Presidential Election (as a current event- watch the tone or it's gone)

i second that. I think its a good idea and its only one topic and is sorta important.

It can’t be close yet, we’ve only had one primary election, we don’t even know who the final candidates are going to be yet!

I gota say I would have loved to discuss a “caucus” with someone who has been to one, especialy a Democratic one.

Only been one Caucus so far.  There’s another one on Saturday.

So far, however, Huckabee and Obama are leading.  Runner ups are Romney and Edwards (yea, you read that right, Clinton is in THIRD place, amazing isn’t it?)

wait, i thought political discustions wern’t allowed hear. how can you have a discusion about the presidental election with out that?
or is this a one time situation deal?

AJ’s calling for a one thread deal just about the candidates of the election.

has a presidence been set for this before? what i mean has any one asked and been aproved or denied on this kind of thing before.

i think it’s a good idea but some ground rules may need to be set before it’s started.
like no be littleing of people based on any reason expetally there views (canidents though are fair game).
some other “controls” would be good too.

Yea, in 1999 the Political Boards were created to discuss the election and aftermath of the election between George Bush and Algore

As I see it so far this is a current events discussion, I may be out voted, but I think as long as we can avoid discussing political oppinion it’s ok with me.  Notice I haven’t mentioned who my favorite is or how he did…

I think the process in interesting, from a cultural stand point.

Jen, when I said “been to a caucus” I meant ever, as in previous years.  It sounds like fun to me, but since I’ve never been to one I wouldn’t know.

i don’t think you can have this kind of talk with out it turnning political as it is a political race.
as for your (dezrtfish) edit of Jen’s statment above, i think she was meaning that it’s amazing that she got 3rd and not higher with all the media around her and the Clinton publicity machine behind her. i’m not saying my political view on this, just that it’s strange that she fell to 3rd and not 2nd at lowest… expetally with her being the Dem fav.

@dezrtfish:

I gota say I would have loved to discuss a “caucus” with someone who has been to one, especialy a Democratic one.

if any thing this seams to me to be more political then Jen’s statment as you brought a perticular party up. is it because you would want to go to the Dem Caucus because you support the Dems or because you would get a good laugh out of it. ether interpritation would be political.

@Pervavita:

i don’t think you can have this kind of talk with out it turnning political as it is a political race.
as for your (dezrtfish) edit of Jen’s statment above, i think she was meaning that it’s amazing that she got 3rd and not higher with all the media around her and the Clinton publicity machine behind her. i’m not saying my political view on this, just that it’s strange that she fell to 3rd and not 2nd at lowest… expetally with her being the Dem fav.

@dezrtfish:

I gota say I would have loved to discuss a “caucus” with someone who has been to one, especialy a Democratic one.

if any thing this seams to me to be more political then Jen’s statment as you brought a perticular party up. is it because you would want to go to the Dem Caucus because you support the Dems or because you would get a good laugh out of it. ether interpritation would be political.

why does it matter? no one is going to die pervavita. the only reason political discussion was band was because it got out of hand and degenerated into name calling. We should be creatures of reason not of law. (bad things happen when people care more about what the law is than what is right) If we don’t degrade to insulting each other then this discussion should be fine. This is just my opinion  though.

Dezrt didn’t edit anything out of my statement, he just pointed out that some may take my statement as “politically motivated” not what it is, amazement that after all the talk of her being inevitable and guaranteed to be on the ballot in November that she came in third place in the first primary.  Not saying she’ll win or lose or that she should win or lose, just kinda shocked at how poor her results were given all the media hype.

How about a temporary board to discuss the election…just about everyone here is already talking about it.

I am running with DF on this one…

Major current event, discuss away.  It is an important topic, and there is a lot of practical and worthwhile stuff to discuss regarding this mass of primaries that will effectively select the candidates by Feb 5.

However, if it becomes the type of worthless diatribe that pervaded the previous PD, it will be locked and sealed away hidden immediately (no name calling, none of the grandiose stereotype statements, etc.)

Good, then other then me, who else was utterly shocked that Hillary came in THIRD!?!?  I mean, Obama in First or Hillary in First with the other in second I was expecting.  But Hillary in Third?  That was a major surprise and a huge upset for the Clintons.

Par for the course with the Clintons in Iowa.  As I recall, Bill did terribly there in 92.  Though Bill also did not actively campaign there.  And Hillary does not have Bill’s charisma.

I am surprised that Obama beat Edwards in Iowa.  Even though he narrowly edged Hillary for 2nd place, I think that just about finishes Edwards.  Anything other than a solid win in New Hampshire and he is toast.

My honest opinion was that Edwards wasn’t going to place in the top two in any state, let alone the first one.

Dunno how well Billy did.  I have been told that Ronald lost the Iowa caucus his first time out.  Then again, even if that was true, Iowa’s not exactly known as a bastion for Republican glory, if you know what I mean.

i’ll chime in by saying this.  i hope,  i hope,  i just freaking hope we have an election in
Nov 08  &  a new president in Jan 09.  thats not asking for too much is it?

Kinda depends on the personality of the loser and how close the election is.  Not how close the VOTE is, how close the ELECTION is.  There is a difference.  It’s happened any number of times that the president lost the vote, but won the election.