Official Campaign 2008 Hot Stove Thread

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
BonoVoxSupastar said:


But he hasn't said anything about leaving acting, in fact there is talk that he has roles lined up. Others have taken a hard stance that they will not act again, or at least until they are out of office. He's still holding on for a back up plan(which he should).

I listed his problems.
Click to expand...

Imdb.com shows he has no upcoming acting roles.

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000669/

Arnold didn't vow to give up acting and he won.
 
Last edited:
Irvine511 said:




this tells me he was a Republican Senator.

there are 50 of them, and most aren't running for president.

what has he done? what foreign experience does he have?
Click to expand...

What more did he have to do except establish himself as a solid Republican?

What foreign experience do Hillary or Obama have? Romney or Rudy?
 
MaxFisher said:


Arnold didn't vow to give up acting and he won.
Click to expand...

Arnold did make a big statement that he would give acting during his term, in fact he turned down some "big roles" according to his statement.
 
MaxFisher said:


What more did he have to do except establish himself as a solid Republican?
Click to expand...

If that's all it takes for you, then by all means vote for him. I would hope it takes more for a president, but given the general voting populace I know it's hard to ask for more.
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:


If that's all it takes for you, then by all means vote for him. I would hope it takes more for a president, but given the general voting populace I know it's hard to ask for more.
Click to expand...
:

:rolleyes:

Every candidate, Dem and Rep at this point is toeing their party line and appealing to their base. The next year of campaigning will show who has "it" and who doesn't.
 
Last edited:
MaxFisher said:
:

:rolleyes:

Every candidate, Dem and Rep at this point is toeing their party line and appealing to their base. The next year of campaigning will show who has "it" and who doesn't.
Click to expand...

No my point is that some of these canidates have actually tried introducing legislature making changes, but not him...

Sorry you can't see that.
 
MaxFisher said:


What more did he have to do except establish himself as a solid Republican?

What foreign experience do Hillary or Obama have? Romney or Rudy?
Click to expand...



well, Richardson has it in droves, but Hillary is on the Armed Services Committee

i do agree, though, "experience" isn't as important as good judgement and good advisors, something Bush lacks in droves. and it seems to me that Fred has about as much curiosity about the world as Bush, which is to say none. and i'd contrast this to Obama, who does strike me as the most thoughtful of all the candidates, almost too professorial.

also, none of the Dems are running as far left as all the Reps are running to the right. you haven't seen a single Dem backtrack on a previously held position -- with the big exception being the 2002 vote on the Iraq war -- in the way that Rudy, Mitt, and Fred are claiming that they were actually pro-life before they were pro-choice and are now pro-life again.
 
martha said:


Do you people ever actually think? You just said you'll support him, right after you said you don't know what he stands for as a presidential candidate. :|
Click to expand...

I posted a link that clearly shows he is a solid Republican. Since he hasn't announced yet, sure, I don't have a complete understanding of his platform. But I have no reason to believe it won't be in accordance with his voting record as a Senator.

"You people"-- I'd like to see the FYM reaction to gays or minorities being refered to this way.
 
MaxFisher said:


I posted a link that clearly shows he is a solid Republican. Since he hasn't announced yet, sure, I don't have a complete understanding of his platform. But I have no reason to believe it won't be in accordance with his voting record as a Senator.

"You people"-- I'd like to see the FYM reaction to gays or minorities being refered to this way.
Click to expand...

Perhaps "you people" was a bit strong. Perhaps. But I stand by the rest of what I said. Fred has no plans, no recommendations or solutions or proposals. He's only got his Bible so far.
 
martha said:


Perhaps "you people" was a bit strong. Perhaps. But I stand by the rest of what I said. Fred has no plans, no recommendations or solutions or proposals. He's only got his Bible so far.
Click to expand...

He hasn't announced yet so obviously he hasn't had a chance to outline his agenda.

When/where has he been invoking Christianity or the Bible?
 
Irvine511 said:





also, none of the Dems are running as far left as all the Reps are running to the right.
Click to expand...

Are you sure about that?

Irvine511 said:
you haven't seen a single Dem backtrack on a previously held position -- with the big exception being the 2002 vote on the Iraq war
Click to expand...

You say that like the war vote was a minor thing. I would say the war vote was a BIG, BIG exception. You're wrong though when you say that no candidate has backtracked. Remember Richardson getting flustered at that gay convention?
 
Irvine511 said:
if Fred becomes the nominee, i can't wait to see the Christian Right struggle to find a way to embrace all those "Hollywood Values."
Click to expand...

I love film and I see 60-70 new films a year. Do I think that generally Hollywood promotes a liberal agenda? Yes. But that doesn't mean I believe everyone associated with Hollywood shares those sentiments.
 
martha said:


My bad. I guess I was going by this:



I figured that's why you were going to support someone with no platform.
Click to expand...

Martha, it's not so black and white. Just because I'm a Christian doesn't mean I'll only support a Bible-thumping candidate. My point was that Thompson doesn't have to align himself with the Christian Right in order for me to support him.

I know it's easier for you to generalize me but please realize I can think outside my religion. I'd support a conservative/republican atheist in a heartbeat if I thought he/she was a better candidate. The health of my political party is more important to me than any candidates religious views.

Also, regarding your "no platform" comment. I look at Thompson's voting record and I look at what party he's going to attempt to appeal to and I put 2 and 2 together. I don't expect to be suprised when he outlines things next week.
 
Why is Thompson (three wives) more of a Christian than Romney (one wife)? Is being a Protestant more of a Christian than being a Mormon?

Since I'm a Catholic, which I assume also counts as Christian, I don't get the "he's a Christian" justification as a reason for voting for one candidate over the other. What's the real difference here?
 
silvrlvr said:

Since I'm a Catholic, which I assume also counts as Christian,
Click to expand...

Oh, don't be so sure. There have been people on FYM in the past who insisted the opposite was the case.
 
2861U2 said:


Are you sure about that?
Click to expand...



yes, i am sure about that. there's not a single position that i can see advanced by a major democratic candidate that they're going to have to backtrack on in the general election.



You say that like the war vote was a minor thing. I would say the war vote was a BIG, BIG exception. You're wrong though when you say that no candidate has backtracked. Remember Richardson getting flustered at that gay convention?
Click to expand...


well, i did use the words "big exception" so i hardly see how i said it like it was a minor thing.

that is HRC's big issue with the Democratic base, at this point, but notice that she still hasn't *apologized* for it, though she's admitted that the performance of the administration has made her regret the vote. she's never yet said that her vote was wrong. and that's a big political point -- if she had to pander and swing way Left, she'd have apologized. the fact that she hasn't done that demonstrates that she's running a national campagin, and not a turn-out-the-base campaign.

yes, Richardson did fuck up at the LOGO debate. it was noted. but there's a difference between misspeaking versus reversing a specific *position.*
 
martha said:


But wouldn't her support for the war make you like her even more?
Click to expand...

When she voted to go to war, I applauded her and every Democrat who voted that way. Needless to say, those sentiments have since disappeared.
 
can Republicans tell me why they've abandoned someone like McCain for someone as absolutely, positively substance-free as Fred Thompson.

just watch his first political ad.

it's like Diet Bush. "Freedom. Terror. Taxes Bad. Vote for me."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Phantom Dreamer
  • Locked
Justin Trudeau Neoliberal
Replies
0
Views
762
Phantom Dreamer
Phantom Dreamer
Axver
2014 New Zealand general election thread
Replies
27
Views
2K
MadForIt
MadForIt
N
All That You Can't Leave Behind/Beautiful Day 15th Anniversary Thread
Replies
21
Views
4K
Mrs. Garrison
Mrs. Garrison
N
The Way-Too-Early 2016 Speculation/Discussion Thread
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
LuckyNumber7
LuckyNumber7
Canadiens1131
On the US is a plutocracy beat: 80% of all Super-PAC money goes to pro-GOP groups
Replies
3
Views
702
anitram
anitram

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom