| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
 Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2008 8:18 pm Post subject: NY Times, naturally, endorses . . . |
 |
|
. . . the hometown favorite.
| Quote: |
Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton would both help restore America�s global image, to which President Bush has done so much grievous harm. They are committed to changing America�s role in the world, not just its image. On the major issues, there is no real gulf separating the two. They promise an end to the war in Iraq, more equitable taxation, more effective government spending, more concern for social issues, a restoration of civil liberties and an end to the politics of division of George W. Bush and Karl Rove.
Mr. Obama has built an exciting campaign around the notion of change, but holds no monopoly on ideas that would repair the governing of America. Mrs. Clinton sometimes overstates the importance of r�sum�. Hearing her talk about the presidency, her policies and answers for America�s big problems, we are hugely impressed by the depth of her knowledge, by the force of her intellect and by the breadth of, yes, her experience.
It is unfair, especially after seven years of Mr. Bush�s inept leadership, but any Democrat will face tougher questioning about his or her fitness to be commander in chief. Mrs. Clinton has more than cleared that bar, using her years in the Senate well to immerse herself in national security issues, and has won the respect of world leaders and many in the American military. She would be a strong commander in chief.
Domestically, Mrs. Clinton has tackled complex policy issues, sometimes failing. She has shown a willingness to learn and change. Her current proposals on health insurance reflect a clear shift from her first, famously disastrous foray into the issue. She has learned that powerful interests cannot simply be left out of the meetings. She understands that all Americans must be covered � but must be allowed to choose their coverage, including keeping their current plans. Mr. Obama may also be capable of tackling such issues, but we have not yet seen it. Voters have to judge candidates not just on the promise they hold, but also on the here and now. |
I actually think this charge is unfair to Obama. He has detailed policy positions, but is trying to present the big picture. What's remarkable is how similar Clinton and Obama are on the issues: both have the same numbers in their energy plans, $150 billion over ten years and 25% goal for renewable energy used in the US by 2025.
| Quote: |
| The potential upside of a great Obama presidency is enticing, but this country faces huge problems, and will no doubt be facing more that we can�t foresee. |
Bingo.
I doubt this article will sway anyone's mind. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2008 11:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| In my opinion, this endorsement may help Clinton with a few independent or undecided voters. However, I think the New York Times endorsement is the kiss of death to McCain. What self-respecting conservative will now vote for McCain? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemcgarrett
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 3:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
The Clinton Camp at The Old York Times is propping her up. What a big surprise.
And they have the temerity to make this claim:
| Quote: |
| ...and has won the respect of world leaders and many in the American military. She would be a strong commander in chief. |
Oh, really? Now who would that be and what in particular has earned her such high marks? McCain will have a field day with Clinton on foreign policy, if she's nominated. This is grandstanding on the part of an editorial board that is a legend in its own collective mind.
And for them to label Giulani arrogant is really rich.
All this goes to show me is that New Yorkers have an inflated image of themselves and their own prowess.
As for McCain, I doubt most of his would-be supporters will care one jot about it. Every big metro newspaper endorses candidates; the NYTimes is no different despite what they imagine their role to be.
Wasn't it TIME magazine, based in NYC, that only a few months ago was touting Giuliani? He's been washed up since Iowa and might as well fold if he places third in Florida, as projected. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 6:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Stevie projected:
| Quote: |
| Oh, really? Now who would that be |
The Clintons are well-respected and liked abroad. Just because you don't like them doesn't mean other people have the same opinion. This may be a shock to you, but even many people at home like them. I know that is a hard truth to swallow, but try to live with it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
djsmnc
Joined: 20 Jan 2003
Location: Dave's ESL Cafe
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 9:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
Stevie projected:
| Quote: |
| Oh, really? Now who would that be |
The Clintons are well-respected and liked abroad. Just because you don't like them doesn't mean other people have the same opinion. This may be a shock to you, but even many people at home like them. I know that is a hard truth to swallow, but try to live with it. |
My gay friend in the US likes her. Everyone else keeps saying she'll bankrupt the country and give money to worthless louts to support their illegitimate children.
Oh yeah, my cousin in NY likes her too. She's 22 and has three kids and a house and education paid by welfare. Last time I saw her and she was showing it all off, it felt like that scene in the movie Office Space where the guy in the wheelchair and body cast was like "Anyone can be a successful millionaire...look at me!" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 12:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nice try, dj.
Romney 39.5% vs Clinton 51.0%
Huckabee 40.8% vs Clinton 50.8%
Guiliani 40.3% vs Clinton 50.8%
McCain 46.3% vs Clinton 46.2%
(RealClearPolitics) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stillnotking
Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Location: Oregon, USA
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 12:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| djsmnc wrote: |
| She's 22 and has three kids and a house and education paid by welfare. Last time I saw her and she was showing it all off, it felt like that scene in the movie Office Space where the guy in the wheelchair and body cast was like "Anyone can be a successful millionaire...look at me!" |
Then she is scamming the system with at least a dozen fake identities and you need to turn her in. No legitimate welfare recipients are buying houses with their ill-gotten gains. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stillnotking
Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Location: Oregon, USA
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 12:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stevemcgarrett wrote: |
| And for them to label Giulani arrogant is really rich. |
"When the world wavered, and history hesitated... he never did!" - Giuliani campaign ad
Yeah, that's not arrogant or anything. 
I agree with your basic point that newspaper endorsements no longer mean anything. Newspaper editors are no longer seen as possessing better information or judgment than anyone else. All part of the decline of the elites... which may not be such a good thing overall, actually. But that's neither here nor there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemcgarrett
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 9:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
YataBoy snipped:
| Quote: |
| The Clintons are well-respected and liked abroad. Just because you don't like them doesn't mean other people have the same opinion. This may be a shock to you, but even many people at home like them |
Yeah, sure. And people have framed photos of them in their huts alongside the one of JFK. In most cases, what admiration there is goes out to Bill, not Hill, since he was the President. Sure, lots of women admire Hill's courage. But when she came to Beijing in 1995 she turned off lots of Chinese (and Asian) women with her strident Western feminism that took no account of cultural differences. Of course, the French and others didn't care about Bill's adultery as it's normal to them. But even GW Bush has his admirers.
stillnotking wrote:
stevemcgarrett wrote:
And for them to label Giulani arrogant is really rich.
"When the world wavered, and history hesitated... he never did!" - Giuliani campaign ad
My point was that Giuliani is no more arrogant than the NYT editorial staff. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Milwaukiedave
Joined: 02 Oct 2004
Location: Goseong
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 9:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stevemcgarrett wrote: |
YataBoy snipped:
| Quote: |
| The Clintons are well-respected and liked abroad. Just because you don't like them doesn't mean other people have the same opinion. This may be a shock to you, but even many people at home like them |
Yeah, sure. And people have framed photos of them in their huts alongside the one of JFK. In most cases, what admiration there is goes out to Bill, not Hill, since he was the President. Sure, lots of women admire Hill's courage. But when she came to Beijing in 1995 she turned off lots of Chinese (and Asian) women with her strident Western feminism that took no account of cultural differences. Of course, the French and others didn't care about Bill's adultery as it's normal to them. But even GW Bush has his admirers. |
I think the Clinton's arrogant attitude is going to play against them in the general election Steve. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemcgarrett
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2008 12:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
I do believe you're right, Dave, and what a lot of us tend to forget is that many people vote first on their IMPRESSIONS of the candidates.
Hill-Bill is building a reputation as arrogant and self-serving that will be hard to shake. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spliff
Joined: 19 Jan 2004
Location: Khon Kaen, Thailand
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2008 12:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Hillary's a whale of a joke... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2008 12:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| stevemcgarrett wrote: |
I do believe you're right, Dave, and what a lot of us tend to forget is that many people vote first on their IMPRESSIONS of the candidates.
Hill-Bill is building a reputation as arrogant and self-serving that will be hard to shake. |
exactly. Anyone who votes for Hillary better not object to McCain or Romney as pres. because voting for Hillary in the primary helps them tremendously. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Milwaukiedave
Joined: 02 Oct 2004
Location: Goseong
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2008 1:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| stevemcgarrett wrote: |
I do believe you're right, Dave, and what a lot of us tend to forget is that many people vote first on their IMPRESSIONS of the candidates.
Hill-Bill is building a reputation as arrogant and self-serving that will be hard to shake. |
I don't know if Camp Hillary knows the definition of arrogant and self-serving Steve. Come this fall they are going to find out the hard way though. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2008 9:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| stevemcgarrett wrote: |
I do believe you're right, Dave, and what a lot of us tend to forget is that many people vote first on their IMPRESSIONS of the candidates.
Hill-Bill is building a reputation as arrogant and self-serving that will be hard to shake. |
exactly. Anyone who votes for Hillary better not object to McCain or Romney as pres. because voting for Hillary in the primary helps them tremendously. |
McCain will be lucky to get as much as 35% of the female vote. Romney will be destroyed.
I can speculate, too.
The election is in over 9 months. Pregnancy is rough, but what emerges is worth the birth pains. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
