Support NeoGAF

[Cheebs]

*raises hand* Douche and turd sandwich.

Why don't you like Obama?

 

[Eric P]

If Obama does go with Webb (and I think he will ultimately) then my guess is a darkhorse candidate for McCain could be Jim Gilmore

ha that would be pretty funny

 

[Gaborn]

ha that would be pretty funny

Yeah, I mean, just practically speaking McCain's biggest problem is credibility with his base, he knows he needs to solidify the south so I'm guessing his preferred candidate is Mark Sanford. Still though, I wouldn't rule out a Virginia VP from both campaigns.

 

[lopaz]

Mike Huckabee saves a life!

psh, he's got enough people raped and murdered for that not to count

 

[grandjedi6]

Geez, for being so ahead of the pack on social issues in this chart he sure seems to fall behind on pretty big issues like gay rights and the separation of church and state.

:lol

Yep a real step forward. From one religious nut job to the next.

what?

 

[Diablos]

If Obama does go with Webb (and I think he will ultimately) then my guess is a darkhorse candidate for McCain could be Jim Gilmore

Oh geez, that would really shake things up.

I bet he'll pick Jindal...

 

[Tommie Hu$tle]

Yeah, I mean, just practically speaking McCain's biggest problem is credibility with his base, he knows he needs to solidify the south so I'm guessing his preferred candidate is Mark Sanford. Still though, I wouldn't rule out a Virginia VP from both campaigns.

I dont think McCain has a South problem for the most part I think he is in good standing there. I'd think he needs to keep the rust belt in play and work someone from Ohio or Penn. I'd be HIGHLY shocked if he went with Jindal

 

[Diablos]

I dont think McCain has a South problem for the most part I think he is in good standing there. I'd think he needs to keep the rust belt in play and work someone from Ohio or Penn

I would be shocked if McCain got Pennsylvania.

 

[teiresias]

My impressions of Gilmore is that he didn't exactly leave the Virginia Governor's office as a very popular governor, but perhaps I'm wrong as I didn't really follow politics at the time - but I am in VA and that's just sort of what I remember, there was the whole crap with the car tax thing that he bungled or something.

 

[Agent Icebeezy]

what?

I don't get it either. He just came out in support of Pride Month.

 

[grandjedi6]

Well this sure is an interesting analysis. It's from a very indepth polical position analysis site, specifically in this case an analysis of whether Obama or Clinton is more liberal. McCain himself though is quite interesting as he jumps around more then anyone else with this methodology:

 

[Gaborn]

I dont think McCain has a South problem for the most part I think he is in good standing there. I'd think he needs to keep the rust belt in play and work someone from Ohio or Penn. I'd be HIGHLY shocked if he went with Jindal

Ohio's a state that's slowly getting redder, I don't think he's got much to worry there ultimately, a few more visits and he should probably win it. If anyone from the midwest was possible I'd wonder what Engler is doing, he was a popular governor for Michigan and the state is already trending McCain's way, that could be enough to lock it in for him. Still though, I say southern hardline conservative is most probable because the base of the Republicans is NOT happy with McCain and needs someone they can be enthusiastic about.

 

[Diablos]

One thing I find interesting about this election is, for years, it has been argued the Republicans always run better campaigns and that's why they always win Presidential elections. They have a better message; they connect with people. Even if you fundamentally disagree with Republicans like I do on pretty much all issues, many people still admit this.

But what are we seeing this time? Obama's campaign is far more effective. It's evident in how McCain basically rips off Obama's main slogan and uses it in everything from his speeches to his website. Obama is running a MUCH better campaign. He has definitely taken the lead here. So much that McCain can't help but jump on the bandwagon and try to steal it.

Ohio's a state that's slowly getting redder, I don't think he's got much to worry there ultimately, a few more visits and he should probably win it. If anyone from the midwest was possible I'd wonder what Engler is doing, he was a popular governor for Michigan and the state is already trending McCain's way, that could be enough to lock it in for him. Still though, I say southern hardline conservative is most probable because the base of the Republicans is NOT happy with McCain and needs someone they can be enthusiastic about.

If Ohio is getting redder, why did Republicans get pwned there in 2006? Wasn't too long ago..

 

[Y2Kev]

what ever happened to picking the VP the BARTLETT way

because I COULD DIE

bartlett :bow

 

[Tommie Hu$tle]

Ohio's a state that's slowly getting redder, I don't think he's got much to worry there ultimately, a few more visits and he should probably win it. If anyone from the midwest was possible I'd wonder what Engler is doing, he was a popular governor for Michigan and the state is already trending McCain's way, that could be enough to lock it in for him. Still though, I say southern hardline conservative is most probable because the base of the Republicans is NOT happy with McCain and needs someone they can be enthusiastic about.

Agreed and I can't see how in any shape form or fashion where Jindal would help him on the national scene. I think if he was trying to pull in more independents and swing voters then he would be a good choice but, McCain doesn't have a problem there he needs a comfort food GOP operative.

 

[grandjedi6]

My impressions of Gilmore is that he didn't exactly leave the Virginia Governor's office as a very popular governor, but perhaps I'm wrong as I didn't really follow politics at the time - but I am in VA and that's just sort of what I remember, there was the whole crap with the car tax thing that he bungled or something.

I'm pretty sure he's refered to in scorn as the "car tax" governor :lol

Plus his presidential run didn' go well, or his current Senate run

 

[Gaborn]

If Ohio is getting redder, why did Republicans get pwned there in 2006? Wasn't too long ago..

Well, I don't think Bob Ney helped the Republicans, nor did Taft and his scandals.... That's local politics though, and historically states punish their local politicians by switching candidates at the state level, but that doesn't mean their national politics change.

 

[grandjedi6]

Well, I don't think Bob Ney helped the Republicans, nor did Taft and his scandals.... That's local politics though, and historically states punish their local politicians by switching candidates at the state level, but that doesn't mean their national politics change.

What makes Ohio "redder" then?

 

[TDG]

If Ohio is getting redder, why did Republicans get pwned there in 2006? Wasn't too long ago..

The republicans got pwned there because everyone was still pissed about what a crook Gov. Taft was. that's why Strickland crushed Blackwell to become gov, and that carried into the senate race, where Sherrod Brown won. And the dems didn't exactly have a runaway victory of the seats in the house. I believe they only picked up one seat.

I don't think Ohio's becoming redder, but I don't think it will go for Obama. I've broken this down before.

 

[Diablos]

The republicans got pwned there because everyone was still pissed about what a crook Gov. Taft was. that's why Strickland crushed Blackwell to become gov, and that carried into the senate race, where Sherrod Brown won. And the dems didn't exactly have a runaway victory of the seats in the house. I believe they only picked up one seat.

One seat? Ugh. I didn't know that.

Dems need to really fixate on that VA+NM+CO+IA+whateverelsetheycanget strategy.

 

[Beer Monkey]

I'm an Ohioan and I definitely don't think it is getting redder.

 

[Gaborn]

What makes Ohio "redder" then?

Well, considering they voted for Clinton twice, and then Bush twice, my guess is that they're more likely to vote for Republicans these days.

disgruntled - Just curious, was that one seat Bob Ney's?

 

[TDG]

One seat? Ugh. I didn't know that.

Dems need to really fixate on that VA+NM+CO+IA+whateverelsetheycanget strategy.

And that one seat would've been a GOP lock (IIRC) if it hadn't been for a sudden scandal that forced the incumbent to drop out of the race in August.

I agree, Obama should only focus on Ohio to the point of making McCain waste money here.

disgruntled - Just curious, was that one seat Bob Ney's?

Yep.

 

[Clevinger]

Well, considering they voted for Clinton twice, and then Bush twice, my guess is that they're more likely to vote for Republicans these days.

By that logic, wouldn't that mean they would switch back to democrat for two terms?

 

[grandjedi6]

Well, considering they voted for Clinton twice, and then Bush twice, my guess is that they're more likely to vote for Republicans these days.

disgruntled - Just curious, was that one seat Bob Ney's?

Using that logic you could apply it to the whole country then.

 

[Gaborn]

And that one seat would've been a GOP lock (IIRC) if it hadn't been for a sudden scandal that forced the incumbent to drop out of the race in August.

I agree, Obama should only focus on Ohio to the point of making McCain waste money here.


Yep.

Makes perfect sense, Ney was one of Abramoff's creatures. I mean, by all rights if the state was truly swinging Democratic they'd be punishing their national representatives, but the only one that got punished was the hugely dirty one.

Grandjedi - you're right, part of it is a gut feeling, I just haven't seen evidence of a national shift towards the Dems from Ohio, I saw their officials being punished at a local level.

 

[SecretDestroyer]

what?

He does not support gay marriage due to his own personal religious convictions and additionally does not seem to see anything wrong with his religious beliefs playing a part in his other political judgements.

While he states that he thinks that the separation of church and state is important he claims it should be taken with a "sense of proportion" and disagrees with long settled church state issues such as restricting prayer in school.

From his vantage point the only usefulness of church-state separation is to protect religious institutions from state control rather than to protect the citizens from religious oppression. He supports the use of faith based programs including religious substance abuse treatments like AA in prisons even while there are completely non-religiously based alternatives like SOS that is now used in a number if state prison systems.

He also advocates that democrats "get in church, reach out to evangelicals [and] link faith with the work that we do."

He seems to fail to understand that not all Americans believe in a higher power and seems to completely drop them from the discussion.

Additionally, I am especially uneasy with that fact that he is a late convert to religion which seems to suggest that he plays it up for political gain (for all intents and purposes he could simply opt to attend church for a cultural connection to the black community in the same way that secular jews may still attend temple while being completely atheistic in their outlook) while would make him fairly slimy. The other alternative that he actually believes his religious doctrines would mean he was familiar with a number of different worldviews including christianity, islam, and his own mothers secular views and choose jesus. Thats as creepy as someone converting to Scientology later in life and really calls his judgement into question.

 

[Tamanon]

He does not support gay marriage due to his own personal religious convictions and additionally does not seem to see anything wrong with his religious beliefs playing a part in his other political judgements.

While he states that he thinks that the separation of church and state is important he claims it should be taken with a "sense of proportion" and disagrees with long settled church state issues such as restricting prayer in school.

From his vantage point the only usefulness of church-state separation is to protect religious institutions from state control rather than to protect the citizens from religious oppression. He supports the use of faith based programs including religious substance abuse treatments like AA in prisons even while there are completely non-religiously based alternatives like SOS that is now used in a number if state prison systems.

He also advocates that democrats "get in church, reach out to evangelicals [and] link faith with the work that we do."

He seems to fail to understand that not all Americans believe in a higher power and seems to completely drop them from the discussion.

Additionally, I am especially uneasy with that fact that he is a late convert to religion which seems to suggest that he plays it up for political gain (for all intents and purposes he could simply opt to attend church for a cultural connection to the black community in the same way that secular jews may still attend temple while being completely atheistic in their outlook) while would make him fairly slimy. The other alternative that he actually believes his religious doctrines would mean he was familiar with a number of different worldviews including christianity, islam, and his own mothers secular views and choose jesus. Thats as creepy as someone converting to Scientology later in life and really calls his judgement into question.

Um....so you think he's a religious nutjob but also think that he only uses his religion for political gain....

Did you actually listen to him at the faith forum?

 

[Hellsing321]

H The other alternative that he actually believes his religious doctrines would mean he was familiar with a number of different worldviews including christianity, islam, and his own mothers secular views and choose jesus. Thats as creepy as someone converting to Scientology later in life and really calls his judgement into question.

So this is all just a problem with you hating Christianity? Got it.

 

[Elfforkusu]

The other alternative that he actually believes his religious doctrines would mean he was familiar with a number of different worldviews including christianity, islam, and his own mothers secular views and choose jesus. Thats as creepy as someone converting to Scientology later in life and really calls his judgement into question.

So you can't come to terms with the fact that a certifiably intelligent person could choose Christianity as their religion whilst being aware of the alternatives.

This is, as it were, not Obama's fault.

 

[Mumei]

He does not support gay marriage due to his own personal religious convictions and additionally does not seem to see anything wrong with his religious beliefs playing a part in his other political judgements.

While he states that he thinks that the separation of church and state is important he claims it should be taken with a "sense of proportion" and disagrees with long settled church state issues such as restricting prayer in school.

From his vantage point the only usefulness of church-state separation is to protect religious institutions from state control rather than to protect the citizens from religious oppression. He supports the use of faith based programs including religious substance abuse treatments like AA in prisons even while there are completely non-religiously based alternatives like SOS that is now used in a number if state prison systems.

He also advocates that democrats "get in church, reach out to evangelicals [and] link faith with the work that we do."

He seems to fail to understand that not all Americans believe in a higher power and seems to completely drop them from the discussion.

Additionally, I am especially uneasy with that fact that he is a late convert to religion which seems to suggest that he plays it up for political gain (for all intents and purposes he could simply opt to attend church for a cultural connection to the black community in the same way that secular jews may still attend temple while being completely atheistic in their outlook) while would make him fairly slimy. The other alternative that he actually believes his religious doctrines would mean he was familiar with a number of different worldviews including christianity, islam, and his own mothers secular views and choose jesus. Thats as creepy as someone converting to Scientology later in life and really calls his judgement into question.

I am an atheist, and one of the annoying ones that thinks that religious belief is absolutely idiotic, and I have no problem with his stance. From his speech:

Moreover, given the increasing diversity of America's population, the dangers of sectarianism have never been greater. Whatever we once were, we are no longer just a Christian nation; we are also a Jewish nation, a Muslim nation, a Buddhist nation, a Hindu nation, and a nation of nonbelievers.

And even if we did have only Christians in our midst, if we expelled every non-Christian from the United States of America, whose Christianity would we teach in the schools? Would we go with James Dobson's, or Al Sharpton's? Which passages of Scripture should guide our public policy? Should we go with Leviticus, which suggests slavery is ok and that eating shellfish is abomination? How about Deuteronomy, which suggests stoning your child if he strays from the faith? Or should we just stick to the Sermon on the Mount - a passage that is so radical that it's doubtful that our own Defense Department would survive its application? So before we get carried away, let's read our bibles. Folks haven't been reading their bibles.

This brings me to my second point. Democracy demands that the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal, rather than religion-specific, values. It requires that their proposals be subject to argument, and amenable to reason. I may be opposed to abortion for religious reasons, but if I seek to pass a law banning the practice, I cannot simply point to the teachings of my church or evoke God's will. I have to explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all.

And in all honesty, he supports gay marriage in everything but name. Frankly, I accept that it is political suicide for him to support it in name as well, and it is not worth voting against him when comparing his views with McCain's views on this subject, especially after McCain actively campaigned for the constitutional amendment in Arizona (which lost, thankfully).

And also, his call to go to churches and getting evangelicals? This makes perfect sense. It is true that fundamentalist Christians and progressives are politically incompatible, but evangelicals can often work with us towards many of the same goals. If we both want to help the poor, and they are willing to help us do it, why do you care that they want to do it because of their imaginary Sky Fairy and you and I want to do it because we have some other moral or ethical consideration that makes us believe it is the right thing to do? Is it not more important that both they and we share that goal?

It is wrongheaded to treat evangelical Christians like a block - fully a quarter of them support gay marriage in California, for instance, and I bet that they especially would be good political allies.

While I don't believe that being religious is a good thing - I think that religion, on balance, is a negative - Obama has done nothing to really earn my ire.

Also, Obama's been reading his John Rawls. :lol

 

[SecretDestroyer]

Um....so you think he's a religious nutjob but also think that he only uses his religion for political gain....

Did you actually listen to him at the faith forum?

I said it's an either-or based on the statements he has made... EITHER he is a religious nut-job if you take him for his word, OR he just another slimy politician using religion for political gain (which is not really the sort of change I can believe in...)

 

[Mumei]

I said it's an either-or based on the statements he has made... EITHER he is a religious nut-job if you take him for his word, OR he just another slimy politician using religion for political gain (which is not really the sort of change I can believe in...)

He is neither one.

 

[Gaborn]

And in all honesty, he supports gay marriage in everything but name. Frankly, I accept that it is political suicide for him to support it in name as well, and it is not worth voting against him when comparing his views with McCain's views on this subject, especially after McCain actively campaigned for the constitutional amendment in Arizona (which lost, thankfully).

While I find McCain's stance unacceptable as well, I don't personally give Obama a pass on what the (Republican dominated) California Supreme Court called "second class status" for marriages.

 

[thekad]

I said it's an either-or based on the statements he has made... EITHER he is a religious nut-job if you take him for his word, OR he just another slimy politician using religion for political gain (which is not really the sort of change I can believe in...)

So are you saying we've never had a good president? You know, since they all were "religious nut-jobs."

Gaborn: I would call it separate-but-equal* status, but that is the best compromise one can get on the national stage. You're winning the battle; take it in stride.

 

[grandjedi6]

He does not support gay marriage due to his own personal religious convictions and additionally does not seem to see anything wrong with his religious beliefs playing a part in his other political judgements.

Obama does personally believe that marriage is a bond between a man and woman. Yet he supports full civil unions, believes same sex marriage should be left to the states, voted against the Marriage amendment and wants to repeal "Dont' ask, Don't tell". So much for that "religious beliefs affecting his political judgement" worry, huh?

While he states that he thinks that the separation of church and state is important he claims it should be taken with a "sense of proportion" and disagrees with long settled church state issues such as restricting prayer in school.

Obama opposes mandatory prayer in schools.

From his vantage point the only usefulness of church-state separation is to protect religious institutions from state control rather than to protect the citizens from religious oppression. He supports the use of faith based programs including religious substance abuse treatments like AA in prisons even while there are completely non-religiously based alternatives like SOS that is now used in a number if state prison systems.

Well separation of church and state was created to protect religion from government. And what is wrong with using faith based programs for abuse treatments? Tends to be effective for some people

He also advocates that democrats "get in church, reach out to evangelicals [and] link faith with the work that we do."

aka "Let's stop losing elections because we give up on church goers"

He seems to fail to understand that not all Americans believe in a higher power and seems to completely drop them from the discussion.

Where do you get this from?

Additionally, I am especially uneasy with that fact that he is a late convert to religion which seems to suggest that he plays it up for political gain (for all intents and purposes he could simply opt to attend church for a cultural connection to the black community in the same way that secular jews may still attend temple while being completely atheistic in their outlook) while would make him fairly slimy. The other alternative that he actually believes his religious doctrines would mean he was familiar with a number of different worldviews including christianity, islam, and his own mothers secular views and choose jesus. Thats as creepy as someone converting to Scientology later in life and really calls his judgement into question.

How is Obama a "late convert" to religion? And how would he be using it for political gain? (he was a member of trinity for 20 years, remember?)

 

[Gaborn]

Gaborn: I would call it separate-but-equal* status, but that is the best compromise one can get on the national stage. You're winning the battle; take it in stride.

I won't refuse civil unions if offered, but that doesn't mean I can vote in good conscience for someone who sees my relationships as less than equal under the law.

 

[Mumei]

While I find McCain's stance unacceptable as well, I don't personally give Obama a pass on what the (Republican dominated) California Supreme Court called "second class status" for marriages.

If those represent his true views, yes, I agree. I'm just not sure, but I'm hopeful that the fact that he supports all of the legal rights and incidences of marriage that he would, if given the opportunity through some legislation (unlikely in the extreme, I realize), that he would sign it.

Maybe I'm wrong, and he's being completely honest about his religious objects to calling it marriage, however.

 

[SecretDestroyer]

So are you saying we've never had a good president? You know, since they all were "religious nut-jobs."

Nope we have had many secular minded, enlightenment influenced, presidents. Hell Jefferson was a freaking Atheist.

The whole commingling of religion and presidential politics is a more recent trend.

 

[thekad]

I won't refuse civil unions if offered, but that doesn't mean I can vote in good conscience for someone who sees my relationships as less than equal under the law.

Under the law, your relationship would be completely equal to marriages.

And you must have had a hard time voting for anyone.

 

[Gaborn]

If those represent his true views, yes, I agree. I'm just not sure, but I'm hopeful that the fact that he supports all of the legal rights and incidences of marriage that he would, if given the opportunity through some legislation (unlikely in the extreme, I realize), that he would sign it.

Maybe I'm wrong, and he's being completely honest about his religious objects to calling it marriage, however.

I don't see how I can vote based on what a candidate MIGHT do, I choose to believe Obama's an honest man who will honor his campaign positions as much as possible. I think he's very sincere, genuine... and utterly wrong on this issue. I give LBJ a lot of credit (even if he was a traitor in regards to Vietnam) he stood up to his party and he fought for people's civil rights. Obama is willing to fight for blacks, but not for gays on marriage.

thekad - no, they would not be without the title of marriage. There are numerous specific legal and traditional rights associated with the term marriage and there's no reason for the law to make a distinction.

 

[thekad]

Lincoln*? Washington? Wilson?

Nut-jobs, by your estimation, unfit for duty.



*may have actually been a nut-job

 

[grandjedi6]

Nope we have had many secular minded, enlightenment influenced, presidents. Hell Jefferson was a freaking Atheist.

The whole commingling of religion and presidential politics is a more recent trend.

False. Jefferson was a Deist not an Atheist.

 

[Gaborn]

Lincoln*? Washington? Wilson?

Nut-jobs, by your estimation, unfit for duty.



*may have actually been a nut-job

Might want to include Wilson in your nut-job evaluation. He basically warmongered his way into WW1, which we had no business being involved in in the first place.

 

[thekad]

Gaborn: 1 and three-thirds.

 

[Gaborn]

Gaborn: 1 and three-thirds.

Then call everything a civil union, I'd have no problem with that. Until then it's not equality, it's a separate legal status meant to stigmatize and say you're not LIKE everyone else.

 

[Mandark]

Lincoln*? Washington? Wilson?

Morons!

 

[grandjedi6]

I don't see how I can vote based on what a candidate MIGHT do, I choose to believe Obama's an honest man who will honor his campaign positions as much as possible. I think he's very sincere, genuine... and utterly wrong on this issue. I give LBJ a lot of credit (even if he was a traitor in regards to Vietnam) he stood up to his party and he fought for people's civil rights. Obama is willing to fight for blacks, but not for gays on marriage.

thekad - no, they would not be without the title of marriage. There are numerous specific legal and traditional rights associated with the term marriage and there's no reason for the law to make a distinction.

Obama wants to repeal DOMA, eliminate DADT, advocated equal rights for LGBT and argued that African Americans & gays most join together to fight for civil rights. And even though he personally believes marriage is between a man and woman, he still voted against the Marriage amendment and believes marriage should be left to the states. What more can you expect from a man?

 

[Gaborn]

Obama wants to repeal DOMA, eliminate DADT, advocated equal rights for LGBT and argued that African Americans & gays most join together to fight for civil rights. And even though he personally believes marriage is between a man and woman, he still voted against the Marriage amendment and believes marriage should be left to the states. What more can you expect from a man?

I can expect equality. Not a separate legal status. Not taking it just so far but not all the way, not half rights, not 3/5, not 99/100. Equality under the law in name and fact.

 

[Mumei]

Nope we have had many secular minded, enlightenment influenced, presidents. Hell Jefferson was a freaking Atheist.

The whole commingling of religion and presidential politics is a more recent trend.

Oh, hardly.

I'd recommend reading American Gospel by John Meacham for a good insight into that.