Obama Running for President.

Tom Earp · #1 12-11-2006, 07:57 PM

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?

squirrely girl · #2 12-11-2006, 08:18 PM

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

LPIDelta · #3 12-11-2006, 08:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Earp

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?

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

macallan25 · #4 12-11-2006, 09:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Earp

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 can't I speeel or speek correkt english????!!!

It must be a local problem, not national

I'll contact Nationals, thayll know !!!????

#5 12-11-2006, 09:31 PM

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.

DeltAlum · #6 12-11-2006, 10:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OTW

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

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?

LPIDelta · #7 12-11-2006, 10:35 PM

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.

valkyrie · #8 12-11-2006, 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by macallan25

Why can't I speeel or speek correkt english????!!!

It must be a local problem, not national

I'll contact Nationals, thayll know !!!????

LOL.

GeekyPenguin · #9 12-11-2006, 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Earp

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?

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.

KSig RC · #10 12-11-2006, 11:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GeekyPenguin

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 . . .

GeekyPenguin · #11 12-11-2006, 11:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KSig RC

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.

shinerbock · #12 12-11-2006, 11:41 PM

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.

starang21 · #13 12-12-2006, 12:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shinerbock

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.

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

shinerbock · #14 12-12-2006, 12:46 AM

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.

honeychile · #15 12-12-2006, 03:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heather17

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.

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".