Before 08, we go through 07.

Spike Lee

Elitist, motherfucka.
Premium
Mar 26, 2005
13,863
546
48
30
#1
I know it's early to talk about 2008 right now. And we really can't say who will be best suited for the job yet since the Bush administration is still going on. Not to mention Iraq is still up in the air.

But lets paint a picture of 2008:

Scenario 1.

War in Iraq is still going on with a positive end in sight.
Scenario 2

War in Iraq is still going on with a negative end in sight.
Scenario 3

War in Iraq is still going on with questionable end in sight.

Scenario 4

War in Iraq has been ended with positive result.

Scenario 5

War in Iraq has been ended with a negative result.
With these scenarios, what would each party present with its nominees? And how will they nominess handle themselves with the scenarios.


Now this is with Iraq as the main focus not taking anything else into account.

You can add other issues but they may or may not be such by the end of the election. Let alone new ones will spring up before the election.

Take this and determining what a postive and negative outcome is, it is one tough cookie.
 

Sketcher

Let the chaos begin
Feb 18, 2004
7,691
193
0
32
Connecticut, USA
#2
Unfortunately, issues play little role in the outcome of elections anymore. The winning candidate is usually the one who can dig up the most dirt on the other guy.

Despite the failures in Iraq, I see the Dems having a hard time gaining the White House. The main Repub candidates so far have been fairly moderate while the Dems are still depending on the far lefties such as Clinton, Gore, and Kerry.
 
Jan 26, 2006
2,425
0
0
#4
Gen. Wesley Clark ! Military Democrat!
He would be seen by many as a 'token' soldier.

Just like there are believed to be 'token Negroes.'

That, by the way, is the ONLY appeal of Jack Murtha..the fact that he was a former military man.

When you put aside their military service and look at their OTHER qualifications and then examine their views and positions and THEN add to the mix that they are former soldiers or whatnot, only then can you realize what you are getting.

I'm not saying that's what you are doing because I have too little info on which to make that kind of statement, but many people just see what SHOULD be and then assume that it is true.

Clark was a General. True. Clarke was head of NATO or whatever. True.

But that means little.

Consider...

Jimmy Carter was an Annapolis grad. True. Carter served in the very demanding early nuclear sub force under Rickover. True. Carter was a governor. True. Carter is a Christian. True.

But Carter was a crappy President who failed to use the military well or to it's best advantage when needed and a crappier Ex-President recently with his terrible book which ignores the failings of HAMAS and makes terrible accusations about the Israelis.
 

Spike Lee

Elitist, motherfucka.
Premium
Mar 26, 2005
13,863
546
48
30
#8
I rember people said that we did not lose the Vietnam War. If that is the case, we wont lose the Second Gulf War either.

Edit: eieio, I would agree with you but the thing about Clark is that he had a position in which he dealt with foreign affairs.
 
Last edited:

YouEnjoyMyself

Fuck yeah
Premium
Mar 27, 2003
11,985
513
48
32
March '03 Owns Your Soul
#9
This won't end well until the Iraqis are committed to ending it well. As it stands right now, our boys are just caught in the middle of too much violence and not enough progress.

We really should tell 'em that they need to start getting their shit together, or we're gonna start pulling out.
 

Hawks9718

I hate you Milkman Dan
Jul 3, 2004
433
3
0
33
Chicago
www.monkeydyne.com
#10
And what in the fucking hell is with Barak Obama? I'm from Illinois, and I VOTED for him for senate... but STILL have NO idea what nor why there is a buzz about him. He just came out of nowhere and is appearing on all these shows, like they are trying to shove him down our throat to be the President.

What does he even talk about except what every other candidate talks about.. "We need a change in Washington." Wooooahh, novel fucking concept.
 

Spike Lee

Elitist, motherfucka.
Premium
Mar 26, 2005
13,863
546
48
30
#11
Charismatic young handsome man. Thats why. Plus I heard he appeals to the right.



Oh well Guliani or Obama?
 

TFS

Steal Life, Cheat Death
Jan 8, 2005
11,571
156
0
32
Ohio
#12
Gulliani, hands down. We know that when he says he'll do something, it gets done.

And what in the fucking hell is with Barak Obama? I'm from Illinois, and I VOTED for him for senate... but STILL have NO idea what nor why there is a buzz about him. He just came out of nowhere and is appearing on all these shows, like they are trying to shove him down our throat to be the President.

What does he even talk about except what every other candidate talks about.. "We need a change in Washington." Wooooahh, novel fucking concept.
I don't like Obama because he's a carpet bagger just like Hillary. He's not an Illinoisan. He was just inserted there to run against republican black man Alan Keyes. I think inserting candidates strategically like that is insulting, and I'm embarassed that it happened in Illinois after having spent 8 years (the longest I've spent anywhere) of my childhood there.

Everyone, do yourselves a favor: don't vote for a senate or congress candidate unless they've lived in the district they're running in for at least a couple years longer than the minimum time required by law, and have spent some time in that state in the sum of at least a year without holding any public office or during a campaign for an office.
 

Sketcher

Let the chaos begin
Feb 18, 2004
7,691
193
0
32
Connecticut, USA
#13
And what in the fucking hell is with Barak Obama? I'm from Illinois, and I VOTED for him for senate... but STILL have NO idea what nor why there is a buzz about him. He just came out of nowhere and is appearing on all these shows, like they are trying to shove him down our throat to be the President.

What does he even talk about except what every other candidate talks about.. "We need a change in Washington." Wooooahh, novel fucking concept.
He's young, fairly new politician, and is black. He's the exact opposite from just about every President we've had in the past century.

But people seem to think that's what matters. His politics are still the same as any other Democrat and I have yet to see a reason to vote for him.
 

Mr. Heskey

Resident Fucktard
Jun 1, 2005
5,392
2
0
College Station, TX
#14
And what in the fucking hell is with Barak Obama? I'm from Illinois, and I VOTED for him for senate... but STILL have NO idea what nor why there is a buzz about him. He just came out of nowhere and is appearing on all these shows, like they are trying to shove him down our throat to be the President.

What does he even talk about except what every other candidate talks about.. "We need a change in Washington." Wooooahh, novel fucking concept.
He's a poster-child for the democratic party much as is John Mccain for the repubs. They all say shit, but in actuality they never "get it done".
 

Hawks9718

I hate you Milkman Dan
Jul 3, 2004
433
3
0
33
Chicago
www.monkeydyne.com
#16
Good follow up posts guys, and I feel the same way... Manufactured candidate by the Dems and no one except the lefties see a reason to vote for him.

The part in the Manchurian candidate where Meryl Streep is talking to all those DC power brokers trying to convince them to get her son on the ticket is probably similart to what Obama's handlers did.
 

Spike Lee

Elitist, motherfucka.
Premium
Mar 26, 2005
13,863
546
48
30
#17
You could almost say the same thing about Guliani no? Of course I am a lot more familiar with Gulianis work than Obamas.
 

TFS

Steal Life, Cheat Death
Jan 8, 2005
11,571
156
0
32
Ohio
#18
You could almost say the same thing about Guliani no? Of course I am a lot more familiar with Gulianis work than Obamas.
That's because Obama hasn't had any work beyond parroting what his party tells him to say.

Guliani has been battle-tested. He cleaned up New York, lowered the crime rate substantially, and even led them through the initial months of the post-9/11 attacks (the guy attended every memorial service that he could, non-stop, and still managed the initial phases of the clean-up and rebound).

It's the difference between people convincing people to get an inexperienced kid with nice teeth on the ballot and people convincing people to get a battle-tested and successful veteran of public office on the ballot.
 

Sketcher

Let the chaos begin
Feb 18, 2004
7,691
193
0
32
Connecticut, USA
#19
You could almost say the same thing about Guliani no? Of course I am a lot more familiar with Gulianis work than Obamas.
Guiliani completely turned NYC around. If his handling of NYC is any indication of how he'll handle the country, he would have no problem winning. My only concern with him is his anti-gun stance.

Obama on the other hand hasn't been in office long enough for us to determine how good or bad of a politician he is. And yet the Dems are throwing him at us like he's the guy whose going to save the country.
 

TFS

Steal Life, Cheat Death
Jan 8, 2005
11,571
156
0
32
Ohio
#20
Guiliani completely turned NYC around. If his handling of NYC is any indication of how he'll handle the country, he would have no problem winning. My only concern with him is his anti-gun stance.

Obama on the other hand hasn't been in office long enough for us to determine how good or bad of a politician he is. And yet the Dems are throwing him at us like he's the guy whose going to save the country.
Guliani's anti-gun stance would still have to be supported by more dems and republicans in Congress than there are that agree with him. I don't think a proposal to ban guns has ever made it to the President to sign or veto.

What offices has Obama held prior to his carpet-bag term as Illinois senator?