300?Bull3t wrote:
Presidency in the United Stats for the last 300 years has been white men.
Do you actually think it will start now?
The elections can be bent and if that does not work well we all know the next best thing.
And of course race and color has a lot to do with it in alot of people's eyes.
It is just the way things are.
Poll
Could Obama Lose Against a White Guy coz of Racism?
| Yes | 65% | 65% - 96 | ||||
| No | 34% | 34% - 51 | ||||
| Total: 147 | ||||||
I take that back I believe it is 200.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
300?Bull3t wrote:
Presidency in the United Stats for the last 300 years has been white men.
Do you actually think it will start now?
The elections can be bent and if that does not work well we all know the next best thing.
And of course race and color has a lot to do with it in alot of people's eyes.
It is just the way things are.
Actually, no it was roughly 230 years.
Last edited by Bull3t (2008-01-04 12:00:20)
1776-2008Bull3t wrote:
1700's bub.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
300?Bull3t wrote:
Presidency in the United Stats for the last 300 years has been white men.
Do you actually think it will start now?
The elections can be bent and if that does not work well we all know the next best thing.
And of course race and color has a lot to do with it in alot of people's eyes.
It is just the way things are.
cupcake
Close enoughGunSlinger OIF II wrote:
1776-2008Bull3t wrote:
1700's bub.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
300?
cupcake
just did all the math in my head
Last edited by Bull3t (2008-01-04 12:01:01)
I am well aware of what Iowa is, are you? Iowa and New Hampshire are good samplings of the United States as a whole. At least in terms of how America votes. That is why they are given so much attention. Instead of making predictions of racial divide without evidence I provided numbers and used historically accurate facts to explain my view. There is a difference between unsubstantiated speculation and an educated opinion. Do I think he may have some trouble because of a few states? Yes. Do I think a few people in a few states will decide the fate of Barrack based on his race? No.sergeriver wrote:
Iowa isn't the whole US. So, there are no racial issues because of Iowa?
Xbone Stormsurgezz
I hope he doesn't lose because he's black. I think he will lose against McCain like Cam said.
1789GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
1776-2008Bull3t wrote:
1700's bub.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
300?
cupcake
sugar
Xbone Stormsurgezz
he'll lose the bible belt obviously.Kmarion wrote:
I am well aware of what Iowa is, are you? Iowa and New Hampshire are good samplings of the United States as a whole. At least in terms of how America votes. That is why they are given so much attention. Instead of making predictions of racial divide without evidence I provided numbers and used historically accurate facts to explain my view. There is a difference between unsubstantiated speculation and an educated opinion. Do I think he may have some trouble because of a few states? Yes. Do I think a few people in a few states will decide the fate of Barrack based on his race? No.sergeriver wrote:
Iowa isn't the whole US. So, there are no racial issues because of Iowa?
Im off by two years because I count the continental congress. 1774Kmarion wrote:
1789GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
1776-2008Bull3t wrote:
1700's bub.
cupcake
sugar
sweetness
Last edited by GunSlinger OIF II (2008-01-04 12:09:45)
Oh, excuse me if I offended you with my unsubstantiated speculation when you obviously have such and educated opinion. What accurate facts are you talking about? Those numbers don't tell anything. So, are you telling me that McCain will come in 4th and won't run for president?Kmarion wrote:
I am well aware of what Iowa is, are you? Iowa and New Hampshire are good samplings of the United States as a whole. At least in terms of how America votes. That is why they are given so much attention. Instead of making predictions of racial divide without evidence I provided numbers and used historically accurate facts to explain my view. There is a difference between unsubstantiated speculation and an educated opinion. Do I think he may have some trouble because of a few states? Yes. Do I think a few people in a few states will decide the fate of Barrack based on his race? No.sergeriver wrote:
Iowa isn't the whole US. So, there are no racial issues because of Iowa?
I think Edwards milking him right now is having a greater impact. If Edwards drops I think his lead would jump considerably over Hilldog.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
serge,lol, you are showing your ignorance of the political process over here.sergeriver wrote:
Oh, excuse me if I offended you with my unsubstantiated speculation when you obviously have such and educated opinion. What accurate facts are you talking about? Those numbers don't tell anything. So, are you telling me that McCain will come in 4th and won't run for president?Kmarion wrote:
I am well aware of what Iowa is, are you? Iowa and New Hampshire are good samplings of the United States as a whole. At least in terms of how America votes. That is why they are given so much attention. Instead of making predictions of racial divide without evidence I provided numbers and used historically accurate facts to explain my view. There is a difference between unsubstantiated speculation and an educated opinion. Do I think he may have some trouble because of a few states? Yes. Do I think a few people in a few states will decide the fate of Barrack based on his race? No.sergeriver wrote:
Iowa isn't the whole US. So, there are no racial issues because of Iowa?
As long as it's not Hillary...
Ok, then teach me, don't be rude if I made a wrong statement.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
serge,lol, you are showing your ignorance of the political process over here.sergeriver wrote:
Oh, excuse me if I offended you with my unsubstantiated speculation when you obviously have such and educated opinion. What accurate facts are you talking about? Those numbers don't tell anything. So, are you telling me that McCain will come in 4th and won't run for president?Kmarion wrote:
I am well aware of what Iowa is, are you? Iowa and New Hampshire are good samplings of the United States as a whole. At least in terms of how America votes. That is why they are given so much attention. Instead of making predictions of racial divide without evidence I provided numbers and used historically accurate facts to explain my view. There is a difference between unsubstantiated speculation and an educated opinion. Do I think he may have some trouble because of a few states? Yes. Do I think a few people in a few states will decide the fate of Barrack based on his race? No.
I didnt think I was being rude. Ignorance is different than stupidity.sergeriver wrote:
Ok, then teach me, don't be rude if I made a wrong statement.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
serge,lol, you are showing your ignorance of the political process over here.sergeriver wrote:
Oh, excuse me if I offended you with my unsubstantiated speculation when you obviously have such and educated opinion. What accurate facts are you talking about? Those numbers don't tell anything. So, are you telling me that McCain will come in 4th and won't run for president?
Last edited by GunSlinger OIF II (2008-01-04 12:14:56)
Not you.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
I didnt think I was being rude. Ignorance is different than stupidity.sergeriver wrote:
Ok, then teach me, don't be rude if I made a wrong statement.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
serge,lol, you are showing your ignorance of the political process over here.
They didn't tell you that from what we have seen the majority of people who have voted so far voted for the Black guy? I tried to explain why Iowa and New Hampshire are important and what they represent. I have presented at least some reason for my opinion. I wasn't offended, I was just saying show me some evidence. You seem to be extra sensitive right now.sergeriver wrote:
Oh, excuse me if I offended you with my unsubstantiated speculation when you obviously have such and educated opinion. What accurate facts are you talking about? Those numbers don't tell anything. So, are you telling me that McCain will come in 4th and won't run for president?Kmarion wrote:
I am well aware of what Iowa is, are you? Iowa and New Hampshire are good samplings of the United States as a whole. At least in terms of how America votes. That is why they are given so much attention. Instead of making predictions of racial divide without evidence I provided numbers and used historically accurate facts to explain my view. There is a difference between unsubstantiated speculation and an educated opinion. Do I think he may have some trouble because of a few states? Yes. Do I think a few people in a few states will decide the fate of Barrack based on his race? No.sergeriver wrote:
Iowa isn't the whole US. So, there are no racial issues because of Iowa?
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Huckabee will most likely be the republican candidate, anyone disagree?
George Washington will be rolling in his grave right now...
an owner of some 300+ slaves.
an owner of some 300+ slaves.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-01-04 12:17:07)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_ … l_CongressCameronPoe wrote:
George Washington will be rolling in his grave right now...
an owner of some 300+ slaves.
If the final elections are between Obama and a white guy, and the white guy wins, Obama is gunna bring up the fact that race had something to do with it, and even the fact that racists played a part in it.
15 more years! 15 more years!
Too similar of a discussion. Merging.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
I'm just saying that maybe, just maybe this guy could lose the election because he's black. You posted pics of his grandparents and mother, who are white people, but he's black. Do you really think that having a white mom makes him white? You seem to deny that there are a lot of racist people in the world, even today mate. That's all I say in the OP and I don't know much about the Iowa importance on the future elections, I just made a question.Kmarion wrote:
They didn't tell you that from what we have seen so far that the majority of people who have voted so far voted for the Black guy? I tried to explain why Iowa and New Hampshire are important and what they represent. I have presented at least some reason for my opinion. I wasn't offended, I was just saying show me some evidence. You seem to be extra sensitive right now.sergeriver wrote:
Oh, excuse me if I offended you with my unsubstantiated speculation when you obviously have such and educated opinion. What accurate facts are you talking about? Those numbers don't tell anything. So, are you telling me that McCain will come in 4th and won't run for president?Kmarion wrote:
I am well aware of what Iowa is, are you? Iowa and New Hampshire are good samplings of the United States as a whole. At least in terms of how America votes. That is why they are given so much attention. Instead of making predictions of racial divide without evidence I provided numbers and used historically accurate facts to explain my view. There is a difference between unsubstantiated speculation and an educated opinion. Do I think he may have some trouble because of a few states? Yes. Do I think a few people in a few states will decide the fate of Barrack based on his race? No.
Just finished a book on the American war of independence (1776: America and Britain at War) and I was just a bit shocked to find out he owned slaves. I never thought he would have.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_ … l_CongressCameronPoe wrote:
George Washington will be rolling in his grave right now...
an owner of some 300+ slaves.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-01-04 12:23:59)
Wasn't there a president who had a kid with a slave?CameronPoe wrote:
Just finished a book on the American war of independence (1776: America and Britain at War) and I was just a bit shocked to find out he owned slaves. I never thought he would have.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_ … l_CongressCameronPoe wrote:
George Washington will be rolling in his grave right now...
an owner of some 300+ slaves.