Hilary angling to demand VP position!

[calmus]

No I am not.  Independents aren't afraid of Hilary as the right wants to believe.  But they are very much afraid of the theocrats.    A war-monger and a theocrat is not a winning ticket.

The latest polls indicate that McCain is just as popular among the independents as Obama. Or slightly more so, but I might have blocked that part out.

And Huckabee might play better in the Bible Belt than Obama-Clinton.

[emn1964]

I just don't see Hillary letting her ego accept a VP position.  Obama will have a relatively conservative/middle of the road white male VP

[240 is Back]

friend,,if the promising black boy put the demon on the ticket it is done for him,,she will lose this election if she is on the ticket wether for her or for him,,right now the economy in america is so bad that barak has about 30-40% to really become president,,,she will bring the chance down to the 10% ,,right now barak can even bring up his chances to the convention and all that mess and really be contender and have about 40 solid % to become president ,,,as crazy as it is with no experience he will have about 40% ,,,she can not be on ticket though

then again ........
barak hussaun obama?
nah not in this life time ,,not in america of 2008
economy has to be bad as in  over 4 $ per gallon of fuel for it to become reality and it wont have time for that since mccain is independent

I agree he doesn't want her on the ticket... get a Jim Webb or Wes Clark or someone with a clean record and more cred.  Plus Obama and Hilary don't seem to like each other.

But he doesn't have a majority - the 2200 or so delegates required for a clean win.  party elders quiet.  Hilary suddenly talking about uniting the party.  If she loses on tues, it gets harder for her.  if she wins, it gets harder for obama.

Clinton is ambitious, and would be a solid VP despite her polarizing nature.  People would have to overlook that, just like they'd have to overlook obama's name and skin color.  But by november, a lot of people might be very broke, and a dem ticket means the economy will start to recover.

[240 is Back]

The latest polls indicate that McCain is just as popular among the independents as Obama. Or slightly more so, but I might have blocked that part out.

And Huckabee might play better in the Bible Belt than Obama-Clinton.

HIlary, Obama, and McCain will all do good jobs.

Some are stronger than others in some area, but all in all, none will screw anything up too bad.  The biggest difference is, if you make OVER $70k, obama will tax you more.  If you make UNDER $70k, obama will take better care of you.  That's basically it.

The economy is the biggest issue.  If everyone is broke in november, obama wins in a landslide.  McCain is currently telling america he will keep bush plan in place, and admits he doesn't konw much about thee economy.  If you've lost half your retirement by Novemeber, are you going to elect the guy who says he won't change anything?

[timfogarty]

And Huckabee might play better in the Bible Belt than Obama-Clinton.

the white Bible-Belt is also very black, and they'll be out in record numbers for Obama.

[G o a t b o y]

A war-monger and a theocrat is not a winning ticket.

If you're McCain, it depends on what you think will hurt you more at the polls:  independants not voting for you due to a theocrat VP, or your far-right theocrat base staying home and not voting for you.  I don't know which situation leads to the better result for him, but I'm sure his campaign staff have studied this and put numbers to it.

[The Luke]

On the one hand:

Clinton for President with Obama as VP... unelectable.
and
Obama for President with Clinton as VP... possibly electable.


...on the other hand:

McCain for President with Huckabee as VP... also unelectable.
and
McCain for President with Condoleeza Rice as VP... also possibly electable.


However:
Obama for President with AnyoneOtherThanHillary as VP beats McCain no matter who his running mate is.

   My considered opinion would be that Obama's AnyOneOtherThanHillary of choice should be Ralph Nader. This avoids the contentious splitting of the Democrat vote that arguably cost John Kerry the 2004 election. It also has the benefits of protecting Obama (which vested interest is going to assassinate/impeach him if the alternative is ultra-liberal Nader... might as well have Michael Moore in the White House) and it rehabilitates (in a way) the man who most pundits (politics aside) would agree is the most respected liberal icon of the 20th century (if not a front runner for greatest living American).
   As long as America shuns people like Ralph Nader, America is lost.


What most Europeans like about Obama is the hope (spurred by the vagueness of his policy details) that he will move America away from it's current path (a faltering fascist state in all but name moving towards becoming a regressive/oppressive theocratic idiocracy) towards a more liberal, compassionate, realistic form of government.

We here in Ireland (and Britain) have always looked west for inspiration... let's privatise public transport, LIKE THEY'RE DOING IN AMERICA... let's privatise healthcare, LIKE THEY'RE DOING IN AMERICA... let's cut taxes, LIKE THEY'RE DOING IN AMERICA... let's offer tax incentives and government dig-outs to multinational corporations LIKE THEY'RE DOING IN AMERICA.

Well now it's thirty years later... and guess what? AMERICA'S FUCKED! And the shiny Yankee social policies we all jumped on are failing here as badly as they failed Stateside.

The highly respected historian Jared Diamond (author of "Guns, Germs and Steel") writing in his treatise on the dynamics of human civilization/population cycles, his recent book "Collapse (Why Civilizations Choose to Fail)" made a well argued and plausible assessment of America's prospects of surviving the next century: 50/50!


Meanwhile there's been a quiet revolution in the Scandinavian countries based on sensible long-term thinking and non-sensationalist politics.

Here's an example, the United Nations (WHO) rankings of the best healthcare systems in the world for 2006: (take the time to read it)
1         France
2         Italy
3         San Marino
4         Andorra
5         Malta
6         Singapore
7         Spain
8         Oman
9         Austria
10        Japan
11        Norway
12        Portugal
13        Monaco
14        Greece
15        Iceland
16        Luxembourg
17        Netherlands
18        United  Kingdom
19        Ireland
20        Switzerland
21        Belgium
22        Colombia
23        Sweden
24        Cyprus
25        Germany
26        Saudi Arabia
27        United  Arab  Emirates
28        Israel
29        Morocco
30        Canada
31        Finland
32        Australia
33        Chile
34        Denmark
35        Dominica
36        Costa Rica
37        United  States  of  America
38        Slovenia
...guess which country spends more than any other country on healthcare (both per capita and as a percentage of GDP; even adjusted for cost of living)? Yes, it's number 37! Guess which countries have free universal healthcare? Yes, that's right... the whole top twenty.

But America simply can't have universal healthcare because the vested interests behind FOX NEWS hired wordsmiths and propagandists who re-labelled the idea "Socialised Medicine"; as if it's only to be considered something that failed in communist countries.

Here's the "Peace" ranking (how unlikely you are to be drafted/invaded):
1         Norway
2         New Zealand
3         Denmark
4         Ireland
5         Japan
6         Finland
7         Sweden
8         Canada
9         Portugal
10       Austria         ...notice all the same countries in the top ten this time around? Well you should as European (Scandinavian countries in particular) dominate the top rankings in just about every favourable living index: longevity; wealth; health; education; literacy; child mortality; crime rates; prison population; even "happiness".
   by the way, the US ranks 96th on the Peace Index.


To prove my point, here's the rankings of most LIVABLE countries... considering a weighted formula of crime; life expectancy; wealth; education; health; benefits etc etc
1    Iceland 
2    Norway 
3    Australia 
4    Canada 
5    Ireland 
6    Sweden 
7    Switzerland 
8    Japan 
9    Netherlands 
10    France                  ...the US ranks 12th and only due to it's sheer wealth and a misleading averaging of results that doesn't properly represent the growing disparity and inequalities in American society.



Hopefully Obama has been so coy with his agenda as he is actually smart enough to know that what America needs to prevent its collapse is what it fears most:
-liberalism
-atheism (goodbye jeebus!)
-high taxes that are fair and redistribute wealth
-proper eductaion: nationalised and properly funded
-universal healthcare: nationalised and properly funded
-gun control
-"BIG" government
-strict controls on corporations
-strict controls on vested interests
-strict controls on the military/industrial complex
-pluralist media (goodbye Rupert Murdoch!)
-proper separation of church and state
-an end to tax exemption for religions
-science education
-equality

...or to put it more succinctly; America (and the world at large) needs a Scandinavian mindset.


...if America can embrace all these things, a cull of the low IQ breeding stock might be averted.


End of lecture...

The Luke

[War-Horse]

Good stuff, Luke.      The elitist upper class will have no part of it tho.   Probably take a total collapse of the US to make someone do anything different.

[Benny B]

It has begun, as 240 predicted.  Hilary will enter the convention with 40% or so of the votes, and will demand the party elders construct the ticket so she is on as VP.

This morning she began her campaign of listing their similarities and saying "WE need to unite the party".

Camp Hilary will demand the VP slot or threaten to split up the party.  Obama won't have the required 2200 delegates to outright win, and in order to prevent a messy scenario, the party elders (Gore, edwards and others) will cave.

The ticket will be Obama/Clinton in 2008.

Not a chance. Barack doesn't like the bitch, and with her gigantic ego, likely would not accept the VP spot after feeling she was "entitled" to be president for the past year.

Obama should choose, Kathleen Sebelius, the governor from Kansas. It would be the perfect ticket.

[240 is Back]

Not a chance. Barack doesn't like the bitch, and with her gigantic ego, likely would not accept the VP spot after feeling she was "entitled" to be president for the past year.

Obama should choose, Kathleen Sebelius, the governor from Kansas. It would be the perfect ticket.

Sebelius is a clinton supporter to the core.

Plus, Obama might not have say in it.  He can't win the 2200 req'd delegates to automatically secure the nomination.   hilary's kept it close enough. 

And yes, she has a giant ego, BUT given the choice of being VP or having to return to senate, she'll take the VP.  Remember - Dick Cheney has made it so that the 2009 vice President will be a very powerful person.

[Benny B]

Sebelius is a clinton supporter to the core.

Plus, Obama might not have say in it.  He can't win the 2200 req'd delegates to automatically secure the nomination.   hilary's kept it close enough. 

And yes, she has a giant ego, BUT given the choice of being VP or having to return to senate, she'll take the VP.  Remember - Dick Cheney has made it so that the 2009 vice President will be a very powerful person.

Get the facts right. Sebelius endorsed Obama and campaigned with him in Kansas, helping him win that state.

Obama-Sebelius=winning ticket 

Once the party backs you, you are in control and you always have a say on who you want as your vp. Whether its Clinton or Obama, their hand will not be forced.

[240 is Back]

sorry, my mistake.  i remembed a kansas woman congressman stumping for hilary... my bad.  I shoulda wiki'd it if not sure.

[Moosejay]

I've been as low as 3%.

Maybe we can post with civility towards each other now?

[Deicide]

On the one hand:

Clinton for President with Obama as VP... unelectable.
and
Obama for President with Clinton as VP... possibly electable.


...on the other hand:

McCain for President with Huckabee as VP... also unelectable.
and
McCain for President with Condoleeza Rice as VP... also possibly electable.


However:
Obama for President with AnyoneOtherThanHillary as VP beats McCain no matter who his running mate is.

   My considered opinion would be that Obama's AnyOneOtherThanHillary of choice should be Ralph Nader. This avoids the contentious splitting of the Democrat vote that arguably cost John Kerry the 2004 election. It also has the benefits of protecting Obama (which vested interest is going to assassinate/impeach him if the alternative is ultra-liberal Nader... might as well have Michael Moore in the White House) and it rehabilitates (in a way) the man who most pundits (politics aside) would agree is the most respected liberal icon of the 20th century (if not a front runner for greatest living American).
   As long as America shuns people like Ralph Nader, America is lost.


What most Europeans like about Obama is the hope (spurred by the vagueness of his policy details) that he will move America away from it's current path (a faltering fascist state in all but name moving towards becoming a regressive/oppressive theocratic idiocracy) towards a more liberal, compassionate, realistic form of government.

We here in Ireland (and Britain) have always looked west for inspiration... let's privatise public transport, LIKE THEY'RE DOING IN AMERICA... let's privatise healthcare, LIKE THEY'RE DOING IN AMERICA... let's cut taxes, LIKE THEY'RE DOING IN AMERICA... let's offer tax incentives and government dig-outs to multinational corporations LIKE THEY'RE DOING IN AMERICA.

Well now it's thirty years later... and guess what? AMERICA'S FUCKED! And the shiny Yankee social policies we all jumped on are failing here as badly as they failed Stateside.

The highly respected historian Jared Diamond (author of "Guns, Germs and Steel") writing in his treatise on the dynamics of human civilization/population cycles, his recent book "Collapse (Why Civilizations Choose to Fail)" made a well argued and plausible assessment of America's prospects of surviving the next century: 50/50!


Meanwhile there's been a quiet revolution in the Scandinavian countries based on sensible long-term thinking and non-sensationalist politics.

Here's an example, the United Nations (WHO) rankings of the best healthcare systems in the world for 2006: (take the time to read it)
1         France
2         Italy
3         San Marino
4         Andorra
5         Malta
6         Singapore
7         Spain
8         Oman
9         Austria
10        Japan
11        Norway
12        Portugal
13        Monaco
14        Greece
15        Iceland
16        Luxembourg
17        Netherlands
18        United  Kingdom
19        Ireland
20        Switzerland
21        Belgium
22        Colombia
23        Sweden
24        Cyprus
25        Germany
26        Saudi Arabia
27        United  Arab  Emirates
28        Israel
29        Morocco
30        Canada
31        Finland
32        Australia
33        Chile
34        Denmark
35        Dominica
36        Costa Rica
37        United  States  of  America
38        Slovenia
...guess which country spends more than any other country on healthcare (both per capita and as a percentage of GDP; even adjusted for cost of living)? Yes, it's number 37! Guess which countries have free universal healthcare? Yes, that's right... the whole top twenty.

But America simply can't have universal healthcare because the vested interests behind FOX NEWS hired wordsmiths and propagandists who re-labelled the idea "Socialised Medicine"; as if it's only to be considered something that failed in communist countries.

Here's the "Peace" ranking (how unlikely you are to be drafted/invaded):
1         Norway
2         New Zealand
3         Denmark
4         Ireland
5         Japan
6         Finland
7         Sweden
8         Canada
9         Portugal
10       Austria         ...notice all the same countries in the top ten this time around? Well you should as European (Scandinavian countries in particular) dominate the top rankings in just about every favourable living index: longevity; wealth; health; education; literacy; child mortality; crime rates; prison population; even "happiness".
   by the way, the US ranks 96th on the Peace Index.


To prove my point, here's the rankings of most LIVABLE countries... considering a weighted formula of crime; life expectancy; wealth; education; health; benefits etc etc
1    Iceland 
2    Norway 
3    Australia 
4    Canada 
5    Ireland 
6    Sweden 
7    Switzerland 
8    Japan 
9    Netherlands 
10    France                  ...the US ranks 12th and only due to it's sheer wealth and a misleading averaging of results that doesn't properly represent the growing disparity and inequalities in American society.



Hopefully Obama has been so coy with his agenda as he is actually smart enough to know that what America needs to prevent its collapse is what it fears most:
-liberalism
-atheism (goodbye jeebus!)
-high taxes that are fair and redistribute wealth
-proper eductaion: nationalised and properly funded
-universal healthcare: nationalised and properly funded
-gun control
-"BIG" government
-strict controls on corporations
-strict controls on vested interests
-strict controls on the military/industrial complex
-pluralist media (goodbye Rupert Murdoch!)
-proper separation of church and state
-an end to tax exemption for religions
-science education
-equality

...or to put it more succinctly; America (and the world at large) needs a Scandinavian mindset.


...if America can embrace all these things, a cull of the low IQ breeding stock might be averted.


End of lecture...

The Luke

Luke, I am both European and American and you are wrong.

The size of the USA, both spatially and demographically as well as a radically different history prevent the implementation of the things you suggested a la Norway (and I love Scandinavia). Denmark and Norway have less than 10 million people, significantly less. France has less than a quarter of the American population. No, you are comparing apples and oranges. The USA cannot and will never gravitate to Western European styles of doing things. Atheism or non-belief as a majority consensus in the USA? You must be living in lala land. That will never happen (and more's the shame). You are right that in those countries, those systems work fairly well. What the USA needs and what would be most plausible would be a return to individual state sovereignty where the great majority of decisions would fall state side; in such a case each state would be its own country, more or less. However even that is unlikely to happen. The USA is fucked.

[War-Horse]

Luke, I am both European and American and you are wrong.

The size of the USA, both spatially and demographically as well as a radically different history prevent the implementation of the things you suggested a la Norway (and I love Scandinavia). Denmark and Norway have less than 10 million people, significantly less. France has less than a quarter of the American population. No, you are comparing apples and oranges. The USA cannot and will never gravitate to Western European styles of doing things. Atheism or non-belief as a majority consensus in the USA? You must be living in lala land. That will never happen (and more's the shame). You are right that in those countries, those systems work fairly well. What the USA needs and what would be most plausible would be a return to individual state sovereignty where the great majority of decisions would fall state side; in such a case each state would be its own country, more or less. However even that is unlikely to happen. The USA is fucked.

Yes, Unfortunatly giving all power to each state  would be total anarchy, as power corrupts in a huge way here.   Politicians only care about how much they can screw out of you before their term ends.     There would be civil unrest immediatly....

Imagine a george bush times 51 states...........VERY FUCKED UP!!!!

[The Luke]

If the states were given sovereignty then we'd have the Sovereign Nazi-style Evangelical Fascist Theocratic Coalition (formerly known as Middle Ameica) at war with both the United Homosexual-Tolerant Jewish Alliance (formerly known as the West Coast) and the Homosexual-Tolerant United Jewish Alliance (formerly known as the East Coast).

The entire world is moving towards an integrated world government.

Europe, through the efforts of the EU is effectively the United States of Europe.

China, India, Pakistan, Malaysia, Indonesia and Russia will soon extend their trade agreements to form a Eurasian Block.

The African League gains political clout every year.

Climate change will bring Canada under increasing pressure from resource hungry America and that will lead to the integration of the EU and Canada with Australia (and possibly Japan) joining soon afterwards.

The only place deliberately marching backwards is the US.


The facts are simple: a well educated, stable and wealthy society quickly becomes athiest; socialist and tolerant.

We should all be following Norway's lead... they're doing something right, and it can be adapted (population /demographic differences notwithstanding) to any and all other countries. If Americans are too religious, then educate them. If Americans are too stupid for education, then implement a eugenics program (or at the very least actively combat the dysgenia).


There's no choice in any of this... as the alternative is an increasingly unstable country in an increasingly stable world. The only real question is whether any of this will matter. Technological advancement and the approaching AI Singularity might well make all such discussions moot within this new century.


The Luke

[Deicide]

If the states were given sovereignty then we'd have the Sovereign Nazi-style Evangelical Fascist Theocratic Coalition (formerly known as Middle Ameica) at war with both the United Homosexual-Tolerant Jewish Alliance (formerly known as the West Coast) and the Homosexual-Tolerant United Jewish Alliance (formerly known as the East Coast).

The entire world is moving towards an integrated world government.

Europe, through the efforts of the EU is effectively the United States of Europe.

China, India, Pakistan, Malaysia, Indonesia and Russia will soon extend their trade agreements to form a Eurasian Block.

The African League gains political clout every year.

Climate change will bring Canada under increasing pressure from resource hungry America and that will lead to the integration of the EU and Canada with Australia (and possibly Japan) joining soon afterwards.

The only place deliberately marching backwards is the US.


The facts are simple: a well educated, stable and wealthy society quickly becomes athiest; socialist and tolerant.

We should all be following Norway's lead... they're doing something right, and it can be adapted (population /demographic differences notwithstanding) to any and all other countries. If Americans are too religious, then educate them. If Americans are too stupid for education, then implement a eugenics program (or at the very least actively combat the dysgenia).


There's no choice in any of this... as the alternative is an increasingly unstable country in an increasingly stable world. The only real question is whether any of this will matter. Technological advancement and the approaching AI Singularity might well make all such discussions moot within this new century.The Luke

Elaborate on said point please.

[Deicide]

If the states were given sovereignty then we'd have the Sovereign Nazi-style Evangelical Fascist Theocratic Coalition (formerly known as Middle Ameica) at war with both the United Homosexual-Tolerant Jewish Alliance (formerly known as the West Coast) and the Homosexual-Tolerant United Jewish Alliance (formerly known as the East Coast).

The entire world is moving towards an integrated world government.

Europe, through the efforts of the EU is effectively the United States of Europe.

China, India, Pakistan, Malaysia, Indonesia and Russia will soon extend their trade agreements to form a Eurasian Block.

The African League gains political clout every year.

Climate change will bring Canada under increasing pressure from resource hungry America and that will lead to the integration of the EU and Canada with Australia (and possibly Japan) joining soon afterwards.

The only place deliberately marching backwards is the US.


The facts are simple: a well educated, stable and wealthy society quickly becomes athiest; socialist and tolerant.

We should all be following Norway's lead... they're doing something right, and it can be adapted (population /demographic differences notwithstanding) to any and all other countries. If Americans are too religious, then educate them. If Americans are too stupid for education, then implement a eugenics program (or at the very least actively combat the dysgenia).


There's no choice in any of this... as the alternative is an increasingly unstable country in an increasingly stable world. The only real question is whether any of this will matter. Technological advancement and the approaching AI Singularity might well make all such discussions moot within this new century.


The Luke

You got to get on the religious discussion board Luke, MCWAY is sure to disagree with you and the education/religion bit (whilst I do agree)...too many stupid fundies on this site...

[240 is Back]

more and more....


NBC reporting on rumbles from camp clinton about neither candidate getting the 2,025 required delegates, and making it a 'resume war' about the 'body of work' of each candidate, if the difference in superdelegates is 'neglibable', or less than 100.

hilary is going to be on the ticket, kids.  she vowed to take it all the way to denver now.

[youandme]

Why am I not surprised you support Obama?   But wait a minute, he's from Kenya, you're from Ethiopia...aren't those two countries enemies?

haha spit my coffee out

[Benny B]

hilary is going to be on the ticket, kids.  she vowed to take it all the way to denver now.

not a chance

[headhuntersix]

more and more....


NBC reporting on rumbles from camp clinton about neither candidate getting the 2,025 required delegates, and making it a 'resume war' about the 'body of work' of each candidate, if the difference in superdelegates is 'neglibable', or less than 100.

hilary is going to be on the ticket, kids.  she vowed to take it all the way to denver now.

They're going to have to do a re-vote in MI and FLA but I think she's going to win. The media love affair with Obama is over. The Saturday Night Live deal sealed it. That could be something that politico's talk about like the Nixon-Kennedy debate, should he loose.

[Benny B]

They're going to have to do a re-vote in MI and FLA but I think she's going to win. The media love affair with Obama is over. The Saturday Night Live deal sealed it. That could be something that politico's talk about like the Nixon-Kennedy debate, should he loose.

All the do-overs and SNL skits in the world won't change the pledged delegate count.  Victories in Wyoming today, MS on Tuesday, and the media's increased reporting that Obama did indeed win TX spells continued momentum and doom for Clinton.

Seriously...Hilary can only win by getting more superdelegates to side with her. If that happens, she will have no chance of beating McCain in November for so many reasons.

[headhuntersix]

Ok sure....his staff is killing him and the media honeymoon is over. Wait until they dig. There is plenty of dirt and very little substance..plus u really think u can't count Hil out. Hope is not a method.

[Benny B]

Ok sure....his staff is killing him and the media honeymoon is over. Wait until they dig. There is plenty of dirt and very little substance..plus u really think u can't count Hil out. Hope is not a method.

All that and a bag of Doritos won't change the delegate count.