Sorry it's so long, but if you are intereted in the topic of this thread then please take the time to read the following:Only one of them can win, so it seems one of them will have a head start in the publicity stakes over McCain no matter what happens. It's taken so much attention off McCain - no amount of money can buy the public focus they're getting.
the only thing i don't think obama has (and needs) is experience. he's only been involved in government for a few years as is.
I reckon McCain has a good chance now. The democratic voter base might be progressive enough to put Obama up but I don't think the entire US voter base is as well...
im getting sick of knobs saying that if obama gets elected that he'll get assassinated - seems to me like some last ditch attempt to pour instability on the guy.
OK, so I've been watching this thread for a while and not felt he inspiration to post anything. Sorry guys - there haven't been too many worthwhile comments on here actually critically analysing the situation! The primary election (where the party selects their leader for the national election) is usually quick and painless, like the Republicans' selection of McCain. Historically, we not only have a black man and a woman in the running for the Democratic primaries, but we also have two powerful and inspirational figureheads that symbolise hope for the people with a breath of fresh air.
Firstly, Bill Clinton wasn't much better than G-Dub Bush in terms of being a warmonger. A clear difference was that he was rampaging eastern Europe driving out Milosovich (who was butchering people simply for their family history), as opposed to Bush and Hussein. The big money spinner in Iraq was the oil, obviously, but it seems that Bush didn't take into account just how wrong the war would go and that to take their oil now would ruin the US with everyone viewing them simply as bullies and thieves (as opposed to just bullies). There is certainly alot of racial unrest in that region - the tribal mentality cannot be overturned in Iraq, even though the dictator can. Now, what we see is a nasty mess of each previously oppressed tribe feeling that they should be the ones with the power now. Not discounting that Hussein did many bad things to these people, he actually kept the tribes in relative calm through use of an iron fist. If the shit hit the fan in Kosovo as it did in Iraq, Clinton would be seen in a very different light - but these are/were very different wars. Because of the underlying tension in Iraq, it has cost America disgusting amounts of money so far (figure, anyone?) and they cannot leave now for at least a good 5 years after stirring the pot the way they have. Clinton fought a war that was run well, had UN backing from the start and didn't have the thought of a money spinner hanging over it. In his power, he did great things for the US economy and fixed alot of the problems that Bush Senior had gotten them into. It took him 8 long years to do so, with a couple of cigars and cheap interns on the way, but it took the overzealous hillbilly that Bush Junior is just 2 years to drive it back again. 5 years later, he (and private industry such as financiers allowed to keep throwing money at people who can't afford to pay it back) has driven it even further down the tube.
McCain - stopping torture or not - is proudly a warmonger. He WILL NOT solve any of the problems of the country, he will simply continue down a similar path of fighting a war that now the masses clearly don't want and drive the country further into financial hardship.
Now, to Hillary and Obama. Considering that history of the past three leaders, Obama may not have the experience that the nation would normally look for in a leader, but his public prowess is inspirational to say the least. Hillary has proven herself as a longstayer - her father, Hugh Rodham, was in big business (textiles, I believe) and a Republican through and through (quite influential to the party, also). Hillary as First Woman showed that she can get through a hell of alot of stress and not waver (Lewinsky scandal in particular) and made big waves in attempts to reform and centralise the American health system. When her father died, unfortunately it couldn't have happened at the worst of times and the private health sector jumped at this and we now see the broken system that it is. She followed up her time as First Lady by becoming a New York senator. The people trust her, but from her time as senator she has showed a slight lean to looking over the people who don't need too much looking after and forgetting the ones at the bottom of the ladder. Obama instills hope for this ever-growing list of people and that, I feel, is his winning factor.
The primaries have dragged so long because Democratic supporters are so passionate about two passionate potential leaders. The party has lost soooooooooooooo much money for it taking so long, but Obama and Hillary have gone to great efforts to raise much of this money themselves at least. It may seem dragged out and Hillary may seem like she doesn't want to accept defeat, but has anyone realised that neither have named a planned Vice President?!?!?!?! Their individual races have pulled alot of votes to themselves, but now more than ever there is a very strong possibility of the two joining as a power team with trust and support from much of the population. The attention has been all about Hillary and Obama, with McCain forgotten in the wake. Does that not seem to anyone on here as being more strategic as opposed to confused of the Democrats??
The South love warmongers and hate the idea of answering to a black man or a woman. You will see alot of effort from the Democrats trying to convince these people to trust them, but McCain will take much of the region.
There is a very real possibility of assassination of either of the Democratic runners, as silly and melodramatic as it may seem. The mentality of the South is not one you can understand without spending some decent time over there. Many of them are still jaded that they didn't win the civil war and still hold hope of the South becoming its own nation. Hell, Lincoln was assassinated for trying to convince the North and South to avoid war and come to a diplomatic decision.
Is anyone else on here actualy able to vote in this?? (I am CERTAINLY NOT saying if you can't that you shouldn't have your opinions - keep em flowing!) As a US citizen, I know who I will proudly be voting for. I will be making my Australian citizenship pledge Wednesday night and obviously take Australia's point of view on this into account in my American vote. As for Rudd clearing Australia's combat troops out of Iraq - we only had a few hundred "combat troops" over there and he did stick to his word to get them out in 6 months, but we have many still there and they won't be back for some years to come. Unfortunately, Bush has gotten us in too deep and, after putting our hands up at the start, it would be very wrong of us to back out now before cleaning up the mess that we did help create.
The whole point of America and why it became independent was because of hatred of family dynasties
I think I'd be looking into my history before saying that, mate. Americans were paying heavy taxes on EVERYTHING and it all went straight across the Atlantic to the crown. The only thing England was providing for America was soldiers to ensure that they paid their taxes. Once the 13 colonies were settled and the new Americans spread further (for more land, gold, etc), they realised they in no way needed an outsider dictating over their economy and were sick of giving away their money for nothing. The Boston Tea Party (where the whites dressed up as natives and threw all of England's cherished tea into Boston Bay) really hit home as a slap in the face to England and around Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Connecticut and surrounding colonies unrest was growing fast. These people were so loyal to their dream of freedom that through pure pride they managed to overturn the powerful English army with pitchforks, axes, rocks and very few bows and firearms. That history has NOTHING to do with the current situation and family dynasties will play absolutely no part in this election.
Perhaps you're mixing up your revolts? Family dynasties - are you thinking of Russia and the Bolshevik revolution??
