The 2008 Election

[mike79]

So Kerry has just conceded defeat. Although I don't see how one could vote for Bush he did win this election fairly(i.e. won the popular vote).

So since Bush can't ever be re-elected after this (thank God) who will probably be running in 2008? I see Giuliani running against Obama. Both candidates could wipe the floor with both Bush and Kerry.

 

[Ptichka]

I think one thing we learned from the past few elections is NOT to get too excited about a candidate before it's time. Just remember how excited people got when Wesley Clark joined the primary race, and how long that lasted.

To me Obama hasn't even begun to show what kind of a leader he would be. He can talk very well, but that doesn't exactly make a president. Besides, we dont exactly like electing Senators for the White House. :sheesh: Though I certainly see him taking up a front and center position in the party.

While I truly respect Guiliani, I honestly don't know what his foreign policy position would be (though I couldn't help admiring the way he treated Arafat back in the 90's - that was soooo beautiful). Besides, in '08, the Republican primaries will be fierce, and Guiliani is just much too liberal. He is good for speaking on at Conventions, but would the party want him as their leader? Remember what was done to McCain 4 years ago; now that was a candidate that would have made me cross party lines despite a myriad of issues on which I disagree with him.

Ultimately, it's much like guessing the next OGM -- fun but pointless. At this point I am seating at work, and it feels like a collective mourning; everyone is just too stunned. We always knew Kerry could loose, but we didn't think Bush's win would be nearly so convincing.

At this point, I think the party must concentrate on mid-term elections in 2 years, and stat concentrating on it NOW. It's never good for one party to control all government; it wasn't good when Clinton had a democratic Congress, and it could be disastarous now. The US political system is very sturdy; one bad (IMHO) president won't kill us. However, it's based on checks and balances which I see slowly disappearing, and that I find very disturbing.

Another possibility is that Democratic party will become inconsequential, while Republican will split. There is quite a lot of discontent among them about things like huge deficit. Perhaps it's time for those Republicans to go their own way.

 

[mike79]

I agree that it's probably too early to get excited about Obama but the Dems need some kind of rallying point, with Obama down the road more than likely being that point. It seems that there aren't too many Democrats to get behind anymore. If Hillary ran in 2008 she'd probably lose big since anyone who even remotely leaned to the right would go against her.

I used to respect Giuiani but after what he said about the American troops not looking hard enough for WMD's I've had it with him. As with most lefties, the Republican that I respect the most is McCain, but I can't see him going for it in four years as he'll be over 70.

I do think that the voting process must change and the Electoral College done away with. Gore won the popular vote and loses the election in 2000, while in 2004 if 130,000 votes in Ohio had gone Kerry's way Bush would have lost the election while winning the popular vote. That just doesn't seem like it screams democracy to me. All it does is promote a bitter, partisan, two-party system where it's either one or the other.

 

[show 42]

All that I can think of at the moment is, here we go, another "Vietnam", smack dab in a place we don't belong, killing off young military men and women. The picture of heartsick parents and relatives watching their children, husbands and wives, arrive home in body bags makes me physically ill.................42

 

[Piel]

I am devastated. Here in WV a state that until Reagan and George W. has always gone for the Democrat the decision to vote for Bush was based on what they are calling "morals" but seems more like fear. Fear that any nut who wants to hunt won't be able to, fear that if gay are allowed to "marry" their own mariages are being ridiculed, and fear that their souls will go to hell if they don't reverse Row vs. Wade. What amazes me is that things they are REALLY frightening and pose a risk to the health and well being of a large number of citizens like, no health care, no prescription drug plan for medicare recipiants, the religious right forcing their beliefs on the rest of the country, the return of back alley abortions, no progress in stem cell research to name a few don't seem to bother these folks. :banging: :banging: :banging:

Here is an example. My brother in law and his family are all Bush supporters because they like to hunt and don't feel that there should be restrictions on gun ownership. This past Memorial Day weekend this same brother-in-law's son in a fit of rage got his hunting rifle out his truck and shot the mother of his two kids, and her new boyfriend in the head killing both of them and then blowing his own head off. Now you would think from this incident alone they might stop and reconsider that maybe not everybody should have a gun?

It is a very sad day for America.

 

[lil chrissy]

I cannot agree with you more. It is a terrible and sad day for america and the world. Anyone who can be elected because they lie and lie and lie and then slime the other guy with their own foibles does not deserve to win. What are people thinking???

 

[Mathman]

In Michigan the voters approved, by a 60-40 margin, an ammendment to the state constitution specifically denying same-sex couples the rights of civil union. Many employers (the state university system, for instance) already extends benefits such as health care and life insurance to gay employees. It is now illegal for them to receive these benefits, which they have had for years.

Mathman

 

[gracefulswan]

i am so stunned that i don't know what to think. i certainly was not expecting bush to win this convincingly (as compared to 2000). i can't fathom how it happened? are there not enough people out there that are truly fed up with partisan, narrow-minded policies...? don't they care about what's going on in iraq? etc..

i think it's a bad sign for america as this will surely give a green light for the bush administration to ram through everyone of their agendas down our throat as they don't have to contend with reelection again. the republicans control everything now.. gained seats, while the dems. were shocked into defeat...unprecedented defeat. this defeat of kerry/edwards will be talked about for a long, long time. how? why? i guess al gore was dead-on right about deciding not to run again after all. now.. 4 more years... uh, don't think i will watch cnn..or any other news network for quite some time. i'm just disheartened and disgusted by all the negative news, the misled opinions on polls, etc... the news will only get worse now as far as i'm concerned..

 

[gracefulswan]

In Michigan the voters approved, by a 60-40 margin, an ammendment to the state constitution specifically denying same-sex couples the rights of civil union. Many employers (the state university system, for instance) already extends benefits such as health care and life insurance to gay employees. It is now illegal for them to receive these benefits, which they have had for years.

Mathman

yea, and i'm sure it's only the tip of the iceberg on things that will polarize us more in this country.

so, you're saying that some employers had currently been extending health care and life insurance benefits to gay employees? how can they be stopped over denial of civil unions? i thought these were individual benefits of being an employee.

 

[BronzeisGolden]

.....I was hoping that the young vote would really turn the tide. Oh well! I'm proud that so many younger people were actually exercising their right to vote. I just hope they won't become frustrated.

Anyway, I feel that the next four years could be very bleak. Bush pretends to be a grand crusader for "good, Christian" morals, yet he blatantly judges all types of people and I fail to see the Christian morality in that. It appears that a little more than half of the nation feels the same way and that is what frightens me the most.

 

[Mathman]

That's a good question, Graceful Swan. Nobody knows how it will play out in the courts. The exact wording of the proposal, which is now part of the state constitution (pending various challenges, I suppose) is:

"A union of one man and one woman shall be the only agreement recognized as a marriage or similar union for any purpose."

People working at public colleges and universities here are employees of the State of Michigan. The president of the university where I teach said last week:

"Some members of the university community have expressed concern that should this amendment be adopted, our ability to continue to offer domestic partner benefits will be adversely affected.

The University is a constitutionally autonomous
institution, and has the authority to enter into collective
bargaining agreements and other contracts, and to provide
benefits to its employees. While the scope of the proposed
Constitutional Amendment is uncertain, The University will
continue to offer domestic partner benefits and defend its
right to do so. The University's Board of Governors fully
supports the administration's position on
this matter."

Nobody seems to know what the effect will be for private employers and their agreements with their employees. It it generally believed that, under the wording of the amendment, a married employee could sue his employer and force the employer to cease giving "marriage-like" benefits to people who can no longer claim to be partners in a "marriage or similar union."

The lawyers are going to have a field day with it.

Mathman

 

[Piel]

Larry, that seems to be a cool place to work. Why in the world would anyone feel threatened or be against benefits offered like that? It just seems like the correct and humane thing to do. Tell me, by working there does your marriage feel less valid because some of your colleagues are offered these benefits? Accoring to "some" it would. :scratch:

 

[Perry]

I believe Ohio passed a ballot initiative banning all civil unions whatsoever, regardless of the sexual preference of those involved....

I think the biggest problem in American politics today is the lack of moderates. Specter and McCain are really the only moderate senators I can count (some might say that the majority of the dems are essentially moderates, but I'll leave them out to eliminate controversy). Because of this, we've grown into this country dominated by two parties with no chance to be between parties -- it seems you either have to agree with Bush's proposed ban of gay marriage, his tax cuts, and his "ownership society" or have to agree with Kerry's civil union stance and health care plan. You can't agree with one party on one issue and the other on another.

I know here in Pennsylvania Specter won by a decent margin, yet our state went for Kerry. This is partially because of the unions and other organizations who, despite normally siding with the dems, gave their endorsement to Specter, desperately hoping to keep at least a few moderates in congress to help bridge the gap.

And for 2008...I'd like to see Obama. I have no idea what he'll be like as a leader, but he won by 88 percent (or so) of the vote in a MIDWESTERN state (in a plce like Massachusetts or California that might not be such an achievement). Furthermore, he's "a crazy liberal", he's actually interesting to listen to, and he'd help get a minority republican vote for the dems. And as for the republicans, I hear Jeb Bush is already printing pins....

 

[Piel]

And for 2008...I'd like to see Obama. I have no idea what he'll be like as a leader, but he won by 88 percent (or so) of the vote in a MIDWESTERN state (in a plce like Massachusetts or California that might not be such an achievement). Furthermore, he's "a crazy liberal", he's actually interesting to listen to, and he'd help get a minority republican vote for the dems.

And as for the republicans, I hear Jeb Bush is already printing pins.

I am really missing JFK, Jr.more and more! Anyone know if Caroline has any political aspirations?

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

I think we have basically become a Christian State like Iraq is a Moslem State, Israel is a Jewish State, and India is a Hindu State. There is freedom of religion in all four of them but you know how laws will prevail.

There is no longer separation of church and state in the USA, imo.

Joe

 

[bronxgirl]

If I wanted to live in a theocracy, I'd be living somewhere else. The "Christian Right"'s support for Israel isn't based on support of a Jewish homeland, but on the need for Israel to exist for the Second Coming. Thanks, but with friends like that, no thanks.

 

[show 42]

There is no longer separation of church and state in the USA, imo.

.........I am afraid that you are right, Joe........sad that our country has come to this............42

 

[Antilles]

Mathman, I wouldn't worry too much about gays losing their rights to benefits etc in Michigan. While the whole marriage thing has been decisive, benefits hasn't been as big a deal. Plus, the people may have voted for it, but I highly doubt the state supreme court would take away those rights. There are times when the courts, and not the people make the laws.

I am most worried about Bush being able to appoint Supreme Court Justices, because that could give the far right influence far beyond the next four years.

I like Obama, but I think he's too new, and he is a minority. Apparently he is only the third African American ever elected to the Senate. Looking at that fact, does anyone really think a party will choose a minority for a presidential candidate anytime soon? I'd like to see it, but I'll continue to hold my breath. Heck, Kennedy was the first and last Catholic elected (IIRC). It seems if you're not a WASP, forget about it.

Guiliani wants the job, but I don't think he'll get it. A lot of people mention Hilary Clinton, but I doubt she'd get anywhere near a nomination. She's too divisive within her own party. I don't know who'll be around 4 years from now. I do wonder what Edwards' plans are now.

Someone mentioned Caroline Kennedy. I doubt she has any political aspirations. Like her mother, she seems very concerned with guarding her family's privacy. Plus, her family has most certainly been burned in the political/public arena. The Kennedy name has been somewhat tarnished over the years. If I were her, you'd never get me to run for any type of political office.

With Bush being re-elected, I am very happy to be Canadian right now. Hopefully the war goes better. People keep mentioning Vietnam, and I certainly hope that all that speculation is incorrect. It is interesting that Vietnam is the only other was that Canada didn't go to with the US.

 

[PrincessLeppard]

I have lost all respect for Guiliani. He has become nothing more than a tool for Bush. He was on TV this morning, talking about what a great "uniter" Bush was during his first term. Yeah, after 9/11, we were all united, hell, we had the whole damn world behind us, and it took all of what? three months to piss that away? I think Rudi is too liberal for the Republican party as it now stands, though maybe after four years of extremely right-wingism, he'll look better. But I'll remember his whoring for Bush.

Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska is a moderate Republican. I voted for him in 2002 and I don't vote for many Republicans. He may run in 2008. I think Obama, should he decide to run, might wait until 2012 (or depending on how 2008 goes) wait until 2016. We need to see what he does in the Senate.

Laura, feeling severely let down by her country

 

[mike79]

I have lost all respect for Guiliani. He has become nothing more than a tool for Bush. He was on TV this morning, talking about what a great "uniter" Bush was during his first term. Yeah, after 9/11, we were all united, hell, we had the whole damn world behind us, and it took all of what? three months to piss that away?

Straight to the point and well said!