The only nutters are those buying the bullshit about "nutters" / "terrorists" as a real and existing thing.Bafana wrote: Only problem is that the nutters our their don't give a toss and will keep up the violence until we are all singing from their song book or they ahev killed us all in the process of savings us.
I can't stand the old dog and his phony antics.Allibert wrote:Did anybody see McCains speech? it was as if his PR people had told him to smile at the end of every sentence and he'd been taking smiling lessons.. The best he could manage was a very strange, sickly kind of false smile.
Made me want to throw up.
The realities of the various presidencies contradict these common, naive misconceptions.Bafana wrote:The big question for me now is whether i support McCain or not since the Republicains make for better business, or should I keep the moral poorer high ground and follow the chosen one to lead the world into a new age of epace and prosperity???
McCain is highly defeatable and Obama has shown he has the professional organization, properly managed, to beat him. Clinton failed because of hubris and a campaign that failed to take into account the unexpected... a good sign she would have been a bad president.cutiebutie wrote:Most polls maintain that Clinton would beat McCain whereas Obama vs McCain would not be so clear-cut.
Having said that, Clinton is not going to win the nomination and it would be a mistake to have her as VP, too confrontational and very different from Obama, it would seem like hypocrisy to accept the post.
Health portfolio, perhaps?
Anyhow - McCain in 2008!, it seems
You get more and more bizarre every time you 'contribute' something here.Strong Eagle wrote:McCain is highly defeatable and Obama has shown he has the professional organization, properly managed, to beat him. Clinton failed because of hubris and a campaign that failed to take into account the unexpected... a good sign she would have been a bad president.cutiebutie wrote:Most polls maintain that Clinton would beat McCain whereas Obama vs McCain would not be so clear-cut.
Having said that, Clinton is not going to win the nomination and it would be a mistake to have her as VP, too confrontational and very different from Obama, it would seem like hypocrisy to accept the post.
Health portfolio, perhaps?
Anyhow - McCain in 2008!, it seems
It takes more a good organisation to win a presidential election. McCain is far enough left to attract the right wing of the Dems . . . and he is white, which still counts for a lot with middle America.Strong Eagle wrote:McCain is highly defeatable and Obama has shown he has the professional organization, properly managed, to beat him. Clinton failed because of hubris and a campaign that failed to take into account the unexpected... a good sign she would have been a bad president.cutiebutie wrote:Most polls maintain that Clinton would beat McCain whereas Obama vs McCain would not be so clear-cut.
Having said that, Clinton is not going to win the nomination and it would be a mistake to have her as VP, too confrontational and very different from Obama, it would seem like hypocrisy to accept the post.
Health portfolio, perhaps?
Anyhow - McCain in 2008!, it seems
GOBAMA!Superglide
The only nutters are those buying the bullshit about "nutters" / "terrorists" as a real and existing thing.
GOBAMA!
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests