Obama Running for President.
 

I am still trying to figure out why He is running.

In the Illinois legislature and a one termer in Federal Govt.

What does He know about world polotics or for that fact polotics in the USA?

why does ANYBODY run for president? seriously.

btw - what did kennedy know about politics either? at any rate, i'm guessing obama prolly has a better handle on what's REALLY happening in the US more so than some sincerely ignorant (and possibly illiterate) old white guys like we've had for 'bout the past 200+ years. i understand that change can be painful for some people, but its just a thought...

- m

edited to add that not ALL of the past presidents were ignorant and illiterate, just the current one which so many people somehow identify with

He knows how to spell "politics" and that is a good start....

Why can't I speeel or speek correkt english????!!! :mad: :eek: :cool:

It must be a local problem, not national :D ;) :mad:

I'll contact Nationals, thayll know !!!???? :D :D :eek:

First of all, someone show me a source that says he's running in 2008.

I know he got a warm show of support in NH over the weekend, but last I checked that didn't = running in 2008.

Apparently he's coming back here for the holidays to weigh his decision. I'm curious to see if local media's going to do an Obama Watch like they did the last time he was home.

I'd guess he testing the water -- as are a bunch of others.

I like him a lot, but think I would rather see him as VP candidate on a ticket this time after only one term in the Senate.

Actually, is anyone officially running yet? Even if announced, has anyone signed anything at this point?

Tom Vilsack from Iowa has officially declared and filed papers....I believe.

What is interesting about Obama and his recent visits to the Tonight Show and NH is that many politicos are saying that if he doesn't run now, he may ruin his chances in the future.

LOL.

Here's some presidents with less political experience than Obama...

George W. Bush - 1.5 terms as TX Gov.
Ronald Reagan - 2x as California Gov.
Jimmy Carter - 2 term GA senate, 1 term GA Gov.
Woodrow Wilson - 3 years as NJ Gov.

Also, squirrely girl, Kennedy was a member of the House and Senate for over a decade before running for president - I'd say that's probably a decent amount of experience.

This is kind of a bizarre "how many grains of sand is a pile?" argument, since that really adds up to 3 or 4 terms total - it's really kind of a moot comparison, anyway, since I'd argue that experience does not necessarily result in preparedness for the job. It's neither a necessary nor sufficient condition . . .

It's Earp, I thought that was the right kind of argument to make. ;)

Geeky, well, I'd place the value of a couple terms as governor above the value of being in the US senate for half a term and in the state legislature for a bit. Granted, I think long term senate service would be valid qualification, but if you're choosing between a 8 years running a state vs 6 years as a senator, I think experience as governor is likely more valuable. People will obviously bring up foreign policy, but a first term senator is not likely to have any grasp of foreign policy yet either...

About Obama...

Running would be extremely stupid. I know he's tempted to cash in his chips now, but he simply won't win in 2008. If I was advising him, I'd tell him to run if he wants, but under no situation should he become a potential VP. Reasons why...

1) If he runs into 2008, he needs to win. He won't, so he shouldnt. Getting his feet wet now is not a bad idea, but unless something happens and gives him a real shot at winning in 2008, he needs to drop out when the going gets serious.

2) He can't be a VP. Hillary won't win. Unless he signs on with Evan Bayh or someone like that (who would actually have a chance to win), he'll be putting himself in a terrible situation. Look at Edwards in 2004. He was a golden boy, but once he signed on w/ Kerry he became an attack dog and things got dirty. I think VP would be fine if he could win, but Hillary won't win and the DNC is too stupid to consider anyone else.

it's too early, america hasn't completely warmed up to him yet. 2012, he should be ok.

I'd say 2016. I think whoever wins in 2008, unless a lot of stuff happens, will serve two terms. Of course, I think if someone like Clinton actually did win, she might lose reelection, but in that case Obama wouldn't be in the running.

I personally hope he follows the DNC stupidity playbook (basically anything they do without Carville) and blows his future chances. However, from a strategic standpoint he'd be wise to wait it out.

Sen. Mike Gravell from Alaska has also thrown his hat in the ring, as has Dennis Kucinich of Ohio. Al Gore is testing the waters again (unofficially); this could be a bloodbath long before the general election.

I would tend to agree, this is a case of "too much, too soon". He's wise to test the waters, but he'd have to pull off a miracle or too to win. Obama is riding a wave, and it either come to shore in 2008 or crashes out to sea.

My own pet peeve is how the primaries are spread out over 5-6 months. I'd like to see 5-7 Super Tuesdays prior to New Hampshire "leading the nation".

I read in the paper last week there are 6 democrats and 5 republicans right now are thinking about running for office.

I like to see Obama take a shot at it but He needs to hold off and gain some experience in his current position as senator. hopefully by 2012, he'll get his chance. Right now, There's not a whole lot of choices as to who could be our next President.

I wish he'd come back to IL and be governor for a bit. (FIX THINGS OBAMA!) But I can see difficulty getting elected nationally after being governor in Illinois. We're a corrupt state that's ears deep in debt. He shouldn't associate himself with that.

He needs to be senator longer and continue to be a national name, travel the south, north, west, etc.

Theres a lot of people crowding the scene right now, but I think it comes down to...

GOP- President- McCain, Rudy, Romney, Tancredo (some support, not contention)
VP- Jeb, Sanford, Huckabee, who knows
My Pick: Romney/Jeb, but I'd prefer somebody else at VP

Dems- President- Clinton, Bayh, maybe Obama
VP- No telling.
I think the only democrat who could win the general is Evan Bayh, but he'd be a good VP pickup for Hillary.

Romney v. Clinton is really the ultimate in "douche vs. turd sandwich" decisions . . . puke

It would seem that the electorate would agree with you.

Recently, the road to the White House has been through Governor's Mansions for whatever reason.

Senators have not done too well.

That may be due to governors having to actually "run" something.

Or, it could just be a fluke, I suppose.

I hope Romney gets the nom, he'd be great.

Why don't you try having him for a governor before you go around singing the man's praises.

Maybe you or Collin can fill me in on your support for the guy a little bit - he's obviously incredibly bright, and his business background is impeccable, I have no doubts there. His background, however, is almost purely in organizational work and budgeting/forecasting - past 'balancing' the MA budget (which primarily came via cutting local funding for towns, plus a ridiculous accidental surplus in capital gains taxation), what has he really done?

I love the idea of giving each kid a laptop, but that wasn't really a tremendous success, and MA schools have actually suffered due to budget cuts that helped to push the budget into balance - I think MA is like 47th in the nation in school funding. The usual Repub platforms (vouchers, anti-gay marriage, pro-life) are fine and whatever, but some of these are kind of bizarre - he based his response to the MASC's ruling by claiming "Children have a right to a father and a mother," which blows me away.

While I'm very supportive of a return to conservative economic ideals and decreased central gov't and spending, does he really represent the best way to do this? Is this the only issue he really brings to the table?

Big surprise, Mass residents hate their GOP governor...

He's a great financial strategist, very inspirational/strong leader, strong record on traditional values, common sense ideas about immigration reform...Naturally we don't know much about his plans for foreign policy, but that will develop as we get further into the campaign.

Big surprise, a republican from the south who doesn't have to deal with this man's policies adores him.

What, like being against gay marriage? Yeah, its terrible. Trying to empower law enforcement to curb illegal immigration? Ridiculous. Thankfully, the rest of the country doesn't share your values, or lack thereof.

I could, of course, be wrong, but I'd be very surprised if he could get the GOP nomination.

Mystic, I think you might turn out to be wrong. We'll see. A lot of people feel he has more push and appeal than any other Republican. I talked to CT from the National Journal via email, and he said his money is on Romney at this point. A fraternity brother of mine within the RNC said that while he was with everyone in the last days of the Talent campaign, Romney was easily the candidate with the most buzz from within the party.

Oh whoops, I forgot that creationism is a totally acceptable thing to believe. Yeah, gay marriage is so wrong, there are only so many marriage licenses and if Teh Gays get them then how will straight people be able to get married in vegas only to divorce a day later? Gay people make a mockery of love I tell you!
God I'm so glad I don't live in the south.

That would be scary.

We live in his district. He's done a couple of "town hall" type meetings at our clubhouse. He shoots off his mouth just for the publicity.

This guy is an empty suit.

(ETA, I actually voted for the guy, though, because his opposition was so bad I don't even remember who it was.)

This argument obviously has no end, but the exact quote I referenced - "A child has a right to a mother and a father" - seems extremely odd as a stance against gay marriage . . . any thoughts, since the institution of marriage is not at all 'sanctioned' for the purposes of child birth, rearing, or anything similar? (I say this because he was challenging a legal ruling in this case, not to start an 'ethics' argument)

Also, he's wavered in the past on these 'traditional' values - when he ran for Senate in MA in '96 he said he would always support legal abortion, even though he was personally against it, because of the experience of a relative . . . he now wants to ban all abortions except in cases of rape (or threatened life).


Just saying, these are the kinds of issues he'll have to deal with to be elected.

Well, there's a first time for everything, and this well could be it.

I'm speaking mainly from personal observation. I have a hard time imagining many in the evangelical wing of the GOP voting for him, and many of the old-line (fiscally conservative, small government, socially libertarian-leaning) Republicans that I know would, I think, also be hesitant.

Well, the early polling shows that his biggest problem will be in the south. However, there won't be any significant opposition there.

Mitt has wavered somewhat on abortion, but I'm not concerned. Its actually getting blown up a bit I think. Its primary season, time to move to your base. Every politician does.

So are we.

I love liberals, especially the really stupid ones.

Time will tell, and as I said at the outset, I may well be wrong.

But seeing as how it's only been 10 years since the Southern Baptist Convention described Mormons as people who need to be converted to Christianity, and how Focus on the Family considers Mormonism a non-Christian faith on a par with Islam, Buddhism and Hunduism (none of which are likely to been seen as pluses by conservative voters), I'm not seeing that wing of the party endorsing the prospect of a Mormon in the White House.

As I said, time will tell.

I'd consider myself rational, not liberal. Also I have this thing where I think everyone should get to be happy. Silly of me I know.
Well at least you don't pretend you're not a bigot, I'll give you that much.

This shirt made me think of you:
http://www.tshirthell.com/store/prod...?productid=704

Perhaps my liberal ilk should throw flip-flops at him like people did to Kerry in 2004. :rolleyes:

How could someone vote for a presidential candidate who is Mormon? I'm not kidding.

Haha, the flip flops...that was both witty and classy.