May 4th, 2008, 10:43 PM
So, the democrats are running their primaries and plastering their candidates all over the news. They're tearing one another down, and pulling out all the nastiness from their closets. I called it cannibalism and wondered if they were going to kill themselves, but tonight I had an epiphany.
Once these 'primaries' are over, the democratic candidate has already had months more coverage and campaigning than McCain has really gotten. The mud has been slung and they've done the hurling, so they knew where it would splatter. When it comes time for the actual election, all they have to do is rip on McCain a tiny bit, and ride on all the work they've already done.
Has this uneven primaries coverage set the democrats up with an unfair amount of coverage?
So, the democrats are running their primaries and plastering their candidates all over the news. They're tearing one another down, and pulling out all the nastiness from their closets. I called it cannibalism and wondered if they were going to kill themselves, but tonight I had an epiphany.
Once these 'primaries' are over, the democratic candidate has already had months more coverage and campaigning than McCain has really gotten. The mud has been slung and they've done the hurling, so they knew where it would splatter. When it comes time for the actual election, all they have to do is rip on McCain a tiny bit, and ride on all the work they've already done.
Has this uneven primaries coverage set the democrats up with an unfair amount of coverage?
May 5th, 2008, 12:39 AM
I sense Hillary is going to win the dem ticket at all costs. I don't know if this has prepared them for the mother of all smear campaigners, the Republican party. They'll dig back about 30 years for mud or half-truths and they'll say it enough so it becomes the only message heard.
I sense Hillary is going to win the dem ticket at all costs. I don't know if this has prepared them for the mother of all smear campaigners, the Republican party. They'll dig back about 30 years for mud or half-truths and they'll say it enough so it becomes the only message heard.
Knows No Bounds
Posts: 2,650 
Location: Vancouver Island
Location: Vancouver Island
May 5th, 2008, 01:44 AM
will have to face the malicious and nasty and untruthful republicans, as the memory of
the awful things they did to Kerry is still fresh in my mind, and it is sickening and unfair,
but it will happen all over again.
Quoting Kreskin
You're right Kreskin, when the victorious democrat goes into the general election, they
I sense Hillary is going to win the dem ticket at all costs. I don't know if this has prepared them for the mother of all smear campaigners, the Republican party. They'll dig back about 30 years for mud or half-truths and they'll say it enough so it becomes the only message heard.
will have to face the malicious and nasty and untruthful republicans, as the memory of
the awful things they did to Kerry is still fresh in my mind, and it is sickening and unfair,
but it will happen all over again.
Mass'Debater
Posts: 2,738
Location: Atlantic Canada
Location: Atlantic Canada
May 5th, 2008, 08:35 AM
The whole democrats situation right now can be taken in several ways..... one as you mentioned Karrie, as giving more media attention to them then to McCain, however I also started to think of it in another perspective a while back.....
Shortly through the whole rat race between the Republicans and Democrats, all the Republicans dropped out and not too far into it McCain was the sure fire best shot for the Republicans so the rest dropped out and are all now supporting McCain..... this may show a level of unity within the Republicans, but it also cheaped out the rest of the nation in their democratic rights to cast their votes, no matter how obvious they may vote.
What Obama and Clinton seem to be doing, although cheap and petty at times, is that they are sticking it out until the very end, not to destroy both of their reps to the point where eveyone will just vote McCain..... they're giving the US public something to think about, something to choose from, someone to actually vote for, rather then the party just folding it up and saying "Well we're giving you this candidate to choose from to fight against the Republicans." ~ Such as what the Republicans already decided to do.
In other words, the Republicans have dictated who will be running as president if you vote for the Republicans.... the Democrats are allowing the people to choose which of the two will run for president for the democrats.... apparently no matter how much they spend, nor how much it may damage their reputation to some..... they're at least giving the US public something to do in this election for once..... perhaps trying to show they're more willing to use the system of government as it was ment to be used.
Although, I still don't trust either of the two sides and it's still good/bad cop mentality in the politics, at least I see the Democrats actually feeding the public something they can have input on, rather then anoher election where it's been pretty well already decided by politicians just dropping out and supporting one guy.
I guess this way Clinton and Obama are doing things, it's not just up to a few States and then the rest suck up what's been decided after they all drop off right away, but now all the States are getting input into at least who the Democrat's runner will be.
The whole democrats situation right now can be taken in several ways..... one as you mentioned Karrie, as giving more media attention to them then to McCain, however I also started to think of it in another perspective a while back.....
Shortly through the whole rat race between the Republicans and Democrats, all the Republicans dropped out and not too far into it McCain was the sure fire best shot for the Republicans so the rest dropped out and are all now supporting McCain..... this may show a level of unity within the Republicans, but it also cheaped out the rest of the nation in their democratic rights to cast their votes, no matter how obvious they may vote.
What Obama and Clinton seem to be doing, although cheap and petty at times, is that they are sticking it out until the very end, not to destroy both of their reps to the point where eveyone will just vote McCain..... they're giving the US public something to think about, something to choose from, someone to actually vote for, rather then the party just folding it up and saying "Well we're giving you this candidate to choose from to fight against the Republicans." ~ Such as what the Republicans already decided to do.
In other words, the Republicans have dictated who will be running as president if you vote for the Republicans.... the Democrats are allowing the people to choose which of the two will run for president for the democrats.... apparently no matter how much they spend, nor how much it may damage their reputation to some..... they're at least giving the US public something to do in this election for once..... perhaps trying to show they're more willing to use the system of government as it was ment to be used.
Although, I still don't trust either of the two sides and it's still good/bad cop mentality in the politics, at least I see the Democrats actually feeding the public something they can have input on, rather then anoher election where it's been pretty well already decided by politicians just dropping out and supporting one guy.
I guess this way Clinton and Obama are doing things, it's not just up to a few States and then the rest suck up what's been decided after they all drop off right away, but now all the States are getting input into at least who the Democrat's runner will be.
Don't bother arguing, I KNOW!
Posts: 10,480
Location: The Evil Empire
Location: The Evil Empire
May 5th, 2008, 12:59 PM
The Democrats however are still trying to decide. It is almost practically impossible for Clinton to win the nomination at this point, and the best thing to do is step down and admit defeat. But she won't do that, so it will all end June 2nd.
Several days thereafter Obama will announce John Edwards as his running mate (that's my guess) and I hoping, and I would like to stress hope, that the mudslinging will be kept to a bare minimum only because both McCain and Obama have alot to say.
You probably do not get the full coverage we do down here (I don't know really just an assumption), but CNN and Fox are not the end all to media. Local and nationwide newspapers along with PBS, XM and Sirius Radios cover almost every aspect of each candidates speech.
Quoting karrie
It's not an even primary election coverage simply because the Republicans had their say and have already decided who will be running for office.
So, the democrats are running their primaries and plastering their candidates all over the news. They're tearing one another down, and pulling out all the nastiness from their closets. I called it cannibalism and wondered if they were going to kill themselves, but tonight I had an epiphany.
Once these 'primaries' are over, the democratic candidate has already had months more coverage and campaigning than McCain has really gotten. The mud has been slung and they've done the hurling, so they knew where it would splatter. When it comes time for the actual election, all they have to do is rip on McCain a tiny bit, and ride on all the work they've already done.
Has this uneven primaries coverage set the democrats up with an unfair amount of coverage?
Once these 'primaries' are over, the democratic candidate has already had months more coverage and campaigning than McCain has really gotten. The mud has been slung and they've done the hurling, so they knew where it would splatter. When it comes time for the actual election, all they have to do is rip on McCain a tiny bit, and ride on all the work they've already done.
Has this uneven primaries coverage set the democrats up with an unfair amount of coverage?
The Democrats however are still trying to decide. It is almost practically impossible for Clinton to win the nomination at this point, and the best thing to do is step down and admit defeat. But she won't do that, so it will all end June 2nd.
Several days thereafter Obama will announce John Edwards as his running mate (that's my guess) and I hoping, and I would like to stress hope, that the mudslinging will be kept to a bare minimum only because both McCain and Obama have alot to say.
You probably do not get the full coverage we do down here (I don't know really just an assumption), but CNN and Fox are not the end all to media. Local and nationwide newspapers along with PBS, XM and Sirius Radios cover almost every aspect of each candidates speech.
Steven Hawking's Tutor
Posts: 4,534
Location: In the bush somewhere near Sudbury
Location: In the bush somewhere near Sudbury
May 5th, 2008, 01:22 PM
Really, I don't care who wins the Democrat ticket. Either way, it's a first in the Oval Office. Whomever gets in there had better be able to give the US a heart or someone is bound to make an attempt at carving Uncle Sam's out. Right extremists and their Bible-thumping supporters have driven the world closer to Judgement day than we ever were during any part of the Cold War.
Woof!
Really, I don't care who wins the Democrat ticket. Either way, it's a first in the Oval Office. Whomever gets in there had better be able to give the US a heart or someone is bound to make an attempt at carving Uncle Sam's out. Right extremists and their Bible-thumping supporters have driven the world closer to Judgement day than we ever were during any part of the Cold War.
Woof!
Knows No Bounds
Posts: 2,650
Location: Vancouver Island
Location: Vancouver Island
May 5th, 2008, 01:45 PM
name has deserted me for the moment, she said she would vote for hillary before
mcCain.
Quoting Curiosity
that's right, even 'whatsername' with the long blonde hair, the 'wench' with no class, The Strict Conservative Republicans are NOT for McCain
They are talking about not voting or voting Democratic rather than for Senator McCain.
They are talking about not voting or voting Democratic rather than for Senator McCain.
name has deserted me for the moment, she said she would vote for hillary before
mcCain.
Steven Hawking's Tutor
Posts: 4,899
Location: Saint John, N.B.
Location: Saint John, N.B.
May 5th, 2008, 02:07 PM
And, as usual, she was just being outrageous to get attention.......
Quoting talloola
Anne Coulter that's right, even 'whatsername' with the long blonde hair, the 'wench' with no class,
name has deserted me for the moment, she said she would vote for hillary before
mcCain.
name has deserted me for the moment, she said she would vote for hillary before
mcCain.
And, as usual, she was just being outrageous to get attention.......
Knows No Bounds
Posts: 2,650
Location: Vancouver Island
Location: Vancouver Island
May 5th, 2008, 05:02 PM
people who behave in such a sleazy manner, and some of the things she has said,
should tell everyone she needs a 'shrink', and a makeover.
Quoting Colpy
Thanks, yeah,' her', everytime I see her I feel embarrassed, as I feel sorry for
Anne Coulter
And, as usual, she was just being outrageous to get attention.......
And, as usual, she was just being outrageous to get attention.......
people who behave in such a sleazy manner, and some of the things she has said,
should tell everyone she needs a 'shrink', and a makeover.
May 5th, 2008, 05:06 PM
What bothers me about Ann Coulter is that she shows me to not be the open minded person I like to think I am. Because the way she acts, talks... the manner in which she not only holds but expresses her political views... I find it unwomanly, unkind, unsoft, and as a result I can't help but view her as something of a man, a masquerader in our gender.
What bothers me about Ann Coulter is that she shows me to not be the open minded person I like to think I am. Because the way she acts, talks... the manner in which she not only holds but expresses her political views... I find it unwomanly, unkind, unsoft, and as a result I can't help but view her as something of a man, a masquerader in our gender.
Knows No Bounds
Posts: 2,650
Location: Vancouver Island
Location: Vancouver Island
May 5th, 2008, 05:14 PM
way, and on that channel she can spout all of her 'filth' any way she wants, and they just
sit back and smile at her, as she makes a total fool of herself, leaving the others 'innocent', (which they are not),and I'm sure they laugh at her behind her back too, once she has left the studio.
Quoting karrie
She always appears on 'Fox News', which is solely a republican channel, not balanced in any
What bothers me about Ann Coulter is that she shows me to not be the open minded person I like to think I am. Because the way she acts, talks... the manner in which she not only holds but expresses her political views... I find it unwomanly, unkind, unsoft, and as a result I can't help but view her as something of a man, a masquerader in our gender.
way, and on that channel she can spout all of her 'filth' any way she wants, and they just
sit back and smile at her, as she makes a total fool of herself, leaving the others 'innocent', (which they are not),and I'm sure they laugh at her behind her back too, once she has left the studio.
Mass'Debater
Posts: 2,738
Location: Atlantic Canada
Location: Atlantic Canada
May 5th, 2008, 05:21 PM
Ann who?
*Google Searches, see's playboy pics of some blonde woman, some blonde woman in a business suit.... etc.*
Never heard nor seen her before.... must not be all that important and the way people describe her in here, she's not worth the time either.
Ann who?
*Google Searches, see's playboy pics of some blonde woman, some blonde woman in a business suit.... etc.*
Never heard nor seen her before.... must not be all that important and the way people describe her in here, she's not worth the time either.
