Jump to content
  • Welcome to AngelsWin.com

    AngelsWin.com - THE Internet Home for Angels fans! Unraveling Angels Baseball ... One Thread at a Time.

    Register today to comment and join the most interactive online Angels community on the net!

    Once you're a member you'll see less advertisements. If you become a Premium member and you won't see any ads! 

     

IGNORED

Obama Poll


Which most accurately describes you?  

38 members have voted

  1. 1. Which most accurately describes you?

    • Voted for Obama in 2008 and 2012 and I still support him.
    • Voted for Obama in 2012 and I still support him.
      0
    • Voted for Obama in 2008 and 2012 and I no longer support him.
    • Voted for Obama in 2008 and I no longer support him.
    • Never voted for Obama and never supported him.
    • Other


Recommended Posts

I will be honest flop... half the time I have no ****in clue what you are talking about.

yes, i heard this the last time.

Ill be honest too, I still dont really care if you do or not and I still feel no need to help you understand cause we both know you wont make the effort unless its inline with your views so... meh, whatever, have a nice day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael Moore Slams Obama: HIstory Will Only Remember You Were a Black President

https://celebrity.yahoo.com/news/michael-moore-slams-obama-history-only-remember-were-211803862.html;_ylt=AwrSyCPzeRBUtyoAY0LQtDMD

 

Ouch.

 

Ouch indeed.  Though in the case of Moore i never know if its real or just him trying to get his name in the news again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being slammed by Michael Moore should be a badge of honor even for Obama.

 

That said, Obama has been a dismal failure.

Yep, and yet, there isnt a rep anyone here would vote for... largely because there isn't one worth voting for unless you are rich, white, and christian, but still.

Instead of options were going to double down on dismal just so the Dems can say they got the first African American and the first woman in office.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding the Palin comments, thats exactly what the Dems are counting on in 16 with Hillary as she is far less experienced than even Palin was.

 

Not even close. Clinton has been Secretary of State, served in the US Senate and has already run one presidential campaign as a primary candidate. Palin was the mayor of a town of about 5,000 people and she served a partial term as Governor of Alaska before being plucked out of the obscurity she so richly deserved by John McCain. She was selected because she was (1) a woman, (2) hot, and (3) hard line right wing without thinking a lot on her own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not even close. Clinton has been Secretary of State, served in the US Senate and has already run one presidential campaign as a primary candidate. Palin was the mayor of a town of about 5,000 people and she served a partial term as Governor of Alaska before being plucked out of the obscurity she so richly deserved by John McCain. She was selected because she was (1) a woman, (2) hot, and (3) hard line right wing without thinking a lot on her own.

 

Running a campaign is not the same as doing the job.. no way, no how.  Nor is sleeping with the man who does.

 

Yes, she was Sec State, but her performance on that job is highly open to debate as to whether it was good or bad, aside from holding the position its easy to debate that as a positive or negative.

You can see these as qualifications if you like, but the reality is that shes getting the nod for no reason beyond her gender and visibility.

This has beenthe Dem roadmap for almost a decade now.. why do you think she bowed out?  backroom promised being kept.. they kept her relevant for exactly this reason, when what they should be doing is looking for a better woman to run.

She will likely get the nod, and she will win regardless as noone will vote Rep and rightfully so really... but that doesn't make her a good candidate, the right candidate, or anything other than political capital.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sarah Palin was the best Governor of Alaska ever right?

 

Please show me where i aid that?

What i said, since you didn't get it,  was that at least as governor she had some experience being where the buck stopped... nothing more.  The fact of the matter is that at least she had that, something Hillary does not have.

Did she do the job well... don't know, didn't live there. 

I do kinda think its funny how she terrifies the left so much though.  Equally funny is how Biden gets a free pass when hes had just as many foot in mouth episodes as Palin ever did. 

Voting for Obama terrified me knowing that Biden was so close to the office at least as much as voting for McCain would have.  i would not want either of them in that chair, ever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Secretary of State is fifth in line for the presidency and one of the highest offices in the White House.  It totally trumps being governor of one of the smallest populated states in the country.

 

She didn't do shit, she was barely in office when she was chosen for Governor.  Before that she was mayor of a town with a population of 7500 people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Secretary of State is fifth in line for the presidency and one of the highest offices in the White House.  It totally trumps being governor of one of the smallest populated states in the country.

 

She didn't do shit, she was barely in office when she was chosen for Governor.  Before that she was mayor of a town with a population of 7500 people.

 

As you say.. 5th, meaning 4 other people are telling her what to do.

im not putting the office of sec State down, but lets be honest... she wasnt setting policy or making most of those policy decisions... the few she did, such as the ever popular B word, blew up in her face.

You can say that trumps it , but that's opinion, not fact.. we've had many many presidents who were governors.   How many that were Sec State?  ill answer it for you, almost 3 times as many former governors as Sec State:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States,_sortable_by_previous_experience

 

Look im not trying to say Palin was a good choice, she wasn't.. but Hillary isn't either is my point.   Palin was never going for the Oval office, only the kids table... Hillary wants the brass ring, and that scares me

Edited by floplag
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm seriously not getting flop's argument. Flop, are you suggesting that being the governor of Alaska would better prepare you to be president than being the Secretary of State?

I'm not sure either truly prepare you but if I had to choose one I'd say the answer is pretty easy.

I think you are also really undervaluing the importance of input the president receives from his cabinet. Remember bin Laden? Reports are that Clinton was the most hawkish person in the White House during those meetings about what course of action to take. There is little doubt that the president respected her opinion on that topic very much. He ignored the requests of his own VP and Sec. of Defense (someone Obama must have truly respected since he kept him on from the Bush administration) and went ahead with the raid. To act as if the cabinet simply pushes someone else's policy is silly. Anyone can be a spokesman. The cabinet exists to help the president create the policy.

Edited by HaloMagic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are also 50 states which need governors and hundreds of people have been governor.  There have only been 68 Secretary of States.

 

ok, but you used it asa qualification, im pointing out that this isnt necessarily the case.

Either way, were now were just off on a tangent... bottom line your comparing someone going for VP versus someone going for pres, it isnt the same thing, as I stated, and you ignored.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm seriously not getting flop's argument. Flop, are you suggesting that being the governor of Alaska would better prepare you to be president than being the Secretary of State?

I'm not sure either truly prepare you but if I had to choose one I'd say the answer is pretty easy.

 

History doesn't agree.  Either way the point is qualifications for one office, versus another.  Palin was not running for Pres, something many of you seem to forget.

 

I wouldn't necessarily oppose Hillary as a VP candidate as was the case with Palin, but for Pres, she is woefully under prepared. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How does history not agree?  How is she under prepared?  I am so confused.  Obama was a Senator from IL.  Experience is one thing, ability is another.

 

That said I am not a fan of Hillary and doubt she will be president.  But your assertions are way off base.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How does history not agree?  How is she under prepared?  I am so confused.  Obama was a Senator from IL.  Experience is one thing, ability is another.

 

That said I am not a fan of Hillary and doubt she will be president.  But your assertions are way off base.

 

Obama was also only senator for less than one term, but i guess thats ok in his case and bad for Palin, but i digress.

 

ive stated me reasons on Hillary, I dont care to do so again.  if you are confused thats on you.

Trust me i hope you are right, i hope she doesnt get that bid, but right now i dont see the Dem party positioning really anyone else.   I fear that the back room deals made for Obama still have some legs.  I hope im wrong

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...