Methinks wishful thinking from the Barr people.

I think Bush missed the deadlines for one of the 2004 battleground states but still ended up on the ballot. Election laws in this country are just loose guidelines anyway.

Seems reasonable that both political candidates would have missed the deadlines in Texas and Barr will be the only name on the ballot. I mean, Obama and McCain probably only have around 2000 staffers each with the sole responsibility to make sure that happens. I could easily see all 4000+ of them, each campaign and the state officials completely spacing on that. This MUST be true - I mean Bob Barr sent out a memo ...

If you have a D or an R after your name.

If you don't, well.

Even if Barr is the only person on the ballot, he's not going to win Texas. McCain would still win, but I'd feel bad for the people counting all those write-in votes.

Right, your political affiliation has no bearing on your intelligence, so it was funny that you had to spill the beans on how smart you are right after your emotional swell of support for a DNC convention speech that spoke to it's large constiuancy of supporters, which happen to number you among them.


Bill Clinton could do more with a lie than George Bush ever could with the truth, I'll give you that.

What's the phrase I'm looking for, something about finishing third in a two-horse race ;)

Barr is so irrelevant I'm not even sure he beats McKinney.

It's supposed to create the imagery of MLK Jr. making his 'I Have A Dream' speech in front of the Lincoln Memorial 45 years ago today. I'm not too sure how well that's going to work, especially given the rockstar stereotype.

***waiting for "Well, I knew MLK Jr., and you sir, are no MLK Jr." response.***

In an attempt to get the thread a bit more back on topic, I thought Clinton's speech was nothing special from a content standpoint, but he always does a good job in regards to presentation.

I've always liked Biden as a person. The personal portion of his speech was very good, but the political content was pretty pedestrian in nature. I did find it ironic that he would blast McCain for being wrong about the Iraq vote when he made the exact same 'Yea' vote. Overall, Biden did a good job and played the role of attack dog well. On a sidenote, someone needs to tell the Democrats that they can stop with the 'McCain is a friend and he served the country honorably.....' comments that are followed by attacks. It comes across as relatively hollow and it does nothing more than give him more exposure.

I'm not too sure that Obama showing up really added all that much. He stumbled over his words twice in the span of just a few comments, which highlighted what many perceive to be his weakness. The above 'wrestler with a mic' comment was pretty accurate. I was waiting for the 'If you smell what Barack is cooking!' line. He's a very good speaker when he's got the speech on teleprompters ready to go, but when the debates start, he needs to handle himself better than he has in past debates where rehearsal is not an option.

Well, isn't this interesting? The Republicans have included the following phrasing in their party platform to be approved next week........


Yeah, I'm none too happy about that.

If you outlaw the poker chips, only outlaws will have poker chips!

Neither the Democrats or the Republicans had officially nominated a candidate by the deadline on which Barr is focusing.

These kinds of issues are where my moderate conservative leanings and the religious right moral idiots collide. I really don't need them to save me from my gambling addiction. I'm doing just fine taking money from the other players.

There's not a chance on God's green Earth than any less than three candidates will be on that ballot.

And the Democrats are against the bill because people with money are dangerous to the New State.

Yeah, gambling is the area where the worst of the right and the worst of the left can find common ground. Lefties hate it because they think that poor people need to be protected from themselves. Righties hate it because teh bible says gamblin is teh devil.

Add prostitution and the war on drugs and I am in complete agreement.

Well, that's the first time all thread that I've agreed with you. :D

I'll be back in a sec - going to check on the current temperature in Hell. :lol:

Evidently the Texas Sec. of State has said that the Dem and Repubs have filed the paperwork, but left off the names pending filing an amended document once the nomination process is complete.

'

Let's include our military adventures too. Lefties like "nation building" and "spreading democracy." Righties like to "Get tuff" and "spread Christianity."

As if invading or bombing other countries accomplishes any of that.

According to the Weather Channel, the temperature at the Temple of Obama should be 65 degrees when the worshippers convene later tonight. Perfect toga weather!

Is it too academic of me to point out that the Greeks didn't wear togas?

It is illegal by the NCAA to gamble on anything if you are a student athlete. I remember in school my freshman year we had a talk by our AD about it.

I'm not blind to think it isn't done and the NCAA really doesn't enforce it.

You obviously haven't seen 'Animal House'. :)

www.electoral-vote.com

CO: McCain 47-46
FL: Obama 45-44
NM: Obama 53-40
NV: Obama 49-44
OH: Tied 40-40
PA: Obama 48-43
RI: Obama 51-30

The New Mexico and Nevada numbers are very good news for Obama.

Kerry had a similar lead in 04 at this time in the race in NM. Same with Nevada. He lost them both in the end.

Sure, if a 6 point lead is the same as a 13 point lead and a 5 point lead is the same as a 2 point lead.

Also, Bush had a 4 pt lead in Wisconsin at this point last election and ended up losing.

I don't think those polls are very predictive, but I do see it more likely that instead of flipping Ohio or Florida the road to the White House for Obama will mean flipping Iowa, New Mexico and Colorado.

What I am trying to say is that it is way to early to get all excited about any lead less than 10 points. But good job throwing the Bush loss in the way you did. There's a lot of margin for error and a lot of time to go. Now I realize why I don't respond to your posts anymore. I won't make that mistake again.

I took the numbers from the map which is showing a 9pt lead in NM, and a 3 pt lead in NV.

How is it getting "all excited" to say it is good news for Obama to be ahead in those two states? And he has a greater than 10 pt lead in one of the states you responded to me about. I mean, it's obviously good news.


I was simply making the point that the current numbers could go either way.

The latest Gallup tracking poll is starting to show the type of bounce that we expected to see from the Democratic convention.

For those of you comparing polls to 2004, remember that the dates of the conventions are different from that year, so head-to-head dates probably won't be all that good from a comparison standpoint until both conventions are done.

It's interesting that they're still going to use the weekend numbers for the official bounce. I guess they need to stay consistent, but McCain's VP choice will complicate the validity of those numbers. I don't think we'll be able to have as clear of a picture with so many major events happening on top of each other.

Geez, rough week for Hillary............

This should be interesting:

I feel worse for the people in there with her.

I hope that he challenges Obama to throw down and then the camera pans back to reveal Chuck Norris, Brett Favre, and CGI John Wayne standing behind him looking tough.

That would take the buzz away from Obama's speech. And be pretty awesome.

So I take it they'll be working towards putting an end to state run lotteries then.

I have no idea why Christians think gambling is immoral since the bible doesn't really say anything about it. I guess you could say that gambling is an extension of greed, and therefore a sin, but if you are going to stretch greed that far to cover gambling, why are people in the "religious right" capitalists?

I don't think Christians consider gambling immoral.

I don't really know why Republicans are against internet gambling, but it seems both sides are.

In the Bible it actually depicts many different times when people "Casted Lots" for various purposes. As far as I am aware, it never says anywhere that Gambling directly is a sin or wrong or evil. My guess is it is people's connection from Love of Money being wrong, and putting money before God being wrong then tying that to people who gamble for the love of money committing a sin.


(note, I am just answering a question as best as I can and not saying what is right or wrong or even giving my opinion or belief on the matter!)

Oh, you're not getting out of it that easy. This is an FOFC thread. You shall certainly be flamed for daring to presume what is right or wrong in a manner that completely offends people who do or do not do that type of thing, and you will learn to be less presumptuous next time!

Republicans are just against the internet period, because a Democrat invented it.

Haha, I actually started making that disclaimer on any politics or religion discussion that I took part in long before FOFC, especially when I wasn't arguing my point but instead just responding to a question.

I remember back in the early 1990s, I was a regular on a BBS hosted at University of Iowa that had some real doozies of discussions that would turn into pretty bad flame wars anytime it dealt with religion and politics. :)

Not an expert here either, but I think the idea of gambling for Christians is a slippery slope. There are many families that have lose everything because of gambling. Therefore, gambling = nothing really good can come of it, so don't even open the Pandora's box.

Frankly, however, I've never even heard our pastor refer to gambling in any of his sermons, so I'm not so sure it's a touch-point with the "religious right" as opposed to society as a whole.

That would be hilarious.

I read that some Christians see gambling as taking money without earning it and consider it close to stealing. Some of the distaste for gambling no doubt also developed from anti-Catholic mindset. I remember as a child hearing the Catholics of my town disparaged for gambling.

With Nevada a battleground state, isn't this political sucide in that state for the GOP to add that to it's platform?

But I guess you go attack alcohol, drugs, cigarettes, junk food, ect.?

McCain should keep inviting Obama for his town hall, no moderator debates that he wants to do. Put the pressure on Obama. McCain just doesn't seem to know when to attack his opponents and do it pretty aggressively.

They showed the new McCain ad on tv. McCain says congratulations to Obama, it's an historic night, and job well done.

I wonder if Obama will walk up to the podium, salute and then declare, "Sen. Obama reporting for duty"? :)

What would be hilarious is if he ended his speech with.......

Can you dig it????

I'd go with:

"FINALLY, Barack as RETURNED to Denver....."

That would be cool. But as the way things have gone this week, every single word, every single motion and every single visual will be fully approved ahead of time by a committee.

Right idea, wrong catchphrase.

If you SMEEEELLLLLLLL what BARACK is cooking!

This is a pretty painfully awkward :56 seconds.

hmmm... Too bad the favor can't be returned. Nothing historic about an old white guy running for president.

Are you now channeling MBBF for your predictions?

:D

I kind of skim over his posts, don't you? ;)

Favor my ass. McCain is running the commercial because it keeps him in the media eye. It wouldn't shock me at all to see some sort of congratulations commercial from Obama, but it won't be a favor either.

Now why didn't I think of that.

Cool. He can get everyone eating oatmeal again.

Posers.

Wilford Brimley can get shit done, Dick Chaney style. He whooped some ass in The Firm.

But he had to shut it all down in "Remo Williams: The Adventure Begins".

I love how they keep referring to Invesco Field as "Mile High Stadium." Keith Olbermann started it last night and ever since then, they've seemingly decided to ignore it. But whatever works.

As for the whole "this convention was supposed to show him as a regular guy and this big rally is failing," that logic is really stupid, even if the pundits and the partisans will keep pushing it. Looking at those crowds, save for the pols and the random Hollywood types mixed in, all I see is a horde of just ordinary people.

Getting that many people energized to do anything, much less listen to a political speech, is a pretty big deal.

If this was overseas and we were watching these rallies, we'd talk about the swarms of people desiring a change in direction in that country.

Here we say "he's not an ordinary guy. He can't connect."

If this was Belarus or something, we'd call it the "Change Revolution" or something.

No, I'm still not voting for him. But this stuff is still crazy.

aaah, just vote for him already

Nope.

Can't do that. It's like rooting for a team you're not a fan of. Just because you're not gonna root for them, you can appreciate the story.

+1

+2 - actually I'll give another bump for him beating the Clintons. That took balls.

"Free ponies! Free ponies for everyone! Ponies for America! All Americans deserve the right to have a pony."

I dunno. I wanna punch Michelle in the mouth and fix her underbite.

Working for the Tribune Company, I found this interesting...

SHOWDOWN: Obama campaign confronts talkradio station over 'right-wing hatchet man'

After all the media anal probes presidents have received for the past two and one half decades, Obama sure seems thin-skinned when it comes to criticism from what he and his followers consider the opposition.

If he wins, hopefully some world leader doesn't insult him.

"Did you hear what that cat, Ahmadinejad, said about me the other day? It is time for you, my followers, to take action..."

Obamanation..."Yes we can...here we come Iran."

Obama should ask Kobe how his ass tastes. That should secure the basketball hater vote in every state except California, and the Dems are too far ahead in CA to lose it. :)

Some "American people" are also demanding changes that neither party can deliver.

"Rise up and insist on new leadership" - Yes.

"New ideas" - Probably, but I haven't heard of many, unless "reversal" are considered new ideas.

"New politics" - Give me a break. This week and next will be anything but new politics. The "American people" are not ready for new politics, they just want to change the channel.

Yeah, the media will probably herald this speech as decisive. I don't really find it anything more than a trumped up stump speech. The massive crowd was necessary, because otherwise, it'd look just like his other rallies. He needed to one up that considerably and this does that by the optics of it all.

That said, all he's saying is the same retread Demo platform stuff. The fact of the matter is, he's giving Johnny Mac more free advertising by saying his name a ton more than anything. You notice McCain almost never says his name. He just generally says "my opponent."

+1

Sounds like we don't want a leader that is too thick skinned (i.e., too stubborn to change) or too thin skinned either (i.e., too reactive). But then again, those that have too little experience in Washington tend to rely more on others to think and react in their stead (as we saw with Carter and Bush2).

It has been my experience, Republicans and Democrats say what needs to be said to energize their voters during the election cycle...but once they get to Washington, there really isn't much difference in how the govern.

So did he say what he would do to bring about change? I mean, besides "save the poor", "tax the rich", "balance the budget", "universal health care" and "save social security"?

I am looking for something between "I will do nothing" and "I will write a great novel", like "I will write the first page in my first year."

:withstupid:

Except for one thing (and this is the big thing for me) - a single-party Legislature/Executive will be different than a split-party Legislature/Executive.

Yep. And I think we all get sucked into it.

How about, "I will do something that should have been done following the First World War, I will work to appeal the Sixteenth Amendment and forever abolish the federal personal income tax."

I'd launch a grass roots effort to abolish presidential term limits for such an individual.

Wonder how Brooks and Dunn feel about their song being used...

I think the American People would like a Free Pony better.

That's a dream sequence, right? He didn't really say that.

Yeah, but it usually only takes one presidential term or two of whatever party is in control of the entire wad to screw things up so badly that partisan gridlock is finally restored to the government. :)

Yes...that would be my dream candidate!

And no, I don't expect any Democrat candidate to say anything close to that in my lifetime.

Considering the average pony costs between $600 and $1200, they've already gotten that this year.

Man...I didn't realize ponies were that cheap!

If my daughter finds out I could have bought a pony instead of a television I'm in big trouble.

That's a really good point.

Instead of one big wad, I would vote for having everyone getting $100 less taken out of their paychecks each month.

luckily for me ... my daughter is past the age of wanting a pony.

unluckily for me ... now she wants a new car.

Yeah, they are cheap to buy, but ongoing upkeep is a bitch. Kinda like interest payments on a massive amount of debt.

ALL AMERICANS DESERVE A PONIES. NOT JUST THE RICHEST AMERICANS DESERVES PONIES.

PONIES ARE AN INALIENABLE RIGHT!

NO SUBPRIME LOANS FOR PONIES!

Heh...the Pony Upkeep Crisis. We need the government to do something to help us take care of our ponies.

Don't worry. A no-bid contract has been awarded to Halliburton to provide for the ponies.