it dealt with taxes, not spending.
It is McCain NOT Obama who claims to balance the budget (Sources are fun), furthermore it is the republicans who claim to be small government and low spending, not the democrats. Far more think McCain will balance the budget, its a claim he has been making a lot. Your beef should be on McCain, not Obama here.
More Sources:
Here
That should be enough
- Enslaught
So, I continue to talk about spending... and you counter with tax plans. You're right Obama's tax plan is cheaper. At first glance I thought it was on spending.
OK.... so I was saying both candidates are going to spend irresponsibly, and I don't think either have good fiscal plans, and you criticize me for not saying McCain claims he will balance the budget when it's obvious he can.
And I disagree with you. People think McCain will spend more because he plans on spending a lot of money on the Iraq war, and think that Obama's "responsible governmental spending" means he will balance the budget. I know you are hardcore for Obama, but I'm not a particular fan of either. I also never claimed to be, there's just more arguements made for Obama that irks me.
No one here tried to claim McCain would balance the budget. And also, republicans and democrats are both big government at this point. I have no ties to either parties, and have voted straight democratic for the past few years.
What did everyone think of Hillary Clinton's speech? Were you convinced? I know I wasn't. Check this out. It pretty much sums up my thoughts so far. Then again...I am a McCain fan and a devoted Republican...so I guess my opinion doesn't matter.
[EDH] Ob Nixilis the Fallen
That was about the same thoughts I had too. It's unfair to say Hillary did a great job, though. She had to in order to be convincing at all. She had to be preparing this speech with her staff since june. All in all, Obama is slowly loosing the luster he had with the media and with the public. He has to do something drastic.
Speaking of which. The republicans have stumbled upon a much stronger link between Ayers and Obama (can't remember all they said off the top of my head). The add is over the top, and yet will probably strike home.
The ad that the Obama campaign and others claim violates the McCain-Feingold act?
The Obama-Ayers is blown up much more than it deserves to be. Association does not equal subscription.
[card=Jace Beleren]Jace[/card] = Jace
Magic CompRules
Scry Rollover Popups for Google Chrome
The first rule of Cursecatcher is, You do not talk about Cursecatcher.
[EDH] Ob Nixilis the Fallen
Technically it doesn't, although it is right on the border.
You're right, but association is association, and Obama has that red flag. He's already tried the denial of association route, and that bought him enough time until now. He's had, and will continue to have, trouble explaining that concept to voters. Especially when his message is strongly founded on his associations as a politician.
Depending on the level of association. Do I quit the PTA because a convicted thief is also on the PTA? If the guy no longer steals and has ideas about how to make the school better why does my character get impugned?
Very true. Ha ha.
[card=Jace Beleren]Jace[/card] = Jace
Magic CompRules
Scry Rollover Popups for Google Chrome
The first rule of Cursecatcher is, You do not talk about Cursecatcher.
I highly disagree. Clinton couldn't have done a better job. She said she supported Barack Obama, and then listed reasons why. Healthcare was the biggest, followed by economical reasons like raising minimum wage and sending less jobs over seas. She also mentioned the importance of pulling out of iraq and providing health care for our veterans.
She wont persuade all of her former supporters (some of them are still bitter and irrational) but I think she did more enough to convince majority of them.
You wouldn't have to, the guy would probably be kicked out the first time a bake sale register was short.
Also, Ayers not only still thinks he is right, he thinks they didn't go nearly far enough. It'd be closer to your analogy if the theif was caught while you knew him on the PTA, and you not only stayed friends with him, you had no problem that he stole from you employer. The you got angry because your employer finds it shady you still talk with him.
Obama has a pretty strong personal connection with the guy, and ignoring that would be a mistake by his campaign.
He's entitled to his opinion, no matter how wrong and deranged it might be. EDIT: What I mean is Ayers position cannot be automatically subscribed to Obama.
Why do you assume Obama and Ayers are friends? Serving on a board with someone and going to meetings with them does not automatically constitute friendship.
This is the assertion I don't get. What strong personal connection?
[card=Jace Beleren]Jace[/card] = Jace
Magic CompRules
Scry Rollover Popups for Google Chrome
The first rule of Cursecatcher is, You do not talk about Cursecatcher.
When they served on the board together, they were known for teaming up together to present new ideas. It wasn't like they just saw each other at opposite ends of the table and nodded to each other once a week. They had a working relationship.
A working relationship is still considered a fairly strong personal connection. No, it doesn't mean he agrees with the man, but it's not like Obama didn't know his future goal. If he felt that strongly for his political goals, then he wouldn't work so closely with him unless he had a personal reason to. It's not like Obama needed the support.
*EDIT*
I'm not trying to say Obama agrees with the man. Nor do I think it should be a reason not to vote for him. I'm just saying he has a personal relationship with a red flag in the matters of national security. It's going to be an issue for him. Why else would he be fighting the commercial itself, and not the message?
She talked about herself. No surprise there.
She talked about voting for Obama to defeat McCain. Well, of course.
She made no actual endorsement of Obama otherwise. No 'He's ready'. No 'He could be a great commander in chief.' No 'He's ready for the 3AM call.' Nada. She basically made no attempt at all to address any of the reservations her supporters cite as reasons not to support him.
That's what some of us saw anyway..
Bill isn't even attending O's stadium speech.
Fully-powered 600-Card "Dream Cube" https://cubecobra.com/cube/list/dreamcube
450-Card "Artificer's Cube" https://cubecobra.com/cube/list/artificer
Cubing in Indianapolis...send me a PM!!
Seeming that they didn't like each other before the primary season even began it's not really a surprise.
[EDH] Ob Nixilis the Fallen
I think there's bad blood between the Clintons and any Democrat who doesn't fall at their feet to lick their boots. Slick Willie's whole "Candidate X" speech showed that. Instead of using his fame and good will to try and unite the party, he has to get another dig in at the fellow who had the gall to beat his wife in a series of elections. Classy.
I think Hillary is definitely positioning herself for a 2012 run should McCain win in November. If Obama wins, he would get the Dem nomination again barring something totally unforeseen, and I don't know how relevant a nearly-70 Hillary will be in 2016.
My Eternal Cube on CubeTutor| |My Reject Rare Cube on CubeTutor| |My Peasant Cube on CubeTutor
I used to write for MTGS, including Cranial Insertion and cube articles. Good on you if you can find those after the upgrade.
I thought it was pretty good. Much better then I expected. Realize that it was aimed at PUMAS not yourselves, and I believe it will bring a majority of them around to Obama come November.
Did anyone watch Schweitzer's speech? I thought it was amazing.
- Enslaught
Well isn't that a bit unfair to all the leopards and jaguars out there? J/K :p.
Her speech did everything it needed to do - it showed her supporters that they need to stop being a bunch of whiny losers and get united to defeat their common opponent, McCain. It also showed enough support for Obama without making it look like she collapsed inward. She needed to preserve her own strength of character too, and yes she is setting herself for a potential 2012 pounce. As for her being almost 70 by then, McCain is 81 now, I don't think it's too much to say she could still have a shot if Obama fails this time.
And Schweitzer's speech was definitely something else, he's certainly a character with lots of personality, I think he was a good choice to speak.
Commander
Ezuri, Renegade Leader (Aggro/Combo - Favorite)
Skullbriar, the Walking Grave (Sac and Grave hijinks)
Azusa, Lost but Seeking (Landfall hijinks)
Kaalia of the Vast (Heavily modded)
Standard
Waiting for Innistrad...
Extended
Hah!
Modern
Living End Cascade (RGB)
Legacy
Burn
Vintage
None
Casual
WB Aggro-Control
Green Stompy
Pink Floyd (UWr Wall Control)
Lunch Box (Fatty ramp)
D-Bag (White Control)
Level 13 Task Mage
Also...the chick that was crying at the end of the speech made me giggle.
[EDH] Ob Nixilis the Fallen