Support NeoGAF

[Tamanon]

I will say this, I'd actually vote for Jeb Bush, but he won't run. He's done a wonderful job here in Florida.

 

[AlanHemberger]

Oprah already has gone on record on her own show to offically back him if he ran. He has her, he doesn't need Cosby. Who cares about him anymore?

Especially since Cosby is now a confirmed sleazebag.

 

[Tamanon]

Cosby still is good for the older black vote.

And to be fair, they actually turn out at the polls a decent amount.

 

[Dilbert]

I'm fully aware that electing a leader in this country is basically like a very cynical version of Hot or Not? With that being said...

Lots of people have made the comment in this thread that Obama is "too green" or otherwise too inexperienced to be President. Those kinds of statements imply that there is some type or length of experience which could be described as a prerequisite for the presidency...so what are those experiences?

Let me guess -- the ideal POTUS candidate should have experience ****ing up a professional sports team, and has gained military experience shirking combat in the National Guard.

 

[He Wants Chalupas]

Too soon for Barry, even as a VP. He may go for it someday, but not '08.

 

[Ashodin]

I'd like to see Dean run again someday.

Have my babies.

Dean really should run again, even though he said he wouldn't if he made Democratic Chair. He should step up. Though the news might bring back the SCREAM to keep him out of the running. Jesus, he shouldn't have lost because of that. Dean was my favorite, I heard his views and agreed with almost all of them (if not all)!

 

[Tamanon]

I'm fully aware that electing a leader in this country is basically like a very cynical version of Hot or Not? With that being said...

Lots of people have made the comment in this thread that Obama is "too green" or otherwise too inexperienced to be President. Those kinds of statements imply that there is some type or length of experience which could be described as a prerequisite for the presidency...so what are those experiences?

Let me guess -- the ideal POTUS candidate should have experience ****ing up a professional sports team, and has gained military experience shirking combat in the National Guard.

The "Too green" statement is in reference to not having enough to run on to be electable.

 

[sprsk]

Remember the last time we sent an "experienced" guy to the presidential election?

Was bush ever really experienced?


Obama has the power to get people riled up, hes got charisma coming out of his asshole. That's almost all you need these days. People want protection against iraq? Sure put clark in as his running mate or something.

 

[AlanHemberger]

Remember the last time we sent an "experienced" guy to the presidential election?

Was bush ever really experienced?


Obama has the power to get people riled up, hes got charisma coming out of his asshole. That's almost all you need these days. People want protection against iraq? Sure put clark in as his running mate or something.

The homophobic community won't like that one bit.

 

[White Man]

I'm fully aware that electing a leader in this country is basically like a very cynical version of Hot or Not? With that being said...

Lots of people have made the comment in this thread that Obama is "too green" or otherwise too inexperienced to be President. Those kinds of statements imply that there is some type or length of experience which could be described as a prerequisite for the presidency...so what are those experiences?

Let me guess -- the ideal POTUS candidate should have experience ****ing up a professional sports team, and has gained military experience shirking combat in the National Guard.

I'm not going to try and put a hard definition on what experienced is, but I feel pretty confident in saying that a junior senator with one term under his belt would be an easy target to label as "inexperienced."

Not to mention hasn't Obama himself stated that he has no intentions of running in 2008? Does he say otherwise in this article?

If he has the ability to get people riled up, get him a job as a speechwriter or something. For a national election, he's too easy of a target right now.

 

[GamePnoy74]

I have absolutely no faith in the US to even consider objectively deciding wether or not to vote for a guy named Obama. Sure, he'll get cool blue states like New York, etc., but I don't think there's any way swing states will get past the name similarity to one of the biggest bad guys' in the world. Plus, he's black.

I kinda agree as well...despite all his qualifications, trying to campaign to the 'lowest common denominator' will be tough for him simply because of his name and ethnicity. He does poke fun at his name though in his speech at the 2004 DNC:

I’m not talking about blind optimism here -- the almost willful ignorance that thinks unemployment will go away if we just don’t think about it, or the health care crisis will solve itself if we just ignore it. That’s not what I’m talking about. I’m talking about something more substantial. It’s the hope of slaves sitting around a fire singing freedom songs; the hope of immigrants setting out for distant shores; the hope of a young naval lieutenant bravely patrolling the Mekong Delta; the hope of a millworker’s son who dares to defy the odds; the hope of a skinny kid with a funny name who believes that America has a place for him, too.

At the same time this is exactly the type of stuff what gets people hyped up for him.

 

[SatelliteOfLove]

I like him for what he could be, not what he is; this is a mistake.

 

[kablooey]

I think Obama should wait four more years before running, yeah. Get a little more experience under his belt, endear himself more to the American public, etc. As for this election, I'd like to see Russ Feingold run, and I'd gladly vote for him, even though I know he's got a snowball's chance in hell of winning the Democratic nomination.

 

[KidGalactus]

He is genetically half white but he was raised 100% white. The fact he talks and acts "white" kinda makes up for his skin color

What's wrong with you?

And insofar as Obama goes: The guy can speak his ass off. It's the damn truth, he's not as eloquent or effortless as Clinton but good at making you care about what he's selling. As for his running or not, I think that after the article I'm only convinced that he's intently thinking about it. Which may or may not even yield anything.

I personally hope he goes for the gusto. Though I'd rather have him run with Edwards than have the two against eachother in the primaries. I think that in the end though, Pheonix is basically right. He's a big risk and likely won't be run.

 

[Nameless]

There is not one GOP canidate I can think of that wouldn't get destroyed by Obama in the debates, thats one thing Obama has for him. Even would even make McCain who is the most level-headed of top republicans look like a bafoon.

 

[Tarazet]

I don't see this happening. Even if he runs, I doubt he'd win. What's he done? He's a great speaker, but that's really the biggest thing he's got going for him.

Tell me what qualifications Arnold Schwarzenegger had to govern the 5th-largest economy on the planet.

 

[White Man]

Tell me what qualifications Arnold Schwarzenegger had to govern the 5th-largest economy on the planet.

A lot of people thought it would be funny if they had the Terminator for a governor?

 

[AlanHemberger]

Tell me what qualifications Arnold Schwarzenegger had to govern the 5th-largest economy on the planet.

Terminator? That's all it took.

 

[Crab Shaker]

Many of you say 2012, but you realize that if a Democrat wins in 2008 he wouldn't be running right? And if a Republican wins...well folks, grab onto your pants.

I will say this, I'd actually vote for Jeb Bush, but he won't run.

I gasped and said "My god."

 

[Diablos]

**** Jeb Bush, if he runs I will go crazy. I do not want to hear of another "President Bush" ever again. We had H.W., now we have W., and that's enough!

 

[Tamanon]

Jeb won't run. Or if he does, it won't be until 2012. Wonder what he's going to actually do after the Governor race....maybe Senate?

 

[Pimpwerx]

Hmmm, I'd vote for him. I'm sure he'd have a chance if black people showed up in record numbers at the...hahahaha. :lol PEACE.

 

[Crab Shaker]

Some non-corrupt, highly-educated middle-class hispanic male with views that are typical for the profile (libertarian, but with a much different aspect than american christianity) needs to rise and exploit growing hispanic numbers. If he can energize that base, is surrounded by good political influences/ideas, and is charismatic; it can work.

 

[Enron]

As a Southerner I would like to say **** you for your ignorance. There is just as much as much, if not more racism in the Northeast than in the South in my experience. Bias is not limited to specific regions or the US. It is everywhere.

That's very true.

What also is true is that Barack Obama will never, ever be president of the United States. And yes, because he is black. But it won't be the "A N*gg*r president? NO GOL DURN WAY, GAWDD*MMNIT!" sort of racism, but rather the kind of racism that many of us harbor. In fact, I don't know if its really racism as much as it is a desire to associate with things "familiar" to us. Why do you see all the black kids hanging out mostly with other black kids and all the white kids sitting with the other white kids in the lunchroom at school? Why are the overwhelming majority of your friends white, like yourself? Why are you, as a black man, mainly attracted to black women? I'm a mixed White/asian, but I mostly identify as being white. The vast majority of my friends are white. Every single girl i've ever dated is white.

It's that sort of thing that will keep Barack Obama out of the White House.

 

[Enron]

Have my babies.

Dean really should run again, even though he said he wouldn't if he made Democratic Chair. He should step up. Though the news might bring back the SCREAM to keep him out of the running. Jesus, he shouldn't have lost because of that. Dean was my favorite, I heard his views and agreed with almost all of them (if not all)!

Dean lost because he's waaaaay too liberal. The far right and the left are the skirts in american politics; the real battle is for the middle. center-left voters were turned completely off by Dean, and thats also a huge reason why the democrats cant win elections. They have let their party be lead around by the nose by the likes of Dean, Pelosi, the Clintons...and they suffer for it.

 

[terrene]

Obama needs more time in powerful positions. No, Ahnold didn't have any credentials, but he already had huge name recognition and a sense of "power" that people voted on. For Obama to be able to overcome the race factors that Condi Rice and Colin Powell overcame (and either of them could easily win the presidency), America needs to be "eased into it." They need to get to know him better and feel cool with it. Yes, mainly because of his race. But also because it's much harder to take down a person if they've built up some good karma first - and it doesn't take much imagination to envision what the GOP slime machine would do to an unknown, exotic quantity like Obama who was trying to introduce himself to America for the first time.

Give the man a high-profile cabinet position in the '08 Administration. Secretary of State would be great. I don't think "never" is really the answer, I think race is just a handicap that he'll have to overcome.

 

[White Man]

How is Dean far left?

 

[terrene]

Dean lost because he's waaaaay too liberal. The far right and the left are the skirts in american politics; the real battle is for the middle. center-left voters were turned completely off by Dean, and thats also a huge reason why the democrats cant win elections. They have let their party be lead around by the nose by the likes of Dean, Pelosi, the Clintons...and they suffer for it.

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

 

[White Man]

How are the Clintons "wayyyy too liberal" for that matter?

 

[MadraptorMan]

I would easily, easily vote for Obama--I think he is one of the only honest politicians this country has.

 

[Stoney Mason]

How are the Clintons "wayyyy too liberal" for that matter?

All Democrats are communists. I thought this was a well known axiom.

 

[Enron]

Oh, right, im sorry, Dean is really a moderate.

Hahahaha.

Is Dean a super-liberal hippy banging bongos in the common at a college campus? No. But he's definitely NOT moderate. Neither are the Clintons, or nancy pelosi. They may not be YOUR definition of liberal, but to most people, they are definitely left of mainstream democrats.

The fact that they havent been able to win anything since clinton left office *and even then they only had the presidency* speaks volumes. Blame it on whatever you want, but the numbers say the people have thus far rejected them. There's gotta be a reason.

Its because the face of the national Democratic party isn't what the moderate voters want to see.

 

[Stoney Mason]

Oh, right, im sorry, Dean is really a moderate.

Hahahaha.

Is Dean a super-liberal hippy banging bongos in the common at a college campus? No. But he's definitely NOT moderate. Neither are the Clintons, or nancy pelosi. They may not be YOUR definition of liberal, but to most people, they are definitely left of mainstream democrats.

Says the guy with the forum name Enron.

 

[terrene]

Oh, right, im sorry, Dean is really a moderate.

Hahahaha.

Is Dean a super-liberal hippy banging bongos in the common at a college campus? No. But he's definitely NOT moderate. Neither are the Clintons, or nancy pelosi. They may not be YOUR definition of liberal, but to most people, they are definitely left of mainstream democrats.

You're talking about the last Democrat President, the Minority Speaker, and the President of the DNC. Those *are* mainstream democrats, dude. It doesn't GET any more mainstream. Maybe you need to get a grip on what being a Democrat is actually supposed to mean? And how these people have risen to power.

 

[Crab Shaker]

nm

 

[Enron]

You can attack me all you want (ooooh, a nick attack, creative!) but I'm not looking for a fight.

1. democrats cannot win elections.

2. democrats cannot beat a republican party that is perhaps more beatable than any party has been in the last 30 years.


Why do you think that is? Why will voters not vote for them? Is it fraud, conspiracy? Or is it simply because the normal joe out there doesn't feel a connection to the democrats he sees on TV and hears about on the radio and reads about in the papers?

Barack Obama, if he weren't black, could be exactly what the Democratic party needed. But unfortunately for reasons as I stated above, I don't think that will happen.

 

[Stoney Mason]

You can attack me all you want (ooooh, a nick attack, creative!) but I'm not looking for a fight.

1. democrats cannot win elections.

2. democrats cannot beat a republican party that is perhaps more beatable than any party has been in the last 30 years.


Why do you think that is? Why will voters not vote for them? Is it fraud, conspiracy? Or is it simply because the normal joe out there doesn't feel a connection to the democrats he sees on TV and hears about on the radio and reads about in the papers?

The dems will own more governerships. The house and senate are extremely close. And the last two elections have been razor thin. Me thinks you over-estimate. If I was to gauge the American public I would argue they are pretty much split down the middle between the two parties.

As for as your forum name based on your posting history it seems in line so what's the issue? I assumed I was just pointing out the obvious.

 

[Incognito]

Enron doesn't have a ****ing clue as to what he's talking about, that much is obvious. Howard Dean and the Clinton's are far left liberals? On what planet? Oh, that's right, on Rush Limbaugh's and FoxNews planet. :lol

 

[White Man]

Enron doesn't have a ****ing clue as to what he's talking about, that much is obvious. Howard Dean and the Clinton's are far left liberals? On what planet? Oh, that's right, on Rush Limbaugh's and FoxNews planet. :lol

He's not even trying to defend that point any more.

Oddly enough, when I was talking to terrene about this post earier, he made roughly the same statement as the one bolded.

 

[Incognito]

but the numbers say the people have thus far rejected them. There's gotta be a reason.

Its because the face of the national Democratic party isn't what the moderate voters want to see.

Actually, if you want to go by the numbers and it looks like you do, the only time the Democrats have lost a popular vote would have been 2004. We all know what happened in 2000, and as for the Senate and House, the Republican majorities are simply illusory. The fact is that their Democratic colleagues have quite a TON more votes. And people wonder why the Republicans have such difficulities passing true and tried conservative legislation? It's because they're outnumbered in America. And the votes prove it.

 

[Incognito]

He's not even trying to defend that point any more.

Oddly enough, when I was talking to terrene about this post earier, he made roughly the same statement as the one bolded.

Well those outlets need Dean, the Clintons, Kerry's and Gores to be far-left liberals in order to maintain balance and order in their little world. What's sad is the audience that is constantly duped.

 

[coldvein]

Looks like it's already been pointed out that he is a BLACK MAN and therefore can never be elected. Sad but true.

 

[Enron]

More attacks. You guys don't want to admit the democratic party has done a bad job of courting voters? Is it because your political views are on the left of the spectrum and you feel insulted by my comments?

i didn't call Dean or the Clintons the SUPER FAR LEFT. But they are left of the moderate majority that make up the battleground voters. Which makes them liberal, and by most people's definitions.

This time, yeah, it looks like they will finally gain ground. But until the Mark Foley fiasco, things still werent solidly in their favor. It took a major front page SEX scandal, one that had nothing to do with Iraq, Immigration, or any other issue the talking heads force down america's throat on a day to day basis to turn the tide.

That should tell you a lot about the candidates and the "message" up until this point.

 

[terrene]

The dems will own more governerships. The house and senate are extremely close.

Actually, the House isn't even close anymore. The Democrats are projected to have a 21-seat lead. Republicans have "abandoned" multiple races and are now focusing on keeping the Senate, which they are currently projected to lose, as well.

Read it and weep:
www.electoral-vote.com

Enron, you must surely know that we've heard the "I could vote for a Democrat, just not THOSE Democrats" line before, right? Please.

 

[Incognito]

More attacks. You guys don't want to admit the democratic party has done a bad job of courting voters? Is it because your political views are on the left of the spectrum and you feel insulted by my comments?

i didn't call Dean or the Clintons the SUPER FAR LEFT. But they are left of the moderate majority that make up the battleground voters. Which makes them liberal, and by most people's definitions.

This time, yeah, it looks like they will finally gain ground. But until the Mark Foley fiasco, things still werent solidly in their favor. It took a major front page SEX scandal, one that had nothing to do with Iraq, Immigration, or any other issue the talking heads force down america's throat on a day to day basis to turn the tide.

That should tell you a lot about the candidates and the "message" up until this point.

Yep, he's right, guys. Up until the Foley scandal, Americans weren't disapproving of Bush's job performance in regards to Iraq, the Economy, terrorism, health car, gas prices, etc. I guess all those polls were just made up!

 

[ToxicAdam]

I'm fully aware that electing a leader in this country is basically like a very cynical version of Hot or Not? With that being said...

Lots of people have made the comment in this thread that Obama is "too green" or otherwise too inexperienced to be President. Those kinds of statements imply that there is some type or length of experience which could be described as a prerequisite for the presidency...so what are those experiences?

Let me guess -- the ideal POTUS candidate should have experience ****ing up a professional sports team, and has gained military experience shirking combat in the National Guard.

Bush's win was strictly because of his money raising ability and "born again" status. Two key factors in winning the Republican nomination nowadays.

 

[Incognito]

http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/archives/2006/10/a_good_shot_say.html#more

Not sure how the Democrats can compete with this message:

And as promised we have with us for the next few minutes, Vice President Dick Cheney. Once again, Mr. Vice President, a thrill and an honor to have you with us, sir.

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, good afternoon, Rush.

Q All right, first thing, we just had a call -- leads me into my first question for you about the economy. Caller was frustrated that the party at large doesn't seem to be getting the news out about how good the economy is. And, indeed, the economic statistics are fabulous. Unemployment, middle class wage growth, Dow Jones Industrial Average flirting with 12,000, yet we're told that people don't feel this economy is good. Why do you think that is, if it's true? And how do you all plan to use the economy in the next three weeks in the campaign?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, I think, first of all, you're absolutely right, Rush -- the economy is very good. I've been involved in a lot of campaigns going back nearly 40 years, and I'm hard put to find a time when things were as good as they are now for the party from our perspective. And you've cited all the data. We've got over 6.6 million jobs we've added in a little over three years now. Home ownership is at an all-time record high. Stock market is at a high. Everything is really kicking along in great shape.

It's hard -- hard sometimes to drive that point through to the public, but -- and I think a lot of the press coverage focuses on specific problems. Gasoline prices go up and everybody gets upset and takes that as sort of a lead indicator for the economy. Even now gasoline prices are coming down. Natural gas prices are coming down. Heating bills are going to be lower this winter. So I think it just takes time for it to sink in.

Q Well, it's interesting, the gas price run-up was hailed as a failure of the Bush administration's economic policy. Now that gas prices are coming down, the focus seems to be on what is it you all are doing to manipulate the market before the election. Also I wanted to mention to you that the deficit has been cut in half three years early.

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Right.

Q It really is stunning news. But it's a large, drive-by media megaphone to overcome. Is there coordinated efforts within all these candidates that are running for reelection to stress the economy?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, we're trying. I've got two major subjects I address when I'm out on the road. One is to talk about tax policy and what that's done for our economy. And the other is to focus on the global war on terror.

The President -- last week when we had the good news on the deficit, as we closed out the fiscal year, was out publicly talking specifically about that point, trying to take advantage of the opportunity to get the idea across to everybody that we did hit our target three years early in terms of deficit reduction.

But again, that was primarily as a result of our tax policy and the fact that we've supported pro-growth policies, and that has generated more economic activity, and more jobs, and ultimately more revenue for the federal government.

Q When you're out there, are you encountering any apathy? Are you encountering engaged excitement? What's the mood you're running in? I know you're speaking to a mostly Republican audience, how do you assess it?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, I did -- yesterday, for example, I was down in Louisville, Kentucky for Congressman Geoff Davis, who is a great member, by the way, I think will get reelected. I also stopped at Fort Campbell and -- to thank members of the 101st Airborne for all their good work they've been doing in the Middle East. But the mood that I find in terms of the people I'm talking with is very positive. Now of course, I'm probably not going to see a lot of Democrats coming to a Republican fundraiser, so I don't want to misread the situation. But I think I find a far more positive attitude out there than one would led by believe just by reading the national press.

Q Do you get frustrated when you see Republicans speculating on how many House seats they're going to lose?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, I think it's a natural, normal situation at this stage. But I really think we're going to do reasonably well. And I think we'll hold the Senate, and I also think we got a good shot at holding the House. And I've done 114 campaigns so far this cycle. I've been all over the country, seen all kinds of candidates and all kinds of races, but I think the key will be who goes to the polls on Election Day.

And certainly, it's always tough when you're in the midterm of your second presidential term in office. Historically, those are the most difficult elections for the incumbents in the White House. But I think the basic fundamental facts in terms of national security, in terms of five years of defeating the terrorists in their efforts to try to launch another attack against the United States, I think the overall health of the economy, I think the progress we're making in all those areas all argues that, in fact, when the American people have to make a choice between us and the Democrats, I think they'll come down on the side of supporting the President and Republican candidates.

Q The war, Iraq national security, war on terror -- it's all combined into one issue now as far as the election is concerned. And when you -- but I saw the President last night say that he acknowledges that there's some frustration on the part of the American people regarding Iraq because we all want to win. And we can't declare victory yet.

The President signed the military detainee act today, the tribunal act. And it's clear to me anyway that you and the White House are not changing policy on this at all, that the operating policy here is victory. Is the perception that victory is possible strong enough? Is that possibility being laid out in strong enough terms to the American people that they think it's possible? Or are they beginning to doubt that it can happen?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, I think there's some natural level of concern out there because, in fact, it wasn't over instantaneously. It's been a little over three years now since we went into Iraq, so I don't think it's surprising that people are concerned.

On the other hand, this government has only been in office about five months, five or six months now. They're off to a good start. It is difficult, no question about it. But we've now got over 300,000 Iraqis trained and equipped as part of their security forces. They've had three national elections with higher turnout than we have here in the United States. If you look at the general overall situation, they're doing remarkably well. It's still very, very difficult, very tough. Nobody should underestimate the extent to which we're engaged there with this as sort of, at present, the major front in the war on terror. That's what Osama bin Laden says, and he's right. It's very important that we prevail there. But we're engaged really on a global basis. We're very active in Afghanistan. We've got continuing activities in Pakistan. We've captured and killed more al Qaeda in Pakistan probably than any place else.

We're active working with the Saudis and many others in that part of the world, so it's a major conflict. It's going to run for a long time. And everybody needs to understand that. The campaign I look on as an opportunity to remind everybody what's at stake here, and in this particular instance, it's especially important to point out to people that the terrorists can't beat us in a stand-up fight. They can only win if we lose our will. And they're betting we will. They're betting we don't have the stomach for the fight. And I don't think that's true. And I think faced with that basic fundamental choice, I think the American people understand that it's having gone on offense, having gotten aggressive going after the terrorists, closing those training camps in Afghanistan, and working to take down the regimes like Saddam Hussein, and to stand up democracies in their place, as well as tough measures here at home is what has kept us safe for five years, and it's the reason why there hasn't been another attack like 9/11 on the U.S.

Q Well, I -- there's no question the American people respond to leadership in times like this. And let me put it to you this way, I was reading something today that a writer -- I don't remember who -- was speculating on increased terrorist attacks in Iraq attempting to demoralize the American people as we get up to the election. And when I read that, it made sense to me. And I interpreted this as that the terrorists are actually involved and want to involve themselves in our electoral process, which must mean they want a change.

Now, I know you can't comment politically on the point that I make, but do you expect, and is there preparation for -- one of the things I read was that there's been noted plots to actually try to blow up the Green Zone. One was aborted and discovered recently -- but some major attacks being planned for right up until the election, which could be devastating if they happen, in terms of the American people's morale.

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Sure. Well, I think there's no question but what this is a sophisticated crew who understand the impact on public opinion. And as I say, I think a lot it, they say as much, that what they're banking on, they hark back to Somalia in '93, or Beirut in 1983 when after Americans were killed, our response was to withdraw our forces. So I think they're very sensitive to that kind of thing. And as I say, they clearly don't have the military capability to defeat us, but they believe they can break our will.

And so you look at something like our elections here, and I think they're probably -- I don't have any proof -- but I think they're probably very sensitive to that. We saw what they did in Spain a few years ago. You remember how Aznar had supported us very aggressively, and shortly before the elections in Spain, they launched an attack on trains. They set off several bombs and killed a bunch of people shortly before the election. And they probably did have that impact.

Q There was a story in The Washington Post yesterday or earlier in the week that was -- the reporter was amazed that the President and Karl Rove remain "inexplicably upbeat" about the outcome of the elections and that there is no plan for if Republicans lose the House and/or the Senate. Can you tell us why the upbeat attitude in the White House?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, because we're out there working hard in connection with this campaign because I think we feel like we've got some great candidates. I've got great confidence in Karl and Ken Mehlman, up at the RNC. These are two of the best in the business in terms of understanding this process.

And I think our candidates are well financed. We're doing everything humanly possible to succeed in this election. And of course, we track polls, as everybody else does, too. But I think it's easy to sit in Washington and sort of absorb the vibes coming from the national media, but that doesn't represent necessarily what's going on out there around the country. And when you get out on the ground talking with real people about real problems, their hopes and desires for their families and for the nation, as well as their appreciation for what we've been able to accomplish over the last six years, and you get a very positive feeling.

Q One final question, you guys are fighting so hard to defeat the terrorists in and around this country and around the world. Do you have any reaction to the lenient sentence that Lynne Stewart received yesterday in New York?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, I was surprised. Of course, it's not for me to substitute my judgment for a judge, but I think, of course, the prosecution had asked for a much stiffer sentence. And this was somebody who has been supposedly convicted -- or pled guilty to being a key intermediary for a major terrorist. And that's significant. I think we need to make certain that when we find somebody who is, indeed, in bed with a terrorist, that they are appropriately brought to justice.

Q Mr. Vice President, thanks very much for your time. I know you gave us a couple minutes extra than you have on your schedule. I appreciate it. And we look forward to the next time. Best to you.

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, Rush. You've got a great show, as always. And it was good to talk to you.

Q Thank you, sir.

Most Americans aren't millionaires who are the beneficiary of the Bush tax policy, I think that's there where the disconnect comes in.....but maybe I'm wrong and all is good?! Either way, a lose lose for Democrats! :lol

 

[Enron]

Then why, oh why have the Democrats not heald the house since 1994? And when was the last time the democrats were elected to a majority in the senate? I know it wasnt any time in the last 6 years (the Jeffords swap doesnt count).

There's gotta be a reason.

 

[Incognito]

Then why, oh why have the Democrats not heald the house since 1994? And when was the last time the democrats were elected to a majority in the senate? I know it wasnt any time in the last 6 years (the Jeffords swap doesnt count).

There's gotta be a reason.

What's the word. I swore I learned about it in my govt. class. Hrmmm, starts with a G and ends with errymandering. Damn, I've lost my head.

 

[Enron]

Yep, he's right, guys. Up until the Foley scandal, Americans weren't disapproving of Bush's job performance in regards to Iraq, the Economy, terrorism, health car, gas prices, etc. I guess all those polls were just made up!

hahaha.

Up until the Foley scandal, the Senate wasn't that close and the house wasn't a sure thing. Now the house looks like a sure thing and the Senate is now in play. Bush's poll numbers have been terrible for a long while now. And yet the fall elections were still not certain until Foley and Hastert have been in every news cycle.