Who are you planning on voting for?

[Irvine511]

i am continually amazed at how sentimental conservativism has become. what a long, long way from Goldwater, and even Reagan.

 

[CTU2fan]

^ They got tired of liberals saying they don't care...

 

[Irvine511]

and since we're talking about negatives, and how people should just give up and walk away if someone doesn't like them, it's intersting to find Mitt Romney at a negative rating of 44%, even higher than HRC.

it seems that some in his own party won't vote for him no matter the circumstance.

probably due to religious bigotry.

 

[diamond]

The point though Mitt is *not* the front runner, and most Republicans know that Mitt won't get nomination.

dbs

 

[redhotswami]

The point though Mitt is *not* the front runner, and most Republicans know that Mitt won't get nomination.

dbs

i thought he was. who is the republican front runner?

 

[UberBeaver]

Rudy, no?

 

[diamond]

i thought he was. who is the republican front runner?

Only in a few states, but *not* nationally.

dbs

 

[diamond]

Rudy, no?

Correct.
Then Fred Thompson, then Mitt and McCain.

dbs

 

[redhotswami]

thanks for the clarification beav & diamond.


beav & diamond

 

[2861U2]

it's intersting to find Mitt Romney at a negative rating of 44%, even higher than HRC.

I wouldnt take that poll real seriously. According to them, not a single candidate is remotely likable. Although, who knows, maybe that's the case right now.

 

[diamond]

thanks for the clarification beav & diamond.


beav & diamond

You're welcome.



Polling Data Averages:

Giuliani 28.2
Thompson: 17.0
Mitt 12.7
McCain: 12.7
Ginrich 8.5




Overall Nationally Rudy leads by +11.2

Rasmussen 08/16 - 08/19 Giuliani +7.0

Gallup 08/13 - 08/16 Giuliani +13.0

Quinnipiac 08/07 - 08/13 Giuliani +13.0

American Res. Group 08/09 - 08/11 Giuliani +11.0

CNN 08/06 - 08/08 Giuliani +8.0

Cook/RT Strategies -Giuliani +10.0


dbs

 

[phanan]

I wouldnt take that poll real seriously. According to them, not a single candidate is remotely likable. Although, who knows, maybe that's the case right now.

I don't get it. You wouldn't take this Rasmussen poll seriously, but in the Hot Stove thread, you post and link another Rasmussen poll regarding HRC's disapproval rating, so I'm assuming you take that one seriously.

?

 

[Angela Harlem]

It's rather simple. If a poll supports claims you make, then it's more believable. If it makes claims you just cannot see (forest for the trees, etc), then it cannot be believed.

 

[U2DMfan]

Re: Is Edwards phony?

Well perhaps this would be a pertinent article, this journalist assigned to cover Edwards shares his observations on Edwards and Dean and how they contrast:

Why I see John Edwards as a big phony

By BRAD WARTHEN - Editorial Page Editor

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1626498,00.html

from Bob Shrum's book
an excerpt from the linked article above:

Kerry talked with several potential picks, including Gephardt and Edwards. He was comfortable after his conversations with Gephardt, but even queasier about Edwards after they met. Edwards had told Kerry he was going to share a story with him that he'd never told anyone else—that after his son Wade had been killed, he climbed onto the slab at the funeral home, laid there and hugged his body, and promised that he'd do all he could to make life better for people, to live up to Wade's ideals of service. Kerry was stunned, not moved, because, as he told me later, Edwards had recounted the same exact story to him, almost in the exact same words, a year or two before—and with the same preface, that he'd never shared the memory with anyone else.

Kerry said he found it chilling, and he decided he couldn't pick Edwards unless he met with him again. When they did, Kerry tried to get a better personal feel for his potential number two; as rivals for national office since 2000, shortly after Edwards had entered the Senate, the two men hadn't spent a lot of time together. Kerry also wanted a specific reassurance. He asked Edwards for a commitment that if he was chosen and the ticket lost, Edwards wouldn't run against him in 2008. Edwards agreed "absolutely," as Kerry recalled him saying. If Kerry had shared this at the time, I would have told him what I did later: it was naive to think he could rely on a promise like that. Unlike Joe Lieberman, who'd been plucked from relative obscurity by Gore, Edwards had made his own mark in the primaries. He was ambitious—and if he saw his chance the next time, he was likely to go for it.

On the day the Edwards pick was made public, Edwards and I talked for the first time since I had informed him of our decision to work for Kerry and he had reacted angrily. He said he knew I'd helped get him on the ticket and he was grateful. I told him that I welcomed the possibility that we might be friends again, but that wasn't the reason for my preference. I believed it was the right move for Kerry. Kerry's relationship with Edwards would sour after the election—and mine would simply fade away. When Elizabeth discovered she had breast cancer, John and Teresa reached out to help the Edwardses find the best doctors they could. Marylouise and I called—but afterward, never heard from John again. Maybe we shouldn't have expected to. Kerry told me that the Edwardses simply stopped returning calls or talking to him and Teresa. Within months, Edwards started preparing for a bid in 2008. Kerry said that he wished he'd never picked Edwards, that he should have gone with his gut.

---------------------------------------------------------------


My gut reaction is that, along with all the other anectdotal evidence, seems to fit. Now, I don't doubt that he wants to fight for the impoverished and a lot of his politics I agree with quite a bit but I just think he's a fake.

All politicans are fake on the stage, in their stump speeches and through the press, we all know this. When people say you are a phony on a personal level, partisan colleagues at that, I don't think it makes him look real good.

There is always a chance that he might be misunderstood and that his detractors are bitter but at some point if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck........

 

[diamond]

Re: Re: Is Edwards phony?

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1626498,00.html

from Bob Shrum's book
an excerpt from the linked article above:

Kerry talked with several potential picks, including Gephardt and Edwards. He was comfortable after his conversations with Gephardt, but even queasier about Edwards after they met. Edwards had told Kerry he was going to share a story with him that he'd never told anyone else—that after his son Wade had been killed, he climbed onto the slab at the funeral home, laid there and hugged his body, and promised that he'd do all he could to make life better for people, to live up to Wade's ideals of service. Kerry was stunned, not moved, because, as he told me later, Edwards had recounted the same exact story to him, almost in the exact same words, a year or two before—and with the same preface, that he'd never shared the memory with anyone else.

Kerry said he found it chilling, and he decided he couldn't pick Edwards unless he met with him again. When they did, Kerry tried to get a better personal feel for his potential number two; as rivals for national office since 2000, shortly after Edwards had entered the Senate, the two men hadn't spent a lot of time together. Kerry also wanted a specific reassurance. He asked Edwards for a commitment that if he was chosen and the ticket lost, Edwards wouldn't run against him in 2008. Edwards agreed "absolutely," as Kerry recalled him saying. If Kerry had shared this at the time, I would have told him what I did later: it was naive to think he could rely on a promise like that. Unlike Joe Lieberman, who'd been plucked from relative obscurity by Gore, Edwards had made his own mark in the primaries. He was ambitious—and if he saw his chance the next time, he was likely to go for it.

On the day the Edwards pick was made public, Edwards and I talked for the first time since I had informed him of our decision to work for Kerry and he had reacted angrily. He said he knew I'd helped get him on the ticket and he was grateful. I told him that I welcomed the possibility that we might be friends again, but that wasn't the reason for my preference. I believed it was the right move for Kerry. Kerry's relationship with Edwards would sour after the election—and mine would simply fade away. When Elizabeth discovered she had breast cancer, John and Teresa reached out to help the Edwardses find the best doctors they could. Marylouise and I called—but afterward, never heard from John again. Maybe we shouldn't have expected to. Kerry told me that the Edwardses simply stopped returning calls or talking to him and Teresa. Within months, Edwards started preparing for a bid in 2008. Kerry said that he wished he'd never picked Edwards, that he should have gone with his gut.

---------------------------------------------------------------


My gut reaction is that, along with all the other anectdotal evidence, seems to fit. Now, I don't doubt that he wants to fight for the impoverished and a lot of his politics I agree with quite a bit but I just think he's a fake.

All politicans are fake on the stage, in their stump speeches and through the press, we all know this. When people say you are a phony on a personal level, partisan colleagues at that, I don't think it makes him look real good.

There is always a chance that he might be misunderstood and that his detractors are bitter but at some point if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck........

Excellent post, thanks for another example of what I was referring to.

Some folks here misinterpreted my criticizing Edwards (in another thread) trying to exploit his wife's illness for votes.

I don't have anything against Mrs Edwards at all. My mom died on Cancer when I was 2 and half years old.
I think she is unwittingly being exploited for polictical purposes.

After she passes, perhaps that would be Edwads' time to run.

The country needs a healthy President and at least a First Lady with a good or decent bill of health.

Family first is my view.


I think Edwards will do just about anything to seek public office-which is sad.

dbs

 

[hardyharhar]

You're welcome.



Polling Data Averages:

Giuliani 28.2
Thompson: 17.0
Mitt 12.7
McCain: 12.7
Ginrich 8.5




Overall Nationally Rudy leads by +11.2

Rasmussen 08/16 - 08/19 Giuliani +7.0

Gallup 08/13 - 08/16 Giuliani +13.0

Quinnipiac 08/07 - 08/13 Giuliani +13.0

American Res. Group 08/09 - 08/11 Giuliani +11.0

CNN 08/06 - 08/08 Giuliani +8.0

Cook/RT Strategies -Giuliani +10.0


dbs

This looks like the sports book at the MGM Grand

 

[Irvine511]

Re: Re: Re: Is Edwards phony?

I think Edwards will do just about anything to seek public office-which is sad.

you mean like being pro-choice, and then not?

like being pro-gay marriage, and then not?

 

[CTU2fan]

Re: Re: Re: Is Edwards phony?

I think Edwards will do just about anything to seek public office-which is sad.

Do you really think he's any different from any of these other candidates? I'd guess most of them would say/do just about anything to win, from simply being phony to outright cheating. It would be nice if they didn't, but expecting that is pretty unrealistic.

 

[anitram]

I can't vote. Originally I was interested in Obama while expecting Hillary to win. Now I think I would vote for Hillary in the primary and the general election. She is not the perfect candidate, and I wish we'd get the woman from the early 90s back in some respects. However, she is very well spoken, very educated generally and on the issues, and I like the fact that the Clintons are willing to get their hands dirty to win.

 

[Liesje]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Is Edwards phony?

you mean like being pro-choice, and then not?

like being pro-gay marriage, and then not?

*snort*

 

[martha]

I can't vote.

It would be so good for the US if Canadians could vote in our elections, but the reciprocal would fuck you guys up so bad.

 

[Irvine511]

what i think is making Hillary so appealing has been the total disaster of the Bush years.

instead of a dick-swinging cowboy who governs with his gut and don't need no focus groups (nor facts) to make decissins, i'd much, much, much rather have a poll-driven, cautious, measured, meticulous, kind of boring leader who's simply not going to fuck up. i doubt she'll accomplish anything great, but she's not going to continue to drive the country into the ground the way Bush has. i feel fully confident that she'll hold her own on the international stage as well -- no one fucked with Thatcher, why would they fuck with her?

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Is Edwards phony?

you mean like being pro-choice, and then not?

like being pro-gay marriage, and then not?

Guess that doesn't count, or just doesn't count only if you're a really hot (allegedly) Mormon guy with a perfect family.

Romney Muddles Abortion Stance
2008 Republican Backs State Abortion Leeway Until Federal Ban Possible
By TEDDY DAVIS

Aug. 22, 2007
LOS ANGELES, Calif. —

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney said Tuesday in a Nevada television interview that he supports letting states "make their own decision" about whether to keep abortion legal.

"My view is that the Supreme Court has made an error in saying at the national level one size fits all for the whole nation," Romney told Nevada political columnist Jon Ralston in a televised interview. "Instead, I would let states make their choices."

Asked by Ralston if it was "OK" with him that Nevada is a "pro-choice state," Romney said, "I'd let states make their own decision in this regard. My view, of course, is I'm a pro-life individual. That's the position I support. But, I'd let states have this choice rather than let the federal government have it."


Romney Shift?

In his interview with Ralston, Romney was not asked about his support for a Human Life Amendment or federal legislation which would bring unborn children under the protections of the 14th Amendment.

The former Massachusetts governor endorsed both positions -- which would effectively ban abortion nationwide -- during an Aug. 6 interview on ABC News' "Good Morning America."

Asked by ABC News' George Stephanopoulos whether he supports the Republican Party's 2004 platform on abortion rights, which states, "We support a Human Life Amendment to the Constitution and we endorse legislation to make it clear that the 14th Amendment's protections apply to unborn children," Romney said, "You know, I do support the Republican platform, and I support that being part of the Republican platform and I'm pro-life."


Romney Campaign Pushes Back

When ABCNEWS.com reported Wednesday that states like Nevada would be unable to keep abortion legal if Romney's ultimate vision were implemented, a Romney spokesman sought to explain the discrepancy by saying that while Romney supports the Human Life Amendment and 14th Amendment legislation contained in the Republican Party's 2004 platform, he does not view either measure as "achievable" at this time.

By contrast, he views overturning Roe vs. Wade, the Supreme Court case which legalized abortion throughout the United States, as a goal which can be achieved more quickly.

If Romney succeeds in overturning Roe v. Wade through his Supreme Court appointments, states would once again be empowered to make their own decisions about abortion rights.

States would retain this power, under Romney's vision, until it is possible to outlaw abortion at the federal level. At that point, they would lose this power.

Romney's camp, however, does not see this day coming any time soon.

"We should aspire to passing a Human Life Amendment when the country as a whole is prepared for it," Romney spokesman Kevin Madden told ABC News. "The American people just aren't there yet."

 

[CTU2fan]

what i think is making Hillary so appealing has been the total disaster of the Bush years.

instead of a dick-swinging cowboy who governs with his gut and don't need no focus groups (nor facts) to make decissins, i'd much, much, much rather have a poll-driven, cautious, measured, meticulous, kind of boring leader who's simply not going to fuck up. i doubt she'll accomplish anything great, but she's not going to continue to drive the country into the ground the way Bush has. i feel fully confident that she'll hold her own on the international stage as well -- no one fucked with Thatcher, why would they fuck with her?

Or to put it simpler, if we can't go back to our successful President who did an overall good job despite getting a little head on the side, we'll settle for his wife.

 

[LemonMelon]

I really like Obama, but quite honestly, I just don't think he's ready for the job. When the NH primary comes around, I'll probably register as a Democrat to vote for HRC.

A lot of people seem to think Clinton should pick Obama as a running mate if she wins, and while I don't know if he'd do it, I think it would be a great ticket.

Agreed. A Hilary/Obama partnership would be close to impossible to top, especially considering the entire Republican party is basically shot thanks to Bush. I would never vote for HRC because of our differences in opinion on many important issues, but I'll give her credit; she's definitely looking to be the most appealing candidate at this point to the masses. Which is why she will not only get the nod, but probably get elected. The GOP isn't helping themselves by having very few appealing candidates.

 

[LemonMelon]

and since we're talking about negatives, and how people should just give up and walk away if someone doesn't like them, it's intersting to find Mitt Romney at a negative rating of 44%, even higher than HRC.

it seems that some in his own party won't vote for him no matter the circumstance.

probably due to religious bigotry.

Well, he's not only a Morman; he's a flip-flopping Morman. I agree with you that there is definitely some religious prejudice in there, but he is fake. Charismatic, but fake.

 

[diamond]

Well, he's not only a Morman; he's a flip-flopping Morman. I agree with you that there is definitely some religious prejudice in there, but he is fake. Charismatic, but fake.

I think Obama is the most likeable fellow and this is what wins elections.

GW had it
Clinton had it
GHW had it over Dukakis barely.
Reagan had it
JFK had it
Nixon didn't have it but McGovern was too liberal for the 1970s.

And it it's Mormon, not "Morman", LemonMelon.

dbs

 

[u2fan628]

Obama

 

[hardyharhar]

Any democrat

 

[MissMaCo]

I'll vote for Ségolène Royal