Iowa and the road to the Whitehouse

[Mr Crunchy]

when LBJ signed the civil rights act of 1965 he said
''WE(the democrats) CAN KISS THE SOUTH GOODBYE)
he was right then although it took the south 16 years to figure out what happened.

[chacha]

"we need someone to step up,grab both parties by the yang and tell it like it is.
so far ive only seen 1 guy capable"

I watched one of the debates and Ron Paul was asked
"why did you not vote for the Patriot Act?"
His answer: BECAUSE I READ IT.
he told it like it is. I loved the look on the other candidates faces.

There was stunned silence in the room.
He then when on to explain his reasoning.

He hasnt been invite to last few debates- not because of that but because he is not considered a "frontrunner"

I Think it really sucks that the people who care enough to run for office, but dont have the billions, never get their side of the issues out there for all of us to see.

If you have the money, you get the votes.
pathetic

[VA Sox Fan]

Originally Posted by Mr Crunchy

he was right then although it took the south 16 years to figure out what happened.

Faaaaaaaaaaaaack you Seany!

[mtbykr]

Originally Posted by chacha

"we need someone to step up,grab both parties by the yang and tell it like it is.
so far ive only seen 1 guy capable"

I watched one of the debates and Ron Paul was asked
"why did you not vote for the Patriot Act?"
His answer: BECAUSE I READ IT.
he told it like it is. I loved the look on the other candidates faces.

There was stunned silence in the room.
He then when on to explain his reasoning.

He hasnt been invite to last few debates- not because of that but because he is not considered a "frontrunner"
I Think it really sucks that the people who care enough to run for office, but dont have the billions, never get their side of the issues out there for all of us to see.

If you have the money, you get the votes.
pathetic

Untrue, he was in the debate on Saturday, but not Sunday. I understand their reasoning why, but i still think he should have been allowed to participate.

[chacha]

Originally Posted by mtbykr

Untrue, he was in the debate on Saturday, but not Sunday. I understand their reasoning why, but i still think he should have been allowed to participate.

Yes thats true but he was also left out of the iowa debates
I still feel ,regardless of how much money they have raised or how popular they are
they should all be treated fairly.
I would also like to learn about all the candidates and what their positons are on the important issues.

I am tired of them insulting our intelligence by spewing whatever the flavor of the day is just to garner the most votes.

I'd like to see the media grill them on the important issues and have them address it and quit flip / flopping.
And no tears....geez

[rician blast]

Originally Posted by Mr Crunchy

the cross aisle battles have to stop,we need unilateral thinking we need a guy who isnt a dem or a republican but an american 1st....

mccain can build across both sides of the floor

McCain, I think, is capable of putting aside partisanship and attempting to do what's best/ right.

I tend to believe, though, the issue really is that attempts to unite are ultimately derailed by politicians who refuse to be united. Seems to me that there is a huge "you're not the boss of me" attitude played out in DC and no one is ever held accountable enough for standing in the way of progress on this front.

Edit:Been thinking abou this a bit today...Candidates love to say "I can get the job done, I will be tough on islamic radicalism, I will bring affordable healthcare to all, etc."

Where's the acknowledgement that it's a team effort, that unless you can get buy the party divisions, reach out across the aisle, etc. you ain't gonna get shit accomplished?

Too many politicans harp on the I, I, I and ME, ME, ME approach.

It would be refreshing to say the least if instead we'd here "This is what the people want, and we need to give it to them and here's how WE can get it done, but I need the help of everyone in the Senate, Congress, etc. and we WILL hold those who stand in our way with partisan politics accountable. I will reach out to all and as a team WE will get this or that done" ...then of course be specific as to how that process would unfold.

Of course the fear I guess would be that once you put the pressure on folks to be accountable they'll find every way they can to bring you down.

[mtbykr]

I just heard a report that said Bloomberg is planning to run as an independant. If that's true this will probably turn out to be 1992 again with Perot!

[rician blast]

Originally Posted by mtbykr

I just heard a report that said Bloomberg is planning to run as an independant. If that's true this will probably turn out to be 1992 again with Perot!

Fkn Perot was a clown. Never once answered a question fully. During debates I recall his approach was as follows:

"What we need to do is get a bunch of people that know about this issue in a room and discuss it and come up with a plan, then we'll implement the plan."

Great, you've said absolutely nothing, Ross...and your running mate needs a fucking nap.

[example1]

Originally Posted by rician blast

McCain, I think, is capable of putting aside partisanship and attempting to do what's best/ right.

I tend to believe, though, the issue really is that attempts to unite are ultimately derailed by politicians who refuse to be united. Seems to me that there is a huge "you're not the boss of me" attitude played out in DC and no one is ever held accountable enough for standing in the way of progress on this front.

Edit:Been thinking abou this a bit today...Candidates love to say "I can get the job done, I will be tough on islamic radicalism, I will bring affordable healthcare to all, etc."

Where's the acknowledgement that it's a team effort, that unless you can get buy the party divisions, reach out across the aisle, etc. you ain't gonna get shit accomplished?

Too many politicans harp on the I, I, I and ME, ME, ME approach.

It would be refreshing to say the least if instead we'd here "This is what the people want, and we need to give it to them and here's how WE can get it done, but I need the help of everyone in the Senate, Congress, etc. and we WILL hold those who stand in our way with partisan politics accountable. I will reach out to all and as a team WE will get this or that done" ...then of course be specific as to how that process would unfold.

Of course the fear I guess would be that once you put the pressure on folks to be accountable they'll find every way they can to bring you down.

So, I guess we've found your guy then:

From his NH speech on Tuesday night:

Barack Obama:

"There is something happening when people vote not just for the party they belong to but the hopes they hold in common – that whether we are rich or poor; black or white; Latino or Asian; whether we hail from Iowa or New Hampshire, Nevada or South Carolina, we are ready to take this country in a fundamentally new direction. That is what's happening in America right now. Change is what's happening in America.

You can be the new majority who can lead this nation out of a long political darkness – Democrats, Independents and Republicans who are tired of the division and distraction that has clouded Washington; who know that we can disagree without being disagreeable; who understand that if we mobilize our voices to challenge the money and influence that's stood in our way and challenge ourselves to reach for something better, there's no problem we can't solve – no destiny we cannot fulfill.......


"We can stop sending our children to schools with corridors of shame and start putting them on a pathway to success. We can stop talking about how great teachers are and start rewarding them for their greatness. We can do this with our new majority.

We can harness the ingenuity of farmers and scientists; citizens and entrepreneurs to free this nation from the tyranny of oil and save our planet from a point of no return. And when I am President, we will end this war in Iraq and bring our troops home; we will finish the job against al Qaeda in Afghanistan; we will care for our veterans; we will restore our moral standing in the world; and we will never use 9/11 as a way to scare up votes, because it is not a tactic to win an election, it is a challenge that should unite America and the world against the common threats of the twenty-first century: terrorism and nuclear weapons; climate change and poverty; genocide and disease.

All of the candidates in this race share these goals. All have good ideas. And all are patriots who serve this country honorably.

But the reason our campaign has always been different is because it's not just about what I will do as President, it's also about what you, the people who love this country, can do to change it. "

"We's" everywhere you turn. THe guy is a constitutional scholar, he fully understands that if we're going to make change it is going to require getting a true majority and actually passing legislation to sign some of these policies into law. In order to get that people have to look at the REAL function of the government, and cut out all the extranious shit that has bogged down this government for so long.


Seems like a pretty obvious difference to me.

[Taliesin]

http://www.blackboxvoting.org/

Poppies...poppies. Bev Harris unearthed yet again more widespread fraud in these elections. Paul’s numbers were far better in the precincts that were paper ballots (20%) as opposed to Diebold.

Hopefully his campaign coughs up the 67,000 for a re-count.

Entrance polls showed him closer to 16% than the given eight. If we lose free elections, we lose all. One guy is in charge of all that black-box data.

Black helicopters...but keep drinking the kool-aid.

[Taliesin]

He's the ONLY one out there answering the questions w/ conviction. With clear stances on everything. Agree or not...he ain't full of rhetoric and flowery poetry. Or change..or living in fake Mill towns. Rarely, rarely do I find a candidate worth discussing for a moment. I don't bother because the American people get distracted by shiny things. He's getting marginalized by the clowns to the left of me jokers to the right. Here I am...stuck in the middle with you. The only candidate worth even mentioning but he won't get the play or the attention because we are cows at the trough. So, it's the lesser of the evils for the maddening crowd. Paul is no fucking Ross Perot, but the kooks will lead you to believe that.

[Jayhawk Bill]

Originally Posted by Taliesin

http://www.blackboxvoting.org/
Bev Harris unearthed yet again more widespread fraud in these elections. Paul’s numbers were far better in the precincts that were paper ballots (20%) as opposed to Diebold.

Entrance polls showed him closer to 16% than the given eight...
One guy is in charge of all that black-box data.

This is a case where I strongly concur with you, Taliesin.

Originally Posted by Bev Harris

LHS is not subject to public records requirements, as the government is, at least, not in New Hampshire. The control over memory card contents is absolute; when cards malfunction or get lost, LHS brings the replacements.

Since LHS maintains the machines, repairs the machines, and replaces the machines -- often on Election Day -- when they malfunction, they have intimate access to the chips, sockets, ports, communications devices and other electronic components.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles...vote_fraud.htm

If there weren't a statistically significant difference from the polls, I'd be concerned but not suspicious--but Obama was leading Clinton in the last Zogby poll by 13% and he allegedly lost the election to her two days later by 3%. Tearing up at a question (and saying "I," not "we," FWIW) doesn't account for that big a shift. Even exit polling was statistically different from the election results, with Obama leading.

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5535

Yes, exit polls aren't perfect--but they're very rarely outside their margin of error, and as Chris Mathews mentioned in passing on "Hardball," the exit polls (which we don't get to see in raw form) confirmed an Obama victory--not a statistical tie with the lead within the margin of error, an outright Obama victory.

http://ronrox.com/paulstats.php?party=DEMOCRATS

On the Republican side, Romney went up 7% at the expense of McCain, Huckabee and Paul in roughly equal proportion. A small drop for Paul could be overlooked--but the huge gain for Romney stinks, calling into question the losses by Paul.

http://ronrox.com/paulstats.php

***

Notably, despite the excellent statistical case that can be made, no major news network, newspaper, wire service or Internet site is daring to say anything--the strong case is restricted to the blogosphere. One could blame the threat of litigation--one could blame the concern that any candidate fingered but not convicted of fraud might win--one could blame conspiracy theories, given the "head-in-the-sand" approach.

***

Taliesin, my support for Paul is less strong than yours, but I agree that he's a good candidate and, as best I can tell, an honest straight-shooter. I understand your being so frustrated.

[Taliesin]

Thanks JHB. Our initial contentious less than stellar meetings were more than likely due to my stubborn views on certain things. Passionate Red Sox fan after all. I appreciate the knowledge that you bring. It doesn't mean that I will always agree w/ your analysis. It does seem ultimately that we tend to agree on certain baseball matters if you didn't notice...we just come at it a different way. I apologize for my rudeness at times. We are in fact both Red Sox faithful. We should expend our energy making fun of Yankee fans and not go after each other when all is said and done.

[example1]

I really respect Ron Paul too. I don't agree with a lot of his stances on domestic policy, but I really appreciate how he challenges that Republican rabble on their absurd beliefs. I respect the libertarian in him, and I understand how a lot of people can support low federal spending.

I don't think it is much of a prescription for the future, but it is certainly a side of the coin that should be in the debate.

[chacha]

Originally Posted by Taliesin

He's the ONLY one out there answering the questions w/ conviction. With clear stances on everything. Agree or not...he ain't full of rhetoric and flowery poetry. Or change..or living in fake Mill towns. Rarely, rarely do I find a candidate worth discussing for a moment. I don't bother because the American people get distracted by shiny things. He's getting marginalized by the clowns to the left of me jokers to the right. Here I am...stuck in the middle with you. The only candidate worth even mentioning but he won't get the play or the attention because we are cows at the trough. So, it's the lesser of the evils for the maddening crowd. Paul is no fucking Ross Perot, but the kooks will lead you to believe that.

TY Talie