How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 The Presidential "Race"   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  ]
 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

The Presidential "Race"

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


0 posted 10-15-2008 08:00 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer


Ok, you can all let me have it if you want but it's time for someone to call this what it is....the presidential race ia all about just that....race.  How can a man with no experience be considered a viable presidential candidate? Race. How did Obama beat Hillary? Race. Obama got votes from 90% of blacks in certain states. 90%! Have the blacks in any one state EVER voted 90% for one candidate before? Have the WHITES in any state ever voted for any one candidate before? No. How could this happen? Easy...because Obama is a black man...period. Yes, of course, people will jump up and say "That's a racist remark!"  No, it's not. It's simply a factual remark that no one will acknowledge. Black leader like Jess Jackson and Al Sharpeton will tell you that race had nothing to do with 90% of blacks voting for Obama. Who are they trying to kid?

Recently some idiot at a republican rally shouted out some threatening remark about Obama and immediately the two black senators from New York jumped onto the headlines of the New York Times by claiming that the republican party is promoting racial hatred against Obama in their campaign. They are trying to incite the blacks by doing so. In Washing there are bumper stickers reading ABORT PALIN!. In Brooklyn there is a wall on a building where a graffiti artist has chalked a mural of a black man holding a gun to Palin's head. There is a porno movie coming out with a Sarah Palin look-alike in the starring role, complete with frameless glasses. Jackson and Sharpeton have nothing to say about that, neither does the New York Times, with the exception of the porno movie, for the tittilation factor. Can anyone imagine what would happen if bumper stickers reading ABORT OBAMA  came out? If there were murals of a white man holding a gun to Obama's head? If a porno movie with an Obama look-alike was produced? Every newspaper would have a field day. Every black leader would be going berzerk. There would be demonstrations in the streets.

True, these instances are not indicative of all Democrats who support Obama, the ones who will raise their hands and say, "Hey, we're not doing those things." No, they aren't - but they are not condemning them, either.

Obama is playing to the poor and the blacks because he knows that is his ride to the White House. That's why he is giving thousand dollar checks to 45% of the people who did not even pay taxes. That's why he talks about "distribution of wealth" - right out of the Marxist playbook. The poor want those checks. The poor want that "distribution" headed their way. They want their own Robin Hood taking from the rich to give to them.

I am neither a racist or a bigot but I can certainly see what's happening here and I'm sure many others can also. They just won't voice it. Want to hear from a few of the people who helped Obama defeat Hillary and who may propel him onto the White House?

http://www.bpmdeejays.com/upload/hs_sal_in_Harlem_100108.mp3

These will be the people who will make the difference and may elect our new president. Yes, there are whites and non-poor blacks who support Obama based on his "calls for change" or whatever requirements they feel he has, but not enough to carry him on their own They need the poor vote.

May God bless America. We're going to need it.
Sunshine
Administrator
Member Caelestus
since 06-25-99
Posts 67715
Listening to every heart


1 posted 10-15-2008 09:39 PM       View Profile for Sunshine   Email Sunshine   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Sunshine's Home Page   View IP for Sunshine

We're going to need some of that insightfulness, Mike. I've seen the same things you have, and that's by flipping on to all channels, listening to what I normally wouldn't listen [including those who think they know all] and I've been trying to come to my own conclusions.

I see a whole lot of fish-flopping going on.

I hope people DO think about this campaign; I hope that ALL of the facts come out [as I am hearing on the TV right now] because if they're going to name their past allegiances, then you know the media on both sides are going to investigate.

You know what I fear? That should either man win, there's going to be such a repercussion that might even rival the Civil War.

  
Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


2 posted 10-15-2008 11:45 PM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

Um, Jesse Jackson ran 20 years ago. Why didn't he win?

To deny that Obama is black or to pretend that he's not or that it helps him in some places and with some people and hurts him in others and with others is insane.

I'm trying to figure out how one can then argue that it is because he's black that he's doing pretty well right now.

I guess you didn't watch the debate.
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


3 posted 10-16-2008 12:19 AM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
Obama is playing to the poor and the blacks because he knows that is his ride to the White House.

Gee, I wonder why no one else ever thought of doing that?

LOL. Mike, only a die-hard Republican would complain that the Democrats are winning because of . . . shudder . . . the traditional Democratic platform.

As Brad implied, Obama's race is always going to be an issue to some people. And you can bet that McCain's race is an issue to others. That's pretty much the very definition of racism.


Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


4 posted 10-16-2008 12:34 AM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

Black vote: presidential elections since 1964

1964: Johnson 94%

1968: Humphrey 94%

1972: ?

1976: Carter 82%

1980: Carter 82%

1984: ?

1988: ?

1992: Clinton 83%

1996: Clinton 84 %

2000: Gore 90%

2004: Kerry: 88%

2008: ?


Sorry, ran out of time. I'll try to finish this tomorrow. Or if somebody has an easier way to get the breakdown, please do so. I was using Wikipedia.

Added note: I can't find the rest of the numbers, but I hope it's clear by now that there's nothing startling about the black vote hitting 90% for Obama.
oceanvu2
Senior Member
since 02-24-2007
Posts 1007
Santa Monica, California, USA


5 posted 10-16-2008 01:13 AM       View Profile for oceanvu2   Email oceanvu2   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for oceanvu2

Aw, c'mon Mike!  You know we disagree on somethings and agree on others, but this post seems a little over the top.

Is it that much different than saying the Kennedy election was all about playing to the Catholic vote, the largest single denomination in the country?  And that was his ticket to the White House?  

Sure, the question of "race" confronts us in this election, but it's hardly the major determining factor.  If every single registered African American voter in the country voted for Obama, Obama would lose.

If every single registered voter who earns a poverty level, just above the poverty level, or nothing at all, Obama would lose.  African Americans and marginal earners are often referred to as "minorities," because they are in the minority.  Put both groups together and even assuming there is no overlapping, Obama would lose, because both groups together still constitute a minority.

Here is, perhaps, the flip side of the post's contention:  John McCain will lose the election because his positions don't appeal to the majority of registered voters. Some very "pale" Registered American Voters must be agreeing with Obama and disagreeing with McCain. They seem to see something in Obama which the post doesn't, and not see something in McCain which the post does.

There's a flip side to all this, too.  If every single registered racial bigot in America voted for McCain, McCain would lose, because race hating bigots are a minority too.

Whether or not Obama wins the election, and most indications are that he will, it's a sign of amazing social progress that a black, or mixed race man was nominated by his party to be their Presidential candidate.

This isn't whomping on you Mike, its womping on the basic premises of the post, that the election is race-based, and God will have to help America when he wins.  A little divine intervention might be useful in helping us out of the plethora of pickles the current administration has gotten us into.

Here's a potentially scary thought:  By 2050 or so, the largest single ethnic group of legal citizens in the US will be of Hispanic heritage.  Whatever will we do then?  Move to Costa Rica?

Obama will be elected because he is a populist, and populists tend to be popular.

McCain will lose the election because he cannot pull together a large enough conservative coalition aligned with his views.

I can't exactly say "you heard it here first," but apparently a lot of people don't like what they are hearing.  The only suggestion I have is that they get over it, get on with it, and aid and encourage all who hold elective offices do the best jobs they possibly can.  

I think most citizens try to do that anyway, not that all politicians listen.  Tactfully, I refrain from mentioning the disgraceful "B" word, but he's only got a few months left to do his usual worst.  

And phooey on ALL the pols who chose to give away 700 billion to a bunch of greedy scoundrels provided they could add a little pork for the folks back home.

So there!

Best, Jimbeaux  


moonbeam
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 12-24-2005
Posts 2038


6 posted 10-16-2008 08:26 AM       View Profile for moonbeam   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for moonbeam



quote:
That should either man win, there's going to be such a repercussion that might even rival the Civil War.

Uh, well Karilea you best reconcile yourself to Civil War then, because it seems reasonably certain that one or the other is gonna win!

Wow Mike, a bit of the desperation of impending defeat creeping into that rant?  
Sunshine
Administrator
Member Caelestus
since 06-25-99
Posts 67715
Listening to every heart


7 posted 10-16-2008 11:14 AM       View Profile for Sunshine   Email Sunshine   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Sunshine's Home Page   View IP for Sunshine

MB...it's not over yet, and anything can happen...even at the 11th hour.
moonbeam
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 12-24-2005
Posts 2038


8 posted 10-16-2008 01:06 PM       View Profile for moonbeam   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for moonbeam

Better pray for a tie then Karilea.
oceanvu2
Senior Member
since 02-24-2007
Posts 1007
Santa Monica, California, USA


9 posted 10-16-2008 01:30 PM       View Profile for oceanvu2   Email oceanvu2   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for oceanvu2

Hi Brad -- One reason Jesse Jackson didn't win the election was because he ran as a "Third Party" candidate.  Even though we occasionally elect Independent's to offices as high as the House and Senate, I don't think an Independent has ever been elected President.  Didn't work for Ralph Nader, or, if memory serves, Teddy Roosevelt.

Before Roosevelt ran on the Bull Moose ticket, he was President of US following the assasination of McKinley, was reelected to a second term, and picked up a Nobel Prize somewhere along the way.  He was pretty mainstream.  But, as a Bull Moose, his candidacy was dead in the water.

When Jesse Jackson was running, a pollster came to my door and asked whom I thought I would vote for for President.  I said Jesse Jackson.  Her response was:  "Who?"  His name wasn't even on the list.

I thought that was both funny and sad at the same time.

Best, Jimbeaux
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


10 posted 10-16-2008 02:18 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


Iím with you Mike, I think itís disgusting that people are allowed to vote for the candidate of their choice, allowing people to make their own decisions is a recipe for disaster if you ask me. Under such a system itís not surprising that some people make the wrong choice.

Thereís one silver lining though, the majority always pick the winner in the end.

Nan
Administrator
Member Seraphic
since 05-20-99
Posts 24426
Cape Cod Massachusetts USA


11 posted 10-16-2008 04:54 PM       View Profile for Nan   Email Nan   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Nan's Home Page   View IP for Nan

Well, Grinch - that's why we have the Electoral College - to avoid those silly "popular vote" blunders.  Didn't we bring that here from England?

Mistletoe Angel
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 5 Tours
Member Empyrean
since 12-17-2000
Posts 34089
City of Roses


12 posted 10-16-2008 04:59 PM       View Profile for Mistletoe Angel   Email Mistletoe Angel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Mistletoe Angel's Home Page   View IP for Mistletoe Angel

In case you haven't noticed, with all due respect, those with lower incomes in all recent election cycles have been far more likely to vote Democratic than those with higher incomes. So it's no new development.

The real story here is not which traditionally Democratic-leaning factions Obama is doing well among, it's which traditionally Republican-leaning factions are gravitating towards Obama. Libertarians have been abandoning the GOP in droves and most have become registered Independents. Many more Americans 65 years and older are pulling for Obama: a demographic historically heavily GOP-leaning. Those without a high school education are pulling more for Obama than for any other recent Democratic nominee. Obama is even making inroads among Christian evangelicals in some regions. Prominent conservative voices like Christopher Buckley are even announcing their endorsements of Obama, and it appears George Will is moving in that direction as well.

This is the bigger story here I believe.

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton


"If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other"

Mother Teresa
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


13 posted 10-16-2008 05:30 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


quote:
Didn't we bring that here from England?


Not really - the closest thing to the American electoral college over here would be how the labour party selects itís leader. Though we donít have proportional representation either the two systems are fundamentally different.

Oddly the American system is closer to the Roman Catholic church of Cardinals selecting a pope.
rwood
Member Elite
since 02-29-2000
Posts 3797
Tennessee


14 posted 10-16-2008 05:53 PM       View Profile for rwood   Email rwood   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for rwood

Ha. And I thought I was the only one in the world who thought our prez election was similar to the pope vote.

Thanks, Grinch.
Mistletoe Angel
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 5 Tours
Member Empyrean
since 12-17-2000
Posts 34089
City of Roses


15 posted 10-16-2008 06:59 PM       View Profile for Mistletoe Angel   Email Mistletoe Angel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Mistletoe Angel's Home Page   View IP for Mistletoe Angel

Great observation, Grinch! I would tend to agree with that!  

If only Joe The Plumber had a chance! hey everyone, let's write his name in on the ballots and make him president!  

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton


"If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other"

Mother Teresa
Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


16 posted 10-16-2008 07:54 PM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

Mike,

Given that you don't really back up your claim, you argue against progressive policies, not blackness. This is a good thing because if Obama loses it could and would be used to explain losing: "Obama lost because he's black.". I don't think you would buy that either.


quote:
Recently some idiot at a republican rally shouted out some threatening remark about Obama and immediately the two black senators from New York jumped onto the headlines of the New York Times by claiming that the republican party is promoting racial hatred against Obama in their campaign. They are trying to incite the blacks by doing so. In Washing there are bumper stickers reading ABORT PALIN!. In Brooklyn there is a wall on a building where a graffiti artist has chalked a mural of a black man holding a gun to Palin's head. There is a porno movie coming out with a Sarah Palin look-alike in the starring role, complete with frameless glasses. Jackson and Sharpeton have nothing to say about that, neither does the New York Times, with the exception of the porno movie, for the tittilation factor. Can anyone imagine what would happen if bumper stickers reading ABORT OBAMA  came out? If there were murals of a white man holding a gun to Obama's head? If a porno movie with an Obama look-alike was produced? Every newspaper would have a field day. Every black leader would be going berzerk. There would be demonstrations in the streets.

True, these instances are not indicative of all Democrats who support Obama, the ones who will raise their hands and say, "Hey, we're not doing those things." No, they aren't - but they are not condemning them, either.


I condemn them. I condemn all of them.

You know, I only hold back condemnation for humor, and none of the above is funny.

Mike,

The one other thing, I guess, is that Marxist playbook idea. The [re]distribution of wealth is not Karl. In fact, he called it 'the same old crap'! I admit, I do find it funny when people call Obama a socialist or a Marxist. It's like calling Bush a genius (I know, I know, cheap shot!).

quote:
May God bless America. We're going to need it.


On this, we can all agree--I hope.

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


17 posted 10-16-2008 08:45 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Grinch, I'll believe that when I see smoke coming out of the White House chimney on November 4th!

Ron - and the rest of you - I don't fault Obama for courting the poor vote. In a country of "one person - one vote", a poor vote carries as much weight as a rich one, and everyone knows that are a heck of a lot more poor ones than other ones. That's how Chavez in Venezuela came into power. That's how Hitler came into power (no, I am not likening Obama to Hitler). Targeting the poor has always been a tactic in elections.

Nor am I blaming the poor or the  black race. He is speaking to them. He is telling them that he will take care of them. He's going to take money from those evil rich people and give it to them. He is also a hero to them - finally, one of their own steps away from the presidency. That brings out a lot of pride for sure. So what if many don't know what he stands for? So what if some don't even know who his vice-presidential candidate is (as evidenced by the provided link). He is one of them and he will take care of them...

So who am I pointing a finger at then? YOU! (and when I say you, i'm saying it collectively, not to one specific person). You are watching the dog and pony show Obama is putting on for the poor and you are buying into it or at least pretending it isn't what it is. Those of you who know know that Obama's tax plan will affect the middle class. There's no way it cannot. You know that this "redistribution of wealth" he is advocating is a  doctrine that America would never survive. You know that he is saying these things only to get the poor and some of the middle class votes and you still go along with it. You know that he has no experience which would qualify him and you disregard it. You know that Acorn is a piece of garbage organization which Obama has represented, worked for and given hundreds of thousands to..and you disregard it. Even many black educators have come out against him and you disregard it, also. The poor will vote for him because, in the wealth distribution plan he represents, they are all on the receiving end. What's your excuse? Your dislike or hatred of Bush? Your belief that McCain wouldn't be any better? Obama claims he will lower the cost of everyone's health care by $2,000.00. He can't and you know it. Not one of you will even acknowledge that the personal attacks on Sarah Palin are wrong. You just disregard them.

Obama has a reason for making the race racial. The poor have a reason to go along with him. What's yours?
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


18 posted 10-16-2008 08:49 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Just saw your comment, Brad. Thank you for the condemnation of the Palin tactics. At least there is one


...and, if Obama loses, the cry WILL be that it's because he's black. You can count on that.
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


19 posted 10-16-2008 08:53 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi



.


Mike

You're wrong.
It's not the black
but the white guilt vote
that is critical


.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


20 posted 10-17-2008 01:49 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



Dear Mike,

           Tax cuts for the wealthy and for the corporations are income redistribution as well, Mike.  That's money that should have gone to running the government.  The term for this is "corporate welfare."  Over the past eight years money has been massively be reassigned upward.

     I don't believe that you actually have anything against the actual process, only against the possibility that the money might go to people who are in desperate need of it to keep from starving.  The notion that Obama might be a Marxist is one that needs to be proven, and frankly, all you've done is called him the name.  Is Bush a Marxist?  He's certainly moved an enormous amount of wealth around, redistributing it into the hands of the already wealthy, who have not, insofar as I can tell, managed to share it with those less fortunate than they.

     That's what Republican economic theory says is supposed to happen, right?

     The Republicans may still win the election, Mike.  Never underestimate the power of Democrats to self destruct at the last minute.  But Obama isn't likely to win because he's black.  The Bradly effect is working against him.  Fewer whites will vote for him than say they will simply because they're embarrassed to say they're not going to vote for a black guy in public.  If he wins, the margin will be slimmer than I, for one, hope.  

     I think that Obama's a very good candidate.  But I think that the reason he's likely to win is because of what the last eight years have done to the country.  Just about everything that could have been done wrong, was done wrong.  Almost every stupid governmental policy that could have been enacted was enacted and was not only enacted but crowed about by the party in power.

     Even the last two years, when the democrats had a majority (though not enough of a majority to govern on its own, not without being blocked by the republican minority) and screwed up their use of the majority, I think that the public had a fairly clear idea of what was going on.  I'm curious now to see if I'm right, and if the democrats will get the presidency and a majority in both houses.  I'd like to think so.  We can't take another four years even remotely like the past eight.  I'm not sure the world can.

Best to you, Mike,

Bob Kaven
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


21 posted 10-17-2008 02:04 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Well, Bob, democrats said give us the majority and watch our smoke. Now the excuse seems to be the majority wasn't big enough. That could fly if they had really tried but I've seen no evidence of that, either.

You may wish to see a Democratic White House along with a Democratic congress but I don't, first of all because I don't trust the likes of Pelosi, Boxer, Mirtha, Reed, Frank, etc etc but also because it would throw the checks and balances out of the window. That's a different situation.

As far as Bush channeling money to the rich, I have no idea what that means. To compare whatever you are referring to to taking money from the middle class, the people trying to better their lives, working to improve their lot in life, building small businesses, hiring people and giving that money to people who don't work, with their hands out, saying "Where's mine?" is not a good step. Punishing innovation and hard work is never a good policy.

As far as people rebelling against the past eight years, we are in agreement. Is that fair to McCain? I don't know. Would McCain be a good president? I don't know. What I DO know, based on what I consider factual and what Obama has said, is that Obama would be a bad one. Give him a Democratic congress and the trouble is doubled.
Mistletoe Angel
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 5 Tours
Member Empyrean
since 12-17-2000
Posts 34089
City of Roses


22 posted 10-17-2008 02:56 AM       View Profile for Mistletoe Angel   Email Mistletoe Angel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Mistletoe Angel's Home Page   View IP for Mistletoe Angel

I advise everyone to look at the exit polls in the last twenty years. A simple glance at the income results shows that those who make less than $50,000 a year have regularly been more likely too back the Democratic nominee than those who make more than $200,000 a year. Thus, while I don't believe either party adequately addresses the needs of the poor earnestly, it appears more are convinced the Democratic Party speaks more to their interests than the GOP does.

And what do you expect when your campaign's health care plan architect, John Goodman, says on August 28th that there are no uninsured Americans? What do you expect when the candidate of the rivaling party says repeatedly that our economic problems are "psychological" more than anything and your top economic advisor, Phil Gramm, who played a role himself in the subprime meltdown during his Senate career, adds that we're "a nation of whiners"? What do you expect when the candidate of the rivaling party admits himself, in his own words to the Boston Globe late last year, that the "issue of economics is not something I've understood as well as I should." What do you expect when the candidate of the rivaling party says out loud he is going to suspend his campaign during economic turmoil amidst a major presidential campaign? What do you expect when the candidate of the rivaling party said himself very recently that, if they kept talking about the economy, they lose, and instead resort to attacking their opponent incessantly and, when they do talk about the issues that matter to voters, much more time is still dedicated to attacks than the details of their proposals?

Much the reason many voters with lower incomes are flocking to the Democrat this cycle is because they sense the GOP has no ideas right now. They see McCain and the Republican National Committee's interests are much more in attacking their opponents than offering ideas. They're flocking to the Democrat NOT because they really like the Democratic Party, but largely as a repudiation of the GOP's leadership and behavior, along with considerable fractions of constituencies they have relied on for the past thirty years.

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton


"If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other"

Mother Teresa
Mistletoe Angel
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 5 Tours
Member Empyrean
since 12-17-2000
Posts 34089
City of Roses


23 posted 10-17-2008 12:00 PM       View Profile for Mistletoe Angel   Email Mistletoe Angel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Mistletoe Angel's Home Page   View IP for Mistletoe Angel

A word of helpful advice to GOP congressional/senatorial candidates in 2010 and the GOP presidential nominee in 2012: talk about issues that matter to everyday Americans more rather than obsessive-compulsively cling to a couple issues for the purpose of attacking your opinion. And watching less Fox News Channel will help as a start.

A compilation of closed caption data reviewed since Sunday reveals that the Fox News Channel has mentioned "ACORN" or "Ayers" a total of 1,231 times, compared to 963 references to "economy" or "middle class".

In comparison, CNN mentioned the economy and "middle-class" a combined 1117 times in that same time-frame, while mentioning "ACORN" and "Ayers" a combined 391 times, with MSNBC mentioning "economy" and "middle-class" 1202 times since Sunday, compared to a combined 417 times for "ACORN" and "Ayers".

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton


"If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other"

Mother Teresa
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


24 posted 10-17-2008 02:13 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Thank you, Noah, for that report on the Clinton News Network and PMSNBC.

Is there  any wonder why FOX is the most watched news program in the country??
 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> The Presidential "Race"   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors