Bob Dole defies Bob Dole to come up with more Bob Dole references about Bob Dole.

/marklar

nashBridges: I'm wondering if like 2004 this election won't be so much the Republicans winning as it will be the Democrats losing. I'm not sure how much more the Democrats can take of the Hillary/Obama fight.

And if the superdelegates decide the primary? It's over for the Dems. Half of them just aren't going to vote.

Part of me sort of hopes that they actually pull off what would be the most horrific failure in American electoral politics in losing this election.

We seriously need a center-left party in this country that knows how to win a goddamn election and knows how administer a thorough kicking to an opponent who deserves to be defeated.

The Dems give the nom to Hillary, and just maybe it'll be so bad the party will implode, and we can have something new and better.

If his wife has cut him off from lobbyist poontang he'd better have a good had.

make that "a good hand"

Bob Dole. Bob Dole. Bob...Dole....Boooob.....Dole...

zzzzzz

What about his PIMP HAND?

Or his evil hand?

Or the gripping hand...

NashBridges


And if the superdelegates decide the primary? It's over for the Dems. Half of them just aren't going to vote.

False.
Committed democrats aren't the only bloc fed up with the Bush maladministration. The war, the economy, along with other misplaced priorities are going to weight heavily in a presidential election. Fundamentally this will look like Gore V Bush, Kerry V Bush, the typical battleground scenarios we have come to know and love. Mind that some of these "independents for Obama" are also known as arseholes that voted for Bush in the last election. As such, democrats can do without them if we have to, and there are quite a few of these newcomers that aren't really committed to the party's progressive values. The ideal candidate facade has been broken. The super-delegates can pass on either and the search will continue. Democrats have every advantage in staying flexible. Some of these fools in the party getting on the endorsement bandwagon are net effect divisive, and would do us all a favor for keeping a poker face.

I can be political!

Obama Obama McCain McCain. Bob Dole? Clinton. Romney? Clinton. Bush Bush Bush? Obama. ECONOMY! Nouri al-Maliki. Torture Terrorists Bush. Oil Oil Oil Oil! Bush! Bin Ladin!!! Bob Dole. Obama Obama. Obamanation. Clinton. Dead Horse. Clinton Clinton B-b-b-but Clinton. Right wing conspiracy. Libs libs libs! Obama. Obama. Obama? Obama.

Kersplode.

nashBridges: And if the superdelegates decide the primary? It's over for the Dems. Half of them just aren't going to vote.

Well in theory, considering Hillary-ous won't drop out, the superdelegates WILL decide the nomination. The question is whether they're stupid enough to piss off blacks, moderates AND the young in favor of racists and/or eldery white hyper-partisan Democrats (who realistically would suck it up and vote (D) anyways).


/I never understood why Hillary thought her strength among faithful Democrats was a selling point in a general election that you need independents to win

McCain gave Bob Dole a sloppy hand job?

nashBridges: I'm wondering if like 2004 this election won't be so much the Republicans winning as it will be the Democrats losing. I'm not sure how much more the Democrats can take of the Hillary/Obama fight.

I'm going to sue the Democratic Party for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder when this is all done. Sue their ugly pantsuits and lapel pins right off. There will be nothing left but a field of khaki pants, John Tesh t-shirts, and mismatching tube socks.

Yeah, that's right. I'm taking all of their shoes, too.

nashBridges: I'm wondering if like 2004 this election won't be so much the Republicans winning as it will be the Democrats losing. I'm not sure how much more the Democrats can take of the Hillary/Obama fight.

And if the superdelegates decide the primary? It's over for the Dems. Half of them just aren't going to vote.

If the superdelegates steal the show, I'll never vote Dem again for anything. I don't care who wins the nomination ,but it should be legit. If it ain't I'm done with them, I'll vote Repub just to spite them, forever.

Childish, sure. But I mean it. This whole superdelagate bs reminds me of the pigs in animal farm... with them being "more equal".

Rovian: Mind that some of these "independents for Obama" are also known as arseholes that voted for Bush in the last election. As such, democrats can do without them if we have to, and there are quite a few of these newcomers that aren't really committed to the party's progressive values.

A little harsh, rovy. You attract far more flies with honey than with vinegar. Besides, if they're willing to open their eyes enough to read up on Obama, they're likely going to learn a lot of other things too. Which will likely end up with them becoming Dems.

/Bush 04
//Obama 08

nashBridges: And if the superdelegates decide the primary? It's over for the Dems. Half of them just aren't going to vote.

Of course the superdelegates will decide the winner.
Whether it's Obama or Clinton, neither candidate will get enough votes without the superdelegates.

The difference is that if Hillary gets 150 more of them than Obama, it's suddenly the end of the world for some irrational reason.

Shaggy_C

if they're willing to open their eyes enough to read up on Obama, they're likely going to learn a lot of other things too.

Possibly. I know I don't want to see this primary turn into a passing fad. Any voter so committed to a candidate but not the party is someone we can ultimately do without. Easy come, easy go as they say. It is wrong to put this much egg in one basket. I'm also definitely not for allowing former Bush supporters to start defining the democratic party. Thanks, but no thanks. He's already bankrupted the country morally and economically, the opposition should be free from Bush taint.

McCain had to chop off his bad hand because it kept trying to kill people. He keeps it securely locked inside an iron box to prevent its escape.

Rovian: Possibly. I know I don't want to see this primary turn into a passing fad. Any voter so committed to a candidate but not the party is someone we can ultimately do without.

Well you'll be happy to know I was never a part of the Republican party and I'll never be a part of the Democratic Party. I'm independent and damn proud of it. With your hateful tone you're starting to sound like a Hillary supporter. It's...unbecoming.

Or the gripping hand...

I came to this thread for this and was not disappointed.

In which hand is he carrying a copy of the 10th Amendment?

24-Bit Voxel-

The pigs Superdelegates need all the milk and apples votes because they are brain workers statesmen, you dont want Jones Osama Bin Laden to come back, do you?

Ms. Rotham-Hyphen-Clinton is trying very hard to transition from Molly the horse to a wannabe-Napoleon.

Barack "Snowball" Obama had better watch his back.

I am counting the days until one of them mentions Windmill subsidies.



/Moses and I are for McCain-Pilkington 08!

Shaggy

With your hateful tone you're starting to sound like a Hillary supporter.

I'm pleased to say I would have supported either candidate before Rev. Wright and the Bosnia thing. Now, I'm having to overlook even these things.

FTFA: A new poll has found that a majority of Americans now believe the US will ultimately succeed in Iraq. That's a strong card for McCain

Wot do the majority of American think about unicorns?

Are they fer 'em or agin 'em?

Enquiring minds wanna know, ya know.

Quatchi can't take this silly article particularily seriously cos one thing I know fer sure about the American electorate is that they have the mental retention of a goldfish with Alzenheimers.

Bottom line is Iraq about as winnable as Palestine and it's not affordable in the long term. Hell, even in the short term. Funny how the MSM can find time to replay selective sound bytes from Rev Wrights 20 years of preaching but still spend less time on the realities of the war in Iraq than they do on where Paris Hilton's much abused cooter turned up this week.

Recession = War Costs + GOP Corruption/Mismanagement of Economy.

If Obama can make that point come debate time then McAncient is toast.

Rovian: Shaggy_C

if they're willing to open their eyes enough to read up on Obama, they're likely going to learn a lot of other things too.

Possibly. I know I don't want to see this primary turn into a passing fad. Any voter so committed to a candidate but not the party is someone we can ultimately do without. Easy come, easy go as they say. It is wrong to put this much egg in one basket. I'm also definitely not for allowing former Bush supporters to start defining the democratic party. Thanks, but no thanks. He's already bankrupted the country morally and economically, the opposition should be free from Bush taint.

i couldn't disagree more.

if you haven't noticed, the democratic party, running under the auspices of the old guard, has failed. the only president you've gotten in office in the past 28 years sold himself as a moderate and moved the party to the right.

the democratic party absolutely cannot afford to act like the farking democratic party right now. it's time the democrats pulled their heads out of their asses and realized that they are losing to people who are dumber than chimps. their complete inability to field a decent candidate against george farking bush in 2004 was the death knell of that phase of the party. it's just that some morons haven't realized it yet.

and if they succeed in pushing away all this new, young, incredibly enthusiastic interest in the party by wresting control back into their wrinkled old hands, we will continue to be governed by warmongers while they shake their canes in ineffectual rage, refusing to see their own complete lack of vision is just as much to blame as the neoconservative agenda.

sorry, but i'm just a little sick of american voices of sanity being repressed by the warring factions of the angry old men and the crying old women.

burndtdan: it's time the democrats pulled their heads out of their asses and realized that they are losing to people who are dumber than chimps.

Smartest line I've read ALL day.

burntdan


if you haven't noticed, the democratic party, running under the auspices of the old guard, has failed

and if they succeed in pushing away all this new, young, incredibly enthusiastic interest in the party

If you haven't noticed, the democrats did pretty well in 2006, and should have won the whitehouse in 2000.

If the youth interest were truly interested in the party as you suggested, we wouldn't be having a primary this contentious. I'm somewhat turned off by the "or bust" attitude by supporters on both sides when this should have been a joint ticket which is what would have been in the interest of the party.

blade1228: burndtdan: it's time the democrats pulled their heads out of their asses and realized that they are losing to people who are dumber than chimps.

Smartest line I've read ALL day.



made him laugh too.

/they lost to this man. god damnit democrats, you could have ended this war 4 years ago.

Rovian: If the youth interest were truly interested in the party as you suggested, we wouldn't be having a primary this contentious.

So you'd have same-old, same-old Hillary who 50+% of the general electorate dislikes up against the 'maverick' McCain since January. Brilliant! I'm sure things would change and she'd have a resounding victory.

Rovian: burntdan


if you haven't noticed, the democratic party, running under the auspices of the old guard, has failed

and if they succeed in pushing away all this new, young, incredibly enthusiastic interest in the party

If you haven't noticed, the democrats did pretty well in 2006, and should have won the whitehouse in 2000.

If the youth interest were truly interested in the party as you suggested, we wouldn't be having a primary this contentious. I'm somewhat turned off by the "or bust" attitude by supporters on both sides when this should have been a joint ticket which is what would have been in the interest of the party.

should have won in 2000? you lost to the guy whose picture i just posted. you lost to a man that couldn't say nuclear. you lost to a man who couldn't manage a baseball team for farks sake. a man whose campaign was pretty much the equivalent of jingling a set of keys in front of a toddler, only the toddler was the religious right.

that's how farking bad the 2000 democratic campaign was. you were WORSE than george bush's campaign.

and in 2004? you lost again. this time, after he had already farked up EVERYTHING! in a sure bet election season against a hugely unpopular incumbent, you put up the most uninspiring, undriven candidate i think in the field. you effectively put up a plank of wood with a face drawn on it.


then comes 2006. what changed before 2006? howard dean took the chair of the dnc. he shook things up a little and pushed for a 50 state plan. AND IT WORKED! lord in heaven, the democrats did something right!

and now you have a candidate that is building on that excitement, using that same winning strategy, pulling in new members to the party, and you want to tell those new people to screw off?


if you can't see what i'm saying, you are one of the ones with your head up your ass. and if the party manages to throw away the chance to fundamentally redefine politics in their image, they deserve what they get, decades more of losing to the functionally retarded.

Descartes: nashBridges: And if the superdelegates decide the primary? It's over for the Dems. Half of them just aren't going to vote.

Of course the superdelegates will decide the winner.
Whether it's Obama or Clinton, neither candidate will get enough votes without the superdelegates.

The difference is that if Hillary gets 150 more of them than Obama, it's suddenly the end of the world for some irrational reason.

Well, of COURSE it'll be the end of the world if she wins! Everybody knows she's the Anti-Christ! She's a white woman, the opposite of Jesus! DUH! It's so obvious that what we have here is a prelude to Armageddon, since Obama's the Second Coming, don'tcha know. And McCain? He must be one of the 4 Horsemen of the Apocalypse. Cheney's probably one too.

And why hasn't anyone commented on John McCain's last name? Mc-Cain means son or kin of Cain, and we all know who he is! Do we really want a President related to the first murderer to walk the Earth? I don't think so!

/my trolling sucks, so sarcasm will have to do

John McAncient has a good hand here?

Author is losing his kung fu grip on reality.

McCain use to be good back in the day but he's lost it now.

Apparently they used to call him... The Kid!

Quatchi: (disbelieving) The Phoenix Kid. He had the fastest hand in the West.
The Phoenix Kid: In the world.
Quatchi: Well, if you're the Kid, then show me something.
The Phoenix Kid: Well, maybe a couple of years ago, I could have shown you something, but today, look at that. (He holds up his right hand - and it is steady without shaking)
Quatchi: Steady as a rock.
The Phoenix Kid: Yeah, but I shoot with this hand. (His left hand shakes wildly)

/Not nearly obscure enuff? ^_^

Shaggy


So you'd have same-old, same-old Hillary

The first Clinton administration was pretty good for the country. I would go back to that same-old in a second. This crutch of same old Hillary, who is at core a centrist, is intellectually dishonest at best.


burntdan

you lost again.

Not by the vote count in 2000, and John the conceder Kerry, didn't do us any justice either. As the electorate lines up like lambs to the slaughter over machismo sound-bites such as Obama's lapel pin - Is this an important issue somehow?

Rovian: This crutch of same old Hillary, who is at core a centrist, is intellectually dishonest at best.

How is it intellectually dishonest? I think a major problem in Washington is lobbyist influence. She represents no departure from the status quo. Same old? You bet.

Rovian: Not by the vote count in 2000, and John the conceder Kerry, didn't do us any justice either. As the electorate lines up like lambs to the slaughter over machismo sound-bites such as Obama's lapel pin - Is this an important issue somehow?

think. seriously dude, think.



this man is sitting in the white house. you lost. to him.

yes, it was an arguable conclusion, and gore got robbed, etc etc. but you still barely eeked out a dead farking tie to a man that can barely string a sentence together. and that was just after the term of a relatively popular president before with high approval ratings. the one, as i said earlier, who only won because he sold himself as a moderate and abandoned the liberal cause.

that's like losing to a one legged kid in the 40 yard dash. even if you tie him and they give it to him in a photo finish, you're farking pathetic.

the president you had before bill clinton was jimmy carter. seriously. wake up.

Rovian: burntdan


if you haven't noticed, the democratic party, running under the auspices of the old guard, has failed

and if they succeed in pushing away all this new, young, incredibly enthusiastic interest in the party

If you haven't noticed, the democrats did pretty well in 2006, and should have won the whitehouse in 2000.

If the youth interest were truly interested in the party as you suggested, we wouldn't be having a primary this contentious. I'm somewhat turned off by the "or bust" attitude by supporters on both sides when this should have been a joint ticket which is what would have been in the interest of the party.

They did well in 2006 because they were talking about pulling out of a war that no one seems to want anymore. Once they got in office it was business as usual and nothing changed. People notice that kind of shiat. Every promise they made they broke, just like the old boss.

Also what I think we are witnessing is the changing of the guard. Hillary and these other old farks represent the way things aren't working... and haven't worked for a while now. I think the younger generations want to move them out entirely, since they have little clue what they are doing anymore. Obama being young is a factor he has going for him, and Hillary looks older every day.

For the Obama supporters that won't vote for Hillary I don't think it's "or bust" for them, she brings very little to the table. We know she supports the war, she's pro censorship, wants to include Iran in the war, wants more money from us for her health care plan, and lies without blinking. How is that good?

24-Bit

Once they got in office it was business as usual and nothing changed.

That just isn't true. Quite a bit has changed, including lame duck status. You can't quantify how different it would be if Bush were still getting his way on everything. Granted, they haven't been able to stop the war, but they don't have enough votes to do so. You might be blaming the republican obstructionists that are still overwhelmingly in support.

Obama being young is a factor he has going for him, and Hillary looks older every day.

We know she supports the war, she's pro censorship, wants to include Iran in the war, wants more money from us for her health care plan, and lies without blinking. How is that good?


She is for troop withdrawal and has a health care plan that can't be distinguished from Obamas enough to make it a relevant campaign issue, which has been tried.

Who doesn't look older every day? She overly embellished on the Bosnia thing, I wouldn't defend such a thing but there is no golden boy in this race.

burntout

you lost. to him.

I wasn't running. If it were just W, common sense should have dispatched him handily, but when you're running against every god-damned lapel pin. . .

I still haven't quite wrapped my mind around how John "No Plan B" McCain thinks he can run an entire campaign on how great the Iraq war is and win.

I came for the Strangelove references and left disappointed.

What a let down.

Rovian: burntout

you lost. to him.

I wasn't running. If it were just W, common sense should have dispatched him handily, but when you're running against every god-damned lapel pin. . .

lol you misspelled my name. and you took what was clearly me talking about the party as a whole and rebutted with "i wasn't running".

man, with keen thinking like that, i can't imagine why you could lose to the unstoppable political argument that is the mighty lapel pin.

seriously. democrats cannot afford to be democrats anymore. the party has the passive stigma of being able to always pull defeat from the jaws of victory. it's time for them to give up the reigns to the next generation, because they really don't know what the fark they are doing.