- This topic has 405 replies, 26 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 6 months ago by an.
-
AuthorPosts
-
May 7, 2008 at 3:52 PM #200870May 7, 2008 at 4:08 PM #200756XBoxBoyParticipant
“Men used to live to be nine hundred years old”
But who calls dat livin’
When no gal’ll give in
To no man what’s nine hundred years?Lyrics from Porgy and Bess – It Ain’t Necessarily So
May 7, 2008 at 4:08 PM #200798XBoxBoyParticipant“Men used to live to be nine hundred years old”
But who calls dat livin’
When no gal’ll give in
To no man what’s nine hundred years?Lyrics from Porgy and Bess – It Ain’t Necessarily So
May 7, 2008 at 4:08 PM #200825XBoxBoyParticipant“Men used to live to be nine hundred years old”
But who calls dat livin’
When no gal’ll give in
To no man what’s nine hundred years?Lyrics from Porgy and Bess – It Ain’t Necessarily So
May 7, 2008 at 4:08 PM #200849XBoxBoyParticipant“Men used to live to be nine hundred years old”
But who calls dat livin’
When no gal’ll give in
To no man what’s nine hundred years?Lyrics from Porgy and Bess – It Ain’t Necessarily So
May 7, 2008 at 4:08 PM #200885XBoxBoyParticipant“Men used to live to be nine hundred years old”
But who calls dat livin’
When no gal’ll give in
To no man what’s nine hundred years?Lyrics from Porgy and Bess – It Ain’t Necessarily So
May 7, 2008 at 4:17 PM #200772EugeneParticipantClinton has a good reason to stay. She is a lot more electable than Obama.
The key to becoming a president is winning Deep South. The reason we had Bush for two terms is that Southern whites voted for him in massive numbers two times in a row. Racism is still strong there. In 2004, Louisiana whites voted 75% Bush / 24% Kerry, blacks voted 9% Bush / 90% Kerry. Georgia whites voted 76%/23%, blacks voted 12%/88%. Bush won both states. And that was with white democratic nominee.
There aren’t enough blacks in the South to turn those states Democratic if we pick Obama, and those blacks vote Democratic anyway. But there are plenty of racist whites who would choose McCain just to keep a black man out of the White House.
As much as I like Obama, his face-off with McCain could be a disaster.
I still hope for some kind of compromise, such as Clinton as VP. But it seems that there’s too much bad blood between them.
May 7, 2008 at 4:17 PM #200813EugeneParticipantClinton has a good reason to stay. She is a lot more electable than Obama.
The key to becoming a president is winning Deep South. The reason we had Bush for two terms is that Southern whites voted for him in massive numbers two times in a row. Racism is still strong there. In 2004, Louisiana whites voted 75% Bush / 24% Kerry, blacks voted 9% Bush / 90% Kerry. Georgia whites voted 76%/23%, blacks voted 12%/88%. Bush won both states. And that was with white democratic nominee.
There aren’t enough blacks in the South to turn those states Democratic if we pick Obama, and those blacks vote Democratic anyway. But there are plenty of racist whites who would choose McCain just to keep a black man out of the White House.
As much as I like Obama, his face-off with McCain could be a disaster.
I still hope for some kind of compromise, such as Clinton as VP. But it seems that there’s too much bad blood between them.
May 7, 2008 at 4:17 PM #200840EugeneParticipantClinton has a good reason to stay. She is a lot more electable than Obama.
The key to becoming a president is winning Deep South. The reason we had Bush for two terms is that Southern whites voted for him in massive numbers two times in a row. Racism is still strong there. In 2004, Louisiana whites voted 75% Bush / 24% Kerry, blacks voted 9% Bush / 90% Kerry. Georgia whites voted 76%/23%, blacks voted 12%/88%. Bush won both states. And that was with white democratic nominee.
There aren’t enough blacks in the South to turn those states Democratic if we pick Obama, and those blacks vote Democratic anyway. But there are plenty of racist whites who would choose McCain just to keep a black man out of the White House.
As much as I like Obama, his face-off with McCain could be a disaster.
I still hope for some kind of compromise, such as Clinton as VP. But it seems that there’s too much bad blood between them.
May 7, 2008 at 4:17 PM #200865EugeneParticipantClinton has a good reason to stay. She is a lot more electable than Obama.
The key to becoming a president is winning Deep South. The reason we had Bush for two terms is that Southern whites voted for him in massive numbers two times in a row. Racism is still strong there. In 2004, Louisiana whites voted 75% Bush / 24% Kerry, blacks voted 9% Bush / 90% Kerry. Georgia whites voted 76%/23%, blacks voted 12%/88%. Bush won both states. And that was with white democratic nominee.
There aren’t enough blacks in the South to turn those states Democratic if we pick Obama, and those blacks vote Democratic anyway. But there are plenty of racist whites who would choose McCain just to keep a black man out of the White House.
As much as I like Obama, his face-off with McCain could be a disaster.
I still hope for some kind of compromise, such as Clinton as VP. But it seems that there’s too much bad blood between them.
May 7, 2008 at 4:17 PM #200899EugeneParticipantClinton has a good reason to stay. She is a lot more electable than Obama.
The key to becoming a president is winning Deep South. The reason we had Bush for two terms is that Southern whites voted for him in massive numbers two times in a row. Racism is still strong there. In 2004, Louisiana whites voted 75% Bush / 24% Kerry, blacks voted 9% Bush / 90% Kerry. Georgia whites voted 76%/23%, blacks voted 12%/88%. Bush won both states. And that was with white democratic nominee.
There aren’t enough blacks in the South to turn those states Democratic if we pick Obama, and those blacks vote Democratic anyway. But there are plenty of racist whites who would choose McCain just to keep a black man out of the White House.
As much as I like Obama, his face-off with McCain could be a disaster.
I still hope for some kind of compromise, such as Clinton as VP. But it seems that there’s too much bad blood between them.
May 7, 2008 at 4:32 PM #200782SDEngineerParticipantThe South has been trending more and more conservative for decades now. It’s pretty much a lost cause for Democrats there, with the exception of FL. I doubt Hillary could win a single one of the deep southern states, with the exception of Arkansas, and possibly FLA (which Obama I would say has a similar shot of winning). And Arkansas doesn’t – or shouldn’t – have near enough votes to matter.
However, while the South has been trending conservative, other areas have been trending more liberal (rocky mtn states like CO and NM, even AZ to a certain degree), New England and the West Coast are now pretty much Republican free zones at the state office or higher level (with the exception of RINO’s like Schwartzenegger who disagree with somewhere between 1/2 and 2/3rds of the Republican party platform). It offsets.
May 7, 2008 at 4:32 PM #200823SDEngineerParticipantThe South has been trending more and more conservative for decades now. It’s pretty much a lost cause for Democrats there, with the exception of FL. I doubt Hillary could win a single one of the deep southern states, with the exception of Arkansas, and possibly FLA (which Obama I would say has a similar shot of winning). And Arkansas doesn’t – or shouldn’t – have near enough votes to matter.
However, while the South has been trending conservative, other areas have been trending more liberal (rocky mtn states like CO and NM, even AZ to a certain degree), New England and the West Coast are now pretty much Republican free zones at the state office or higher level (with the exception of RINO’s like Schwartzenegger who disagree with somewhere between 1/2 and 2/3rds of the Republican party platform). It offsets.
May 7, 2008 at 4:32 PM #200850SDEngineerParticipantThe South has been trending more and more conservative for decades now. It’s pretty much a lost cause for Democrats there, with the exception of FL. I doubt Hillary could win a single one of the deep southern states, with the exception of Arkansas, and possibly FLA (which Obama I would say has a similar shot of winning). And Arkansas doesn’t – or shouldn’t – have near enough votes to matter.
However, while the South has been trending conservative, other areas have been trending more liberal (rocky mtn states like CO and NM, even AZ to a certain degree), New England and the West Coast are now pretty much Republican free zones at the state office or higher level (with the exception of RINO’s like Schwartzenegger who disagree with somewhere between 1/2 and 2/3rds of the Republican party platform). It offsets.
May 7, 2008 at 4:32 PM #200874SDEngineerParticipantThe South has been trending more and more conservative for decades now. It’s pretty much a lost cause for Democrats there, with the exception of FL. I doubt Hillary could win a single one of the deep southern states, with the exception of Arkansas, and possibly FLA (which Obama I would say has a similar shot of winning). And Arkansas doesn’t – or shouldn’t – have near enough votes to matter.
However, while the South has been trending conservative, other areas have been trending more liberal (rocky mtn states like CO and NM, even AZ to a certain degree), New England and the West Coast are now pretty much Republican free zones at the state office or higher level (with the exception of RINO’s like Schwartzenegger who disagree with somewhere between 1/2 and 2/3rds of the Republican party platform). It offsets.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.