Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : President Barack Obama -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MJ who wrote (114)	12/2/2006 12:43:20 PM
From: American Spirit	Respond to of 149317

Everyone is searching for the new hot thing in terms of a candidate. The MSM especially loves stories like that. For some reason Warner backed out, though I thought he might make it. Romney and Obama are getting positive press, but Romney hires illegals and Obama's middle name is Hussein, two major problems for them, though it may seem silly. For the life of me, I can't understand the MSM's acceptance of McCain, Guiliani, Condi and Hillary as the "frontrunners". Those polls they take are BS. I'll bet three-fourths of the country don't want any of them. They don't want Kerry now either. As in most elections, the people want a miracle candidate who looks, sounds and acts perfectly and has no flaws. But even JFK had flaws. And Reagan was very unpopular until he finally got into office and projected his masterful charisma. Clinton was a baby-faced prodigy with a Gennifer Flowers affair. Kerry was 25% behind dean in New Hampshire two weeks before the primary. So anything can happen. Maybe even President Vilsack, though the GOP will call him "vile sack of s*it", of course. One thing I know, the GOP will be weaker in 2008 than they have been in any race since Dole in 1996, so Dems have an advantage. Like any competition, let's first wait to see who's competing, then decide.

To: MJ who wrote (114)	12/2/2006 2:41:00 PM
From: ChinuSFO	Respond to of 149317

Both are two young bright men without the Clinton, Kerry, Gore baggage. jmho Very true and I agree.

To: MJ who wrote (114)	12/2/2006 4:57:56 PM
From: American Spirit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 149317

Maybe baggage isn't such a bad idea for a candidate, so long as we know what the baggage is. GW Bush in 2000 didn't have baggage, but if people had known what he was really all about, and who was really behind him, he would not have won and the country would be much better off now. I just heard a pundit on TV agree with me, saying Hillary and Obama won't be running. That would be a practical decision on their parts. And so if Gore hasn't changed his mind and Warner is out, then who does that leave as the most qualified candidate? Kerry-Edwards II? And this time they win big? Who knows. If that election were held over again, Kerry would probably win in a landslide, no matter how many punchlines he blows.