“She has almost no chance of overtaking Obama’s lead in pledged delegates by the end of the primaries, and has to rely on convincing superdelegates to choose her instead of Obama.”

I can hear it now……….. Denver, Summer 2008:

“The whole World is watching! The whole World is watching!”

Indy Conservative on March 27, 2008 at 8:44 AM

Cheer up comrade, we live in the greatest country on earth.

We can only take what life has put on our plate, and work with it best we can. At my business, I have a plan for the day; then there are the back-up plans; the phone keeps a-ringing, and the plan keeps a-changing. I’m forced to make logical decisions each and every morning, as the dynamics of the day unfold. We all face challenges each day; our own personal attitudes towards these challenges have much to do with the outcome.

My guy didn’t win the nomination, John McCain did. I stand no chance of having any say at the table if the table belongs to Liberals. This is where my own personal attitude must begin the process of getting on with what has been put on my plate.

Keemo on March 27, 2008 at 8:58 AM

I look at reality too. And I describe the world as I see it not as I wish it was.

If the Liberals are in power, so be it. We can’t do anything about it.

All I’m saying is that nothing significant will change because I look at these three candidates and I don’t see a dramatic difference among them.

It’s all rhetoric.

Personally I don’t think that any of these Gore scenarios has a prayer of happening, but it would certainly be interesting. We haven’t had as solid or entertaining Democrat pie fight as we might since Silky dropped out to go twiddle his thu…

Indy Conservative on March 27, 2008 at 9:05 AM

The world hasn’t changed that much since the 80s, believe me. These same arguments were made then about why RR couldn’t do just what he did, and, he did it with a very hostile media and the Dems controlling Congress. They had no choice but to go along because RR had the people behind him and a hunger for change.

TheBigOldDog on March 27, 2008 at 9:14 AM

Ooops, I think I answered this above, also to TheBigOldDog on March 27, 2008 at 8:58 AM :-)

See? I’m smiling :-)

Well, I wish we had another Reagan. Maybe somebody should’ve cloned him :-)

But we don’t, not even close unfortunately.

I’m sorry, but I really like to live in the real world. The guessing and the prediction world in not mine.

That’s why I don’t believe in polls, in exit polls, in most of Fox News’ “commentators” or as I call them the “Ms Cleos of Fox News.”

Remember her?

Indy Conservative on March 27, 2008 at 8:44 AM

To think a President can’t change things dramatically is optimistic. I say optimistic because I saw Reagan do just that virtually overnight. I saw Presidents cut and run from Vietnam, Beirut and Mogadishu. I saw a President so paralyzed by uncertainty or fear that he let a country take our people hostage and give us the finger nightly by telling us we were too weak and cowardly to do anything about it. So, the idea that Obama wouldn’t cut and run from Iraq is wildly optimistic. To think he couldn’t get sweeping radical domestic legislation passed through an increasingly radical Democrat controlled House and Senate is wildly optimistic. I wish I had you faith.

TheBigOldDog on March 27, 2008 at 8:58 AM

I understand what you’re saying, but the thing is, September 11 changed everybody, even the Liberals.

Islamic terrorism became a reality on American soil and I don’t think any president will ever act again like the examples you mentioned.

The world has changed. Terrorism is in our neighborhoods.

They know that.

And any withdraw will be symbolic.

There are bigger factors and players in the world now than one person sitting on a chair in the White House.

As I said, the President, these days, count on not only his advisors, but on foreign advisors (such as head of states) and world events play a big role in decision-making.

It’s a much complicate world. You have to do a lot of concessions and a lot of butt-kissing.

Yes, I do agree that one candidate might be different than another, but looking at the big picture, they are all the same.

Reagan had his era. America was much more powerful because there was two poles. One collapsed, the other got stronger.

But today, we are faced with Islamic terrorism around the world, Europe is falling apart, China is rising, Russia is seeking its glorious military power again, Iran, Iraq, North Korea, Venezuela, etc.

We must stop the nostalgia about Reagan. We must live in reality, especially in Foreign Policy.

Indy Conservative on March 27, 2008 at 9:05 AM

The world hasn’t changed that much since the 80s, believe me. These same arguments were made then about why RR couldn’t do just what he did, and, he did it with a very hostile media and the Dems controlling Congress. They had no choice but to go along because RR had the people behind him and a hunger for change.

Do you really think, that even if he has the intention of doing it, the Democrats in Congress, especially when they get their 60 Senate seats, will let him do it?

First, yes. I trust him more than I trust Clinton or Obama. Much more.

Second, the only way the Democrats are getting to 60 this year is if enough conservatives choose petulance over what’s best for their country. Not voting for McCain? I disagree, but can understand. But if those voters extend their “keep my ballot and stay home” mentality to the lower ticket races, then they are doing this country a disservice.

Slublog on March 27, 2008 at 8:44 AM

Well, you know, I don’t trust voters. I don’t believe in polls.

I believe what I see. I believe the primaries results on both sides. It sure can tell you where this country is going.

Putting aside all personal feelings about these candidates, the global policy and strategy is the same, especially the Foreign one.

See, the president might think that he or she can set big ideas and strategies (that might have been true during Reagan time) but in reality, these days, the world has changed and any U.S. president is bound by many factors -foreign and domestic- which dictate his decisions.

Being a President as these fools are so eager to be, is not an easy job. Not only you have to kiss domestic butts, you have to be an international butt-kisser.

As for McCain, he will have to lean to the Left before the elections and after. Why after? Because he will have to “work” with the Democrats in Congress and knowing McCain from previous experiences, he will favor the “moderate left” over the Republicans and Conservatives.

Do you really think he can appoint a Supreme Court judge without the consent of the Liberals?

If you’re answer is ‘yes,’ then you don’t know John McCain.

Cheer up comrade, we live in the greatest country on earth.

We can only take what life has put on our plate, and work with it best we can. At my business, I have a plan for the day; then there are the back-up plans; the phone keeps a-ringing, and the plan keeps a-changing. I’m forced to make logical decisions each and every morning, as the dynamics of the day unfold. We all face challenges each day; our own personal attitudes towards these challenges have much to do with the outcome.

My guy didn’t win the nomination, John McCain did. I stand no chance of having any say at the table if the table belongs to Liberals. This is where my own personal attitude must begin the process of getting on with what has been put on my plate.

Indy Conservative on March 27, 2008 at 8:44 AM

To think a President can’t change things dramatically is optimistic. I say optimistic because I saw Reagan do just that virtually overnight. I saw Presidents cut and run from Vietnam, Beirut and Mogadishu. I saw a President so paralyzed by uncertainty or fear that he let a country take our people hostage and give us the finger nightly by telling us we were too weak and cowardly to do anything about it. So, the idea that Obama wouldn’t cut and run from Iraq is wildly optimistic. To think he couldn’t get sweeping radical domestic legislation passed through an increasingly radical Democrat controlled House and Senate is wildly optimistic. I wish I had you faith.

Hening on March 27, 2008 at 7:41 AM

I agree…you have to remember, Obama will always be the candidate that people diss the least in public, and not vote for in private.
We have all learned that if you say you don’t support Obama, you are labeled a racist. And no lib wants to be called that.
*
Lesson learned in Mitt’s run. If you said anything against him, you were labeled a bigot. So people, in the most part, shut up and didn’t support him. That’s what the zealots do to their man, they push the dissenters, the ones with valid issues, underground. And then they sit around afterward and mumble…”I don’t understand, they must be all closet bigots…”
*
But unlike Mitt, this is a “black liberal”, they are untouchable…case in point, his spiritual mentor was “publicly” let off the hook.

Do you really think, that even if he has the intention of doing it, the Democrats in Congress, especially when they get their 60 Senate seats, will let him do it?

First, yes. I trust him more than I trust Clinton or Obama. Much more.

Second, the only way the Democrats are getting to 60 this year is if enough conservatives choose petulance over what’s best for their country. Not voting for McCain? I disagree, but can understand. But if those voters extend their “keep my ballot and stay home” mentality to the lower ticket races, then they are doing this country a disservice.

Indy Conservative on March 27, 2008 at 8:30 AM

Now today, you’re wildly optimistic. Yesterday you were wildly pessimistic. Hopefully tomorrow you’ll be right in the middle…LOL ;)

TheBigOldDog on March 27, 2008 at 8:35 AM

Umm How come I don’t see it that way?

Someone else would’ve thought that I’m pessimistic today too.

Anyway, thank you for measuring my daily mood.

I appreciate it :-)

At this point in time in America’s History, these candidates can’t change Foreign Policy or even the domestic one.

The Supreme Court is likely to hand down an historic ruling this summer in DC v. Heller. That would not have happened without a Republican president.

Imagine the next four years – what sort of cases are going to go before the court?

Slublog on March 27, 2008 at 8:31 AM

I understand the concern about the Supreme Court, but honestly, do you think McCain has any chance to nominate a desirable Conservative Judge?

Do you think he’ll ever do it in the first place?

Do you really trust him?

Do you really think, that even if he has the intention of doing it, the Democrats in Congress, especially when they get their 60 Senate seats, will let him do it?

Indy Conservative on March 27, 2008 at 8:02 AM

You know, you make a good point. I have been realizing lately that it is not likely that any president will withdraw troops on a timetable that their generals advise them against. Withdraw will be slow and measured under any administration; the only difference will be the narrative in the media.
Given that, what exactly was my reason for voting McCain again? In reality, I’ve already lost this election.

joewm315 on March 27, 2008 at 8:26 AM

The U.S. will never withdraw from Iraq or from any hot spot in the World.

Yes, a withdraw might mean in the Media: Reduction in troop level, but not a full, complete withdraw.

As I said, these people want more power, so they have to kiss some butts, and to satisfy their idiot voters, they have to say something or do something (if elected), even insignificant to shut these idiots up.

The world is much more complicated than some election speeches.

Then how do you explain Obama holding his 2% lead over McCain. If the Wright speech is going to hurt him in November, don’t think it — while it’s still fresh in potential voter’s minds — hurt him now?

Indy Conservative on March 27, 2008 at 8:30 AM

Now today, you’re wildly optimistic. Yesterday you were wildly pessimistic. Hopefully tomorrow you’ll be right in the middle…LOL ;)

At this point in time in America’s History, these candidates can’t change Foreign Policy or even the domestic one.

The Supreme Court is likely to hand down an historic ruling this summer in DC v. Heller. That would not have happened without a Republican president.

Imagine the next four years – what sort of cases are going to go before the court?

Rovin on March 27, 2008 at 8:18 AM

It doesn’t matter where the president comes from.

At this point in time in America’s History, these candidates can’t change Foreign Policy or even the domestic one.

It is impossible to have Universal Healthcare.

It is impossible to withdraw from Iraq.

Everybody knows that except the stupid voter who is fooled by campaign rhetoric and goes to rallies clapping his hands and fainting.

Indy Conservative on March 27, 2008 at 8:02 AM

You know, you make a good point. I have been realizing lately that it is not likely that any president will withdraw troops on a timetable that their generals advise them against. Withdraw will be slow and measured under any administration; the only difference will be the narrative in the media.
Given that, what exactly was my reason for voting McCain again? In reality, I’ve already lost this election.

Another dynamic of this story that must be concerning for the democrat party is the love affair the enemies of America have with Democrats. This will be the 4th election cycle in a row where sworn leaders of countries that are hostile towards America feel free to voice their support for the Democrat candidates. This is a theme that seemed to start with the Chinese support for the Clinton’s; fueled with the reports that BJ sold our country down the road to the Chinese in the form of top-secret missile data.

“McCain cannot be president without the Left, he knows it and he’s going to work on it.”

While Indy’s a bit vague on what portion of the “left” may vote for McCain, I would submit that there is a strong portion of the moderate left, (blue dogs if we must), that are already disillusioned over their party’s choices and hesitant to admit their convictions.

The shame of all this is just when an American society believed it could elect a woman or a “black” person to become POTUS, this is the “best” representation the Democratic Party can put forward. Historians may very well write that in this era, the DNC was “Shanghaied” by the radical left of a once respected party that gave us the likes of JFK and FDR. Instead we have one candidate who’s mentor believes we should “God-Damn” America, and another that would hand you a three dollar bill with her husband’s picture on it, and tell you it’s legal tender.

A commodities trader would be a fool not to invest in the popcorn market.