I voted yes...listen to this on youtube and you will see why.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5p3OB6roAg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5p3OB6roAg
Last edited by lilbaily2 (2008-11-08 10:18:29)
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- Would he still have the support of the international community?
Poll
Would Barrack Obama have won if he ran as a Rebublican?
| Yes | 28% | 28% - 14 | ||||
| No | 71% | 71% - 35 | ||||
| Total: 49 | ||||||
Would Barrack Obama have won if he was a purple dinosaur?
Was going into Somalia right? Was bombing Saddam right? Was making it official policy to remove Saddam right? You might want to reconsider Slick Willy.Bertster7 wrote:
It was the right thing to do.Kmarion wrote:
Leaving Iraq was intelligent. .. well more so.
I would consider that a pretty obvious decision though. There is nothing in Bush Sr's personal or political life that suggests to me he was a particularly clever person. So I, like most people, judge him on his public speaking. If you can present anything that does seriously suggest that he was very clever then I am eager to hear it.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Agreed... If Obama had the same foreign policy positions as Bush, then he'd be rejected by most of the world.TheAussieReaper wrote:
I don't think so, it was a rejection of the Republican party as much as it was a win for Obama.
However, the poll asks a different question from the thread title. I think Obama would still have won the election as a Republican if he had Republican stances, unless the Democrats ran someone like Mark Warner.
No, he wouldn't have won because his policies are anything but conservative and he wouldn't have received the Rep nomination. If a conservative black man ran, he'd be treated like any other white Rep because you don't count as a minority in politics unless you're on the left.
Not necessarily. If Alan Keyes had more moderate stances and won the nomination back in 2000, I think he would've beaten Gore. He probably could have beaten Kerry as well (if we hadn't invaded Iraq by then).Stingray24 wrote:
No, he wouldn't have won because his policies are anything but conservative and he wouldn't have received the Rep nomination. If a conservative black man ran, he'd be treated like any other white Rep because you don't count as a minority in politics unless you're on the left.
That's part of my point, though. Any conservative will be painted as a nut by their Dem opponents and the press even if they are moderate.
You should be amazed by how similar their policies are. "We can't be blind to the opportunities presented in Iraq". "Withdrawal conditions are determined by the military leaders on the ground". That's Barry, not Bush. His position is very similar when it comes to Pakistan also. Anyone that really thinks Barrack is going to quickly pull out of Iraq is delusional. The Bush admin and the Iraqi government are working for a military withdrawal by 2010. Obama said he is shooting for a sixteen month timetable. Big difference?Turquoise wrote:
Agreed... If Obama had the same foreign policy positions as Bush, then he'd be rejected by most of the world.TheAussieReaper wrote:
I don't think so, it was a rejection of the Republican party as much as it was a win for Obama.
However, the poll asks a different question from the thread title. I think Obama would still have won the election as a Republican if he had Republican stances, unless the Democrats ran someone like Mark Warner.
However, domestically there is a huge difference. But this topic is about the international community.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
That didn't happen to Reagan. That didnt' happen to George H. W. Bush. And for all the things that McCain fucked up on, most people didn't perceive him as a nut -- they just thought he was too much like Bush.Stingray24 wrote:
That's part of my point, though. Any conservative will be painted as a nut by their Dem opponents and the press even if they are moderate.
Touche... Let me rephrase then.... Obama would have probably gotten the same support internationally because he's black and charismatic.Kmarion wrote:
You should be amazed by how similar their policies are. "We can't be blind to the opportunities presented in Iraq". "Withdrawal conditions are determined by the military leaders on the ground". That's Barry, not Bush. His position is very similar when it comes to Pakistan also. Anyone that really thinks Barrack is going to quickly pull out of Iraq is delusional. The Bush admin and the Iraqi government are working for a military withdrawal by 2010. Obama said he is shooting for a sixteen month timetable. Big difference?Turquoise wrote:
Agreed... If Obama had the same foreign policy positions as Bush, then he'd be rejected by most of the world.TheAussieReaper wrote:
I don't think so, it was a rejection of the Republican party as much as it was a win for Obama.
However, the poll asks a different question from the thread title. I think Obama would still have won the election as a Republican if he had Republican stances, unless the Democrats ran someone like Mark Warner.
However, domestically there is a huge difference. But this topic is about the international community.
Well, to be fair at least Obama doesn't bare the scar of having actually voted for the war. But then again he couldn't have if he wanted to .Turquoise wrote:
Touche... Let me rephrase then.... Obama would have probably gotten the same support internationally because he's black and charismatic.Kmarion wrote:
You should be amazed by how similar their policies are. "We can't be blind to the opportunities presented in Iraq". "Withdrawal conditions are determined by the military leaders on the ground". That's Barry, not Bush. His position is very similar when it comes to Pakistan also. Anyone that really thinks Barrack is going to quickly pull out of Iraq is delusional. The Bush admin and the Iraqi government are working for a military withdrawal by 2010. Obama said he is shooting for a sixteen month timetable. Big difference?Turquoise wrote:
Agreed... If Obama had the same foreign policy positions as Bush, then he'd be rejected by most of the world.
However, the poll asks a different question from the thread title. I think Obama would still have won the election as a Republican if he had Republican stances, unless the Democrats ran someone like Mark Warner.
However, domestically there is a huge difference. But this topic is about the international community.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Great intelligence does not automatically make a good leader. Just look at Carter (degree in nuclear engineering from USNA, which is one of the top nuclear engineering programs in the world).
Whats the point of this thread?
Would anyone have won if they had run for the ________________ party?
1. Obama isn't a republican
2. If he were, he wouldn't be the same person. So anything is possible.
Would anyone have won if they had run for the ________________ party?
1. Obama isn't a republican
2. If he were, he wouldn't be the same person. So anything is possible.
Stupidity (like Bush) doesn't work too well either.RAIMIUS wrote:
Great intelligence does not automatically make a good leader. Just look at Carter (degree in nuclear engineering from USNA, which is one of the top nuclear engineering programs in the world).
Yep, the turning point for McCain was the imfamous "Fundamentals of a sound economy" a few days before we decided to stop talking about the recession and make it happen for real.CameronPoe wrote:
This election was a protest vote against the Republicans as much as anything else. McCain was up in the polls four days before Lehmann Bros collapsed.
The point is that the international community seems to have America in its good graces again solely because Obama is a democrat. I am wondering if it is the man they embrace or the party. I find it hard to beleive almost an entire planet is so convinced a mess this big will be cleaned up by a man who has written more memoirs about himself than bills passed into legislation which, by the way, is-his-job. Or maybe there is so much work to be done over here that means we will stay out of everyone elses biznizz for a few years.Spearhead wrote:
Whats the point of this thread?
Would anyone have won if they had run for the ________________ party?
1. Obama isn't a republican
2. If he were, he wouldn't be the same person. So anything is possible.
Malloy must go
I think it has more to do with his personality and race. Electing Obama was the politically correct thing to do. As Kmarion pointed out, his foreign policy isn't that different from Bush's.deeznutz1245 wrote:
The point is that the international community seems to have America in its good graces again solely because Obama is a democrat. I am wondering if it is the man they embrace or the party. I find it hard to beleive almost an entire planet is so convinced a mess this big will be cleaned up by a man who has written more memoirs about himself than bills passed into legislation which, by the way, is-his-job. Or maybe there is so much work to be done over here that means we will stay out of everyone elses biznizz for a few years.Spearhead wrote:
Whats the point of this thread?
Would anyone have won if they had run for the ________________ party?
1. Obama isn't a republican
2. If he were, he wouldn't be the same person. So anything is possible.
No matter who we elect, we get a pawn of the military industrial complex and of Israel. So basically, the world should be standoffish toward us no matter who is in power. We can be trusted when it comes to trade, but we're pretty sketchy when it comes to foreign policy.
Nuclear engineering is for community college drop outs. Or is it paralegal I'm thinking of? Whatever.RAIMIUS wrote:
Great intelligence does not automatically make a good leader. Just look at Carter (degree in nuclear engineering from USNA, which is one of the top nuclear engineering programs in the world).
Malloy must go
The pendulum is constantly swinging in this country.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
So if McCain/Palin was the Dem choice they would have won ?
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
Not with that idiot for VP!Varegg wrote:
So if McCain/Palin was the Dem choice they would have won ?
But wait... she's not an idiot. At least, not according to some people here.CameronPoe wrote:
Not with that idiot for VP!Varegg wrote:
So if McCain/Palin was the Dem choice they would have won ?
With the support of Chris Mathews yes.Varegg wrote:
So if McCain/Palin was the Dem choice they would have won ?
Xbone Stormsurgezz
I have a better question
"Would America have supported the Soviet Union if Hitler was a communist and Stalin was a Nazi?"
"Would America have supported the Soviet Union if Hitler was a communist and Stalin was a Nazi?"
A black republican?
Last edited by Mek-Stizzle (2008-11-08 12:32:51)
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- Would he still have the support of the international community?