Politcs Plus
I will be writing the 2008 presidential election and anything political in between. Although I am a Democrat ,come on in and tell me where I am wrong. lol
About Mike


Member Since:
October 01, 2007
Last Signed In:
September 06, 2008
Profile Views:
781
Blog Views:
5132
View Profile
Send a Message
Send To A Friend
Sign Guestbook
Add as a Friend

Previous Posts
Why I think Barack Obama will win in November
No longer McCain's party
That was yesterday's qualifications
Grand Slam
"No way,no how,no John McCain"
The Hillary Factor and why
Excellent Choice
Nuance v Steadfast
Start the real campaign
Glad to be back
Archives
October 07
November 07
December 07
January 08
February 08
March 08
April 08
May 08
June 08
July 08
August 08
September 08
John Edwards & Barack Obama went straight for the jugular in going
after Hillary. They attacked the vote on calling the Iranian Revolutionary Council a terrorist organization. Saying it will give this president the excuse he needs to
go to war with Iran.

Hillary’s inconsistent answers were exposed on social security and at the end
of the debate she agreed with New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer's controversial plan to give driver's licenses to illegal immigrants but then a minute later started backtracking.
Now Bill Clinton was a master at being evasive but her facial expressions and
demeanor showed she is no Bill Clinton. Will this debate change the numbers?
I don’t know.

I think what was really exposed last night was status quo positions of the front runner.
How can my party complain about the secrecy in the Bush Administration
if Hillary does not turn over all her documents? I understand it gives the other
candidates an unfair advantage, because she will be the only candidate required to
do this. But if this lack of transparency is going to stop, someone has to take
the lead. The other is lobbyist money; Hillary has out raised all the candidates of
both parties in lobbyist money from Wall Street, defense department, and insurance
and drug companies. Some might see it as success but really it business as usual.
Somehow we must have a leader to take us to public financing because these lobbyist
have too much influence.

I am getting suspicious as to why the Bush Administration is getting their way on the
latest NSA spying bill. Did the telecommunication lobbyist have something to do
with it? I don’t know.

This may sound like a slam on Hillary but it really isn’t, it just exposes some of her
weakness in a primary. Great leaders learn form mistakes and they don’t
usually repeat them. Constructive criticism will only make a person stronger.
Subscribe!
RSS 2.0 feed RSS 2.0
Add to My Yahoo
Add to My Google
Add to Bloglines
Add to My AOL
Mike - > Politcs Plus -> Enough already
Enough already

It seems to me, that the so called left wing media won't be happy until they start a full scale race riot. It started for me this morning, on MSNBC's “Morning Joe.”  It’s driving me crazy, having to agree with Pat Buchanan over David Shuster about the comments Bill Clinton made in West Virginia.  Bill Clinton said something like this "If all you vote overwhelmingly for Hillary she will win" David Shuster said it was code, for Barack Obama cannot win the white vote.  Pat Buchanan said Bill Clinton was merely saying Hillary can still win if she wins the most of the remaining states.  Earlier, the Morning Joe’s panel was discussing the AP story about Hillary getting the hard working white vote.  This topic left their black guests Tiki Barber and John Ridley shaking their head, not believing what was going on.  John Ridley said the part about "hard-working white voters might be a problem like; Obama’s bitter remarks.  I'm not picking on MSNBC, because I'm sure the other networks are doing the exact same thing.

 

I've been a political junkie for years, but now the media has me stumped. Why is the Catholic voting preference, an exit poll question? Why is the Catholic vote important in Pennsylvania and Ohio and not in Brownsville, Texas or Los Angeles, California?  MSNBC's Chris Matthews says its code for white Reagan Democrats.  This is a year change, so get rid of Reagan Democrats, yellow dog Democrats, and latte drinking Democrats and just go with Democrats. Too many labels to keep up with.

 

I am amazed as to how quickly John McCain can change his mind (flip-flop).  Jon Stewart asked McCain about his remarks saying Hamas favored Obama and McCain said he, was just repeating the words of the Hamas leader.  Then Jon asked "When did we decide the words of a Hamas leader are so important?"  Jon went onto say Al Qaeda, Hamas and other terrorist groups said the words and actions of George W. Bush's inspire them and it helps recruiting. John McCain immediately said we cannot pay attention to the words of a group that hates us for our freedoms.  The media should cover this man and repeat the results, because this man is a walking gaffe waiting to happen.  Perhaps CNN and MSNBC can follow the story about John McCain not voting for George W. Bush in the 2000 election.  The Washington Post, New York Times, and Los Angeles Times are reporting that witnesses are backing up Arianna Huffington’s (proprietor of left-leaning blog Huffington Post) version that John McCain told her he did not vote for George Bush in 2000, despite John McCain’s denial.  Why is this so important? If true it will knock another wheel off the straight talk express, and alienate the base.

 

Perhaps this race thing will blow over and we can have a presidential race on the views and issues of John McCain and Barrack Obama.

 

“Happy Mother’s Day” to any mom reading this blog.

I lost my mom last year, so I know how extra important a mom is to the family.

Tags:
posted by Mike on Friday, May 9, 2008 at 12:37 PM
Report a Violation
Viewed 95 times
6 comments from 4 users

1

posted by Mike on May 9, 2008 at 02:31 PM

That's telling it like it is Vet ,you must have slept good after last night's win.

I guess they are mad because they can't poll people that only have cell phones.

 

posted by VietnamVet on May 9, 2008 at 02:26 PM

I'm tired of the black voter, white voter, Hispanic voter, etc. thing.  I'm waiting for them to start talking about short people, fat people, people who eat hamburgers over tacos and vice-versa, people who drive cars or trucks, people who have central a/c versus window a/c. 

God, if it weren't for this long campaign, what would these people be talking about?  The war,  the economy?

posted by Mike on May 9, 2008 at 02:14 PM

Hello Sandwichh

I agree with that game assessment, and I might add, the media seems to want to take the role of king maker, forget about the issues (because that's boring) and just report gossip, rumors,and their assessments and predictions.  That New Hampshire fiasco didn't slow them down a bit. We remember that; all the polls were wrong.

posted by sandwichh on May 9, 2008 at 02:05 PM

It's all because this political game has become just that, a game. It is control of the ball and it does not make any difference how you get it. No rules rule. It use to be as long as you are truthful to the people you could deal with the candidates. That is out the window also. More than half the commentators have their own agendas.

posted by Mike on May 9, 2008 at 01:48 PM

Seems to me that question is important in the Rust Belt (Rust Belt, is an area in parts of the Northeastern United States, Mid-Atlantic States, and portions of the Upper Midwest.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wik....

 

I remember e-mailing Cokie Roberts, when she said Catholics did not vote for John Kerry. Believe it or not, she wrote me back saying she meant the Irish and Italian Catholics around Boston and Philadelphia. So, I have to agree with your analysis Maryann.

 

I say, why not ask for the evangelical, Baptist or Methodist vote. I realize Catholics make up 25% of the United States so in proportion, that is not a big voting bloc unless they are voting as a single bloc. That is where my disagreement lies....I think you nailed it ..swing vote.

 

You quite welcome maryann and again thanks for the kind words.

A personal Happy Mothers Day.

posted by maryann on May 9, 2008 at 01:29 PM

Hello Mike,

You ask: "Why is the Catholic voting preference, an exit poll question?  I think because in decades past, the "Catholic" vote was almost a guaranteed Democratic vote. I can remember my parents and aunts and uncles talking about how the Republicans stood for the rich man, and the Dems. stood up for the working man. Those times have changed, in more ways than one, but I can just summarize by saying that Catholics who traditionally voted Democrat are more open to looking at the differences in candidates, and thus can be seen as a swing vote.

You also ask: "Why is the Catholic vote important in Pennsylvania and Ohio and not in Brownsville, Texas or Los Angeles, California?"  I don't know, what's your hypothesis? 

Also, thanks for the Mother's Day wish. Sorry to hear about your mom. May she rest in Peace.

 

1

Leave a Comment
Ground Rules for posting comments:
  • No profanity or personal attacks.
  • Please comment on the subject of the blog post itself.
If you do not follow these rules we will remove your comment. Please keep it civil.

To protect users from spam, we need you to prove that you're a human being.
Please enter the text from the image at left.