BigStack.com

thejim · Joined: 25 Feb 2004 Posts: 12155

but too lazy to find it. Awhile back, a few of you noted that you thought the Dems were wrong to nominate Obama instead of Hilary. Do you still think Hilary would be the better candidate (i.e., would she be leading by the same margin?)?

TommyTwoToes · Joined: 25 Feb 2004 Posts: 13466

i think that the repubs have screwed this up pretty bad. mccain refuses to attack obama for fear of looking like a racist... if he had constantly questioned his ties to his pastor and others then i think we would be looking at a different story ... instead the only people bringing up obama;s connections are the people not running the campaign...

i think that no matter who the dems put up they were going in with a huge advantage.... i think that the two that turned up making a run for it were and are horrible choices... yet because of said advantage they might still win.

the race isnt over yet ... and even if or when obama wins it wont be by as big a margin as it is now ...

thejim · Joined: 25 Feb 2004 Posts: 12155

TommyTwoToes wrote: i think that the repubs have screwed this up pretty bad. mccain refuses to attack obama for fear of looking like a racist... if he had constantly questioned his ties to his pastor and others then i think we would be looking at a different story ... instead the only people bringing up obama;s connections are the people not running the campaign...

i think that no matter who the dems put up they were going in with a huge advantage.... i think that the two that turned up making a run for it were and are horrible choices... yet because of said advantage they might still win.

the race isnt over yet ... and even if or when obama wins it wont be by as big a margin as it is now ...

Awesome. Three paragraphs from someone who doesn't really like to type, and yet no direct answer to my question.

Nekosohana · Joined: 19 Dec 2005 Posts: 9775 Location: Plano, Tx

thejim wrote: but too lazy to find it. Awhile back, a few of you noted that you thought the Dems were wrong to nominate Obama instead of Hilary. Do you still think Hilary would be the better candidate (i.e., would she be leading by the same margin?)?

I never thought she was the better candidate for the Dems.

thejim · Joined: 25 Feb 2004 Posts: 12155

Sorry, Tommy. I'm still bitter over having to read a whole page of responses telling me how dumb I am for not taking Brad's buyout before realizing that nobody had read my post.

MushMouthMike · Posted: Wed Oct 15, 2008 12:29 pm Post subject:

thejim wrote: Sorry, Tommy. I'm still bitter over having to read a whole page of responses telling me how dumb I am for not taking Brad's buyout before realizing that nobody had read my post.

Still funny

thejim · Joined: 25 Feb 2004 Posts: 12155

MushMouthMike wrote: thejim wrote: Sorry, Tommy. I'm still bitter over having to read a whole page of responses telling me how dumb I am for not taking Brad's buyout before realizing that nobody had read my post.

Still funny

I actually worked for a while on that post. I didn't think it was funny that nobody read it, and yet criticized me not taking the deal.

Zero · Joined: 15 May 2006 Posts: 4382

Picking Palin was dumb, I agree Jim.

Nekosohana · Joined: 19 Dec 2005 Posts: 9775 Location: Plano, Tx

Zero wrote: Picking Palin was dumb, I agree Jim.

Like a Fox. This would be over already if it wasn't for her.

thejim · Joined: 25 Feb 2004 Posts: 12155

Zero wrote: Picking Palin was dumb, I agree Jim.

That's not exactly what I was wondering, but I agree that Palin probably would not have been chosen if McCain was running against Clinton.

MushMouthMike · Posted: Wed Oct 15, 2008 12:58 pm Post subject:

thejim wrote: MushMouthMike wrote: thejim wrote: Sorry, Tommy. I'm still bitter over having to read a whole page of responses telling me how dumb I am for not taking Brad's buyout before realizing that nobody had read my post.

Still funny

I actually worked for a while on that post. I didn't think it was funny that nobody read it, and yet criticized me not taking the deal.

I thought it was funny due to it being erroneous on two fronts. One, I never criticized you for not taking the deal. I even stated such. And I read your post very carefully, and spoke to how you were coming up with the equation to arrive at the number (or input as you would say) and not the final number (or output). I did realize halfway through our conversation though, once I was in too deep, that I should have never said a damn thing, as you could have been posturing to get a better deal in which case I have no business sticking my nose in there because I was not involved in either side of the bet

MushMouthMike · Posted: Wed Oct 15, 2008 1:02 pm Post subject:

Nekosohana wrote: Zero wrote: Picking Palin was dumb, I agree Jim.

Like a Fox. This would be over already if it wasn't for her.

I agree. That is the only thing that is keeping this thing within striking distance, but the issue that is KILLING McCain now is the economy. IMO people relate the economy to who is in office even after it has been proven time and again that it takes years to change. We have been on this roller coaster for YEARS now. Bush 1 had the economy on the upswing when Clinton took office so he rode that. When Clinton was leaving office the economy was headed down, and the subprime market was booming. Bush 2 comes into office and now takes all the blame. The economy is still in the shitter, and most likely will still be sputtering in 4 years but Obama will be blamed for it.

And make no qualms about this race - it is over. Obama is our next President

Nekosohana · Joined: 19 Dec 2005 Posts: 9775 Location: Plano, Tx

MushMouthMike wrote: Nekosohana wrote: Zero wrote: Picking Palin was dumb, I agree Jim.

Like a Fox. This would be over already if it wasn't for her.

I agree. That is the only thing that is keeping this thing within striking distance, but the issue that is KILLING McCain now is the economy. IMO people relate the economy to who is in office even after it has been proven time and again that it takes years to change. We have been on this roller coaster for YEARS now. Bush 1 had the economy on the upswing when Clinton took office so he rode that. When Clinton was leaving office the economy was headed down, and the subprime market was booming. Bush 2 comes into office and now takes all the blame. The economy is still in the shitter, and most likely will still be sputtering in 4 years but Obama will be blamed for it.

And make no qualms about this race - it is over. Obama is our next President

I said it was over before it began, but they fucked up and chose Biden and screwed my landslide predictions.

By the way, if it wasn't obvious I agree on all points.

Cajun · Posted: Wed Oct 15, 2008 1:10 pm Post subject:

MushMouthMike wrote: And make no qualms about this race - it is over. Obama is our next President
This is my thinking as well.

My biggest concern is Obama won't get anything done in office and will probably weaken our overall security with his plans to pullout, although I still think its all talk at this point and he won't pullout.

The only way I see things changing is if the economy takes off in the upcoming weeks.

I'll just prepare for him to raise taxes.

itsoverjonny · Joined: 10 Jun 2006 Posts: 1698

I thought that Obama was a good choice by the Dems. I was hoping that they would nominate Hillary so that the Reps had a chance.

MushMouth is right - this race is over. Even if every Big Southern Dummy comes out of the woodwork to vote for McCain, it won't be enough.

At one point I thought McCain had a chance, but I was somehow underestimating the stupidity of the American public. I don't like McCain, but Obama terrifies me.

I am now placing my confidence in the inability of the Legislature to get anything done and how beholden those shady fucks are to their corporate sponsors - surely there's no way that any of these crazy ideas actually get implemented, right?

thejim · Joined: 25 Feb 2004 Posts: 12155

itsoverjonny wrote:
I am now placing my confidence in the inability of the Legislature to get anything done and how beholden those shady fucks are to their corporate sponsors - surely there's no way that any of these crazy ideas actually get implemented, right?

Is Pelosi going to be around?

Nekosohana · Joined: 19 Dec 2005 Posts: 9775 Location: Plano, Tx

thejim wrote: itsoverjonny wrote:
I am now placing my confidence in the inability of the Legislature to get anything done and how beholden those shady fucks are to their corporate sponsors - surely there's no way that any of these crazy ideas actually get implemented, right?

Is Pelosi going to be around?

As you know, Herr Pelosi can stay there until she dies.

*but that was funny!