Obama takes the big leap

Ben_Hecht · Jan 21, 2009

dooley_womack1 said:

Yeah, great get. Funny to see AQB so full of fail on his prognostications. And Hecht said McCain would beat Obama in a showdown.
Click to expand...

Yep.

Thank Krishna we didn't get the far-left Obama OR the 2000 McCain, in the campaign.

We are grateful.

alleyallen · Jan 21, 2009

Oh how young we were then.

Fenian_Bastard · Jan 21, 2009

Excellent episode of SportsJournalists.com Classic.
One of my only squabbles with s'chick ever.

slappy4428 · Jan 21, 2009

Fenian_Bastard said:

Excellent episode of SportsJournalists.com Classic.
One of my only squabbles with s'chick ever.
Click to expand...

Nice to see you be a member instead of a guest...

Fenian_Bastard · Jan 21, 2009

I was planning on playing with myself during the annual member-guest.
Wait, that didn't come out right.

hockeybeat · Jan 21, 2009

Fenian_Bastard said:

I was planning on playing with myself during the annual member-guest.
Wait, that didn't come out right.
Click to expand...

In Minneapolis, Reg Dunlop shakes violently.

playthrough · Jan 21, 2009

So whatever happened to this guy?

2muchcoffeeman · Jan 21, 2009

Double Down said:

Armchair_QB said:

He was also the governor of one of the biggest states in the Union. Bit more experience than a one-term senator.
Click to expand...

People always say this about Bush, and then fail to point out that the Texas governorship is one of the least powerful in the country.

And the idea that Obama would be more electable in 2012 has been debunked numerous times here, but I will quickly rehash it once again.

Let's say Obama sits out. In 2012, he's either running against an incumbent Democrat or an incumbent Republican. If it's a Democrat, he/she has either made the situation in Iraq better, or at best, maintained the status quo, which is really making it worse simply with the passage of time. So either people don't want to vote for a Democrat because the war is going worse, or they're going to vote for the incumbent because it's going better. The idea that the Democratic party would oust a sitting president in the primary anyway simply to clear the way for Obama is laughable.

If a Republican wins, he faces the same challenge. Running against an incumbant. He also will have to face all kinds of difficult votes on the war, which will be used against him (if he even wins the primary) by a party that is looking for every possible scrap of evidence to paint him as a lightweight.

The time for Obama to take his shot is now, otherwise he might as well wait until 2016. There is a good chance he won't even get the nomination this go round, but he's obviously the most interesting, compelling character in the race. People have been bitching for years that "if Democrats would just nominate someone who didn't have the personality of a two-by-four, they'd win easily." So now we have a candidate with the best personality, and the same people say, "He should wait. He's too green."

I think part of the reason people are saying that is because they're afraid he might actually connect with people and win. Funny how little we heard about Perot's experience when he was leading the polls in 1992.

Obama is the perfect contrast to Bush. He's articulate, he's been against the war from the beginning, he's actually good at bi-partisanship instead of just paying lip service, and doesn't try to make the opposition party out to be all that's evil and wrong with the world. I like the whole Purple America message, because I'm a liberal who grew up in a red state, and I know that we're not as different as Karl Rove and James Dobson would like you to believe. Most people don't hate the other guy. They just disagree. And that, right now, is Obama's message, and he just so happens to be as good at expressing it as anyone to come along in years.

He should throw his hat in. Because a lot of people want to hear what he has to say.
Click to expand...

Except for one really obvious phrase, this turned out to be a brilliant post. Possibly the second-best prognostication in board history.

Ben_Hecht · Jan 21, 2009

2muchcoffeeman said:

Double Down said:

Armchair_QB said:

He was also the governor of one of the biggest states in the Union. Bit more experience than a one-term senator.
Click to expand...

People always say this about Bush, and then fail to point out that the Texas governorship is one of the least powerful in the country.

And the idea that Obama would be more electable in 2012 has been debunked numerous times here, but I will quickly rehash it once again.

Let's say Obama sits out. In 2012, he's either running against an incumbent Democrat or an incumbent Republican. If it's a Democrat, he/she has either made the situation in Iraq better, or at best, maintained the status quo, which is really making it worse simply with the passage of time. So either people don't want to vote for a Democrat because the war is going worse, or they're going to vote for the incumbent because it's going better. The idea that the Democratic party would oust a sitting president in the primary anyway simply to clear the way for Obama is laughable.

If a Republican wins, he faces the same challenge. Running against an incumbant. He also will have to face all kinds of difficult votes on the war, which will be used against him (if he even wins the primary) by a party that is looking for every possible scrap of evidence to paint him as a lightweight.

The time for Obama to take his shot is now, otherwise he might as well wait until 2016. There is a good chance he won't even get the nomination this go round, but he's obviously the most interesting, compelling character in the race. People have been bitching for years that "if Democrats would just nominate someone who didn't have the personality of a two-by-four, they'd win easily." So now we have a candidate with the best personality, and the same people say, "He should wait. He's too green."

I think part of the reason people are saying that is because they're afraid he might actually connect with people and win. Funny how little we heard about Perot's experience when he was leading the polls in 1992.

Obama is the perfect contrast to Bush. He's articulate, he's been against the war from the beginning, he's actually good at bi-partisanship instead of just paying lip service, and doesn't try to make the opposition party out to be all that's evil and wrong with the world. I like the whole Purple America message, because I'm a liberal who grew up in a red state, and I know that we're not as different as Karl Rove and James Dobson would like you to believe. Most people don't hate the other guy. They just disagree. And that, right now, is Obama's message, and he just so happens to be as good at expressing it as anyone to come along in years.

He should throw his hat in. Because a lot of people want to hear what he has to say.
Click to expand...

Except for one really obvious phrase, this turned out to be a brilliant post. Possibly the second-best prognostication in board history.
Click to expand...

Yep.

What was the first?

2muchcoffeeman · Jan 21, 2009

Freelance Hack, 24 season 5 finalé, Jack Bauer, slow boat to China.

finishthehat · Jan 21, 2009

How come no one mentioned the Sarah Palin factor?

(Nice job retrieving the thread, btw.)

Log in or Sign up

Obama takes the big leap

Ben_Hecht Active Member

alleyallen Guest

Fenian_Bastard Guest

slappy4428 Active Member

Fenian_Bastard Guest

hockeybeat Guest

playthrough Moderator Staff Member

2muchcoffeeman Well-Known Member

Ben_Hecht Active Member

2muchcoffeeman Well-Known Member

finishthehat Active Member

Share This Page

Members

Useful Searches