'Danger Signs' as Clinton Supporters Resist Obama - Cannabis Forums Message Boards - Medical Marijuana, Cannabis Club, Dispensary, News

**Psycho4Bud** · #1 (**permalink**) Jun-17-2008, 12:22

Sen. Barack Obama has emerged from his bruising battle for the Democratic presidential nomination with only a six point lead over Sen. John McCain and claiming his Republican rival has been getting a "pass" from the media.

A ABC News/Washington Post poll shows Obama, D-Ill., leading McCain, R-Ariz., by a margin of 48 percent to 42 percent. It is a surprisingly small lead considering that the incumbent Republican president George Bush is at record lows and public opinion overwhelmingly feels the country is on the "wrong track".

No Bounce, Resistance from Clinton Supporters
The poll indicates that Obama did not get the traditional "bounce" in the public's opinion by finally defeating Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., and getting her endorsement as the Democratic presidential candidate.

While leading among young voters and other key demographics, ABC News chief Washington correspondent George Stephanopoulos saw what he called "danger signs" for Obama.

In an exclusive network interview with ABC News, Obama said that his long Democratic primary battle with Clinton, which wasn't settled until early June, spared McCain critical scrutiny.

"While we were doing that, John McCain basically was getting a pass, both from the media . . . as well as from other opponents. And so I think that explains it," said Obama of the close race.

It is an ironic accusation from Obama. During the bitter Democratic fight, the Clinton camp repeatedly complained that Obama was getting a pass from the media.
ABC News: Obama Struggles to Win Over Key Groups

Obama's free ride with the press ended when he mocked them on SNL. Could we get you a pillow?

I personally think this lack of numbers, or bounce, is in regards to his affiliations with Rev. Wright, Rev. Michael Pfleger, and William Ayers. When he began the election he come across as a clean new face....his affiliations put an end to that shortly after the press took his pillow away.

Have a good one!

StickyfingahZ · #2 (**permalink**) Jun-17-2008, 14:29

I aint gonna vote.I no like vote mccain or obama,I guess whatever happens happens.

**stinkyattic** · #3 (**permalink**) Jun-17-2008, 16:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud

I personally think this lack of numbers, or bounce, is in regards to his affiliations with Rev. Wright, Rev. Michael Pfleger, and William Ayers.

I'm going to add that when you see opposing candidates of the same party playing so rough with each other before nominations are handed out, that's going to translate to potential supporters balking later, remembering the accusations thrown out during the early part of the race.
That's why I am feeling so meh about both of them. A visibly united Democratic party could have been a force to be reckoned with in this political climate. But alas...

SAME FUCKING TEAM, PEOPLE!!! ARRRGH!!!

**Psycho4Bud** · #4 (**permalink**) Jun-17-2008, 17:27

Couldn't agree more....the long primary season did it's damage too.

I'm with ya on the "meh" also, once again we're voting against someone instead of for someone.

Have a good one!

rebgirl420 · #5 (**permalink**) Jun-18-2008, 02:27

^ First time I get to vote and I have THESE freaking choices.

Ugh

I suppose I'll have to hold my nose and choose McCain

(I wanted Ron Paul)

Mississippi Steve · #6 (**permalink**) Jun-18-2008, 10:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by StickyfingahZ

I aint gonna vote.I no like vote mccain or obama,I guess whatever happens happens.

If you don't vote, then you got no room to complain when things don't go the way you want them to.

Mississippi Steve · #7 (**permalink**) Jun-18-2008, 10:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud

Couldn't agree more....the long primary season did it's damage too.

I'm with ya on the "meh" also, once again we're voting against someone instead of for someone.

Have a good one!

Pretty much same here... FWIW, I think that the only way that McCain will have a real chance of not only winning, but surviving and doing something good for the country is if he can get either Colin Powell, or Conde Rice as his running mate.

**stinkyattic** · #8 (**permalink**) Jun-18-2008, 10:20

I'm not so sure that Rice would attract undecided voters. Powell might, though.

daihashi · #9 (**permalink**) Jun-18-2008, 10:51

Rice has expressed that she has no desire to hold any of those offices and I think she's gone back full time to her University. Powell on the other hand would win me over completely and I don't think I would feel so bad, I shouldn't say bad but rather disappoited, for having to choose McCain.

You would think once in 12 years we would have a decent candidate to choose from.

**stinkyattic** · #10 (**permalink**) Jun-18-2008, 10:56

I like that. Rice is obviously a highly intelligent and driven person, and academia seems a good fit for her. I am not so much a fan of her in the political arena. Powell, on the other hand, carries himself in a manner that I feel would encourage cooperation between the parties, and has credentials that voters from both parties can both recognize, and accept as qualifications to hold high office.

daihashi · #11 (**permalink**) Jun-18-2008, 11:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by stinkyattic

I like that. Rice is obviously a highly intelligent and driven person, and academia seems a good fit for her. I am not so much a fan of her in the political arena. Powell, on the other hand, carries himself in a manner that I feel would encourage cooperation between the parties, and has credentials that voters from both parties can both recognize, and accept as qualifications to hold high office.

Word madam........ word.

**stinkyattic** · #12 (**permalink**) Jun-18-2008, 11:08

Am I alone in feeling that Condi has the potential to be a bit of a loose cannon on the world stage? That's my gut feeling. Although I could simply be mistaking the rumblings of impending lunch for political instinct...

**Psycho4Bud** · #13 (**permalink**) Jun-18-2008, 11:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by stinkyattic

Am I alone in feeling that Condi has the potential to be a bit of a loose cannon on the world stage?

I think they all have that potential to tell ya the trooth. She's seemed to hold pretty well with all the chaos since she's took her position though. Condi has kind of a love/hate thing going with people too though...Powell on the other hand would be an instant win for McCain.

Have a good one!

dragonrider · #14 (**permalink**) Jun-18-2008, 14:18

I think the democrats will pull it together by the time it counts. Both Obama and Clinton seem to be working pretty hard to make that happen, and I think it will. I'm not sure I agree that Obama did not get his "bounce" --- wasn't McCain polling ahead of Obama before Obama got the nomination? Maybe that was a different poll.

I do not like Condi Rice as a policy maker. I would not like to see her run for office.

I like Colin Powell, but I lost a lot of respect for him as the Bush mouthpeice to the UN making the case for the Iraq war. I remember watching that speech to the UN and thinking, "Man, I'm not sure I believe this WMD thing coming from all these neo-cons, but if Colin Powell says its true, and he has all these satelite photos and intelligence reports, then it must be true."

I do not think Powell is the sleazy tell-all book kind of guy at all, but I hope someday he will write a memoir of some kind about his experience as Secretary of State and his roll in setting the stage for Iraq. Was he honestly convinced of the intelligence he presented? Or did he have doubts and was just following orders like a good soldier? I remember him making the case against taking out Sadam in the first Gulf war, becasue it would lead to a nightmare postwar chaos and civil war that we would not be able to control. And I also remember the so called "Powell Doctrine" of overwhelming force, limited scope, clear objectives, and clear exit strategy. I wonder how he felt about going into Iraq agaisnt his better judgement from 1991, and what he thought when it was clear we did follow the "Powell Doctrine," did not have enough force, the scope spiralled out of control, the objectives kept changing, and there was no way out. Seems like he participated in something that went totally against everything he stood for. I don't know whether to give him credit for being absolutely right in '91 and right in his "Powell Doctrine," or to despise him for not standing by those principles.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode