Do you want to see a President McCain or a President Obama?

[AZBlue]

Those are your ONLY TWO choices.

[ihavenobias]

1. But, but, what about Barr and Nader?! ;)

I just groan when I hear someone mention either of those two.

PS---

[Lord Helmet]

2. President Obama sounds pretty good to me.

[Bluerthanblue]

3. and it's NOT a "Hobsons Choice"-

:evilgrin:

i learn't me sumthin t'day!

OBAMA !!!!

:hi:
peace~

[AZBlue]

4. So learn me sumthin!

What's a "Hobsons Choice"?

[Bluerthanblue]

5. "no choice at all"-

-

from http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=6478560&mesg_id=6482379


I'm glad you pointed this out in simple- clear language.

I guess it needs repeating.

:hi:

peace~
blu

[AZBlue]

9. Very informative! Thanks!!

:D

[jgraz]

21. No it's actually a "false choice"

Strongly analogous to Bush's "you're either with us, or you're with the terrorists" bilge.

[AZBlue]

26. So we'll put you in the President McCain column.

Thanks for the bump!

[jgraz]

29. Like I said, false choice.

Is there anyone left on this board who can think their way out of a wet paper bag? Jesus. :argh:

[Colobo]

62. It's a very real choice. It's either progress or more of the same.

[CreekDog]

57. No, a false choice is: do you want to be rich or happy?

you can be both or none or something else along the continuum.

however, there are two major candidates for the presidency. at this point, it is McCain or Obama and that is the question of the moment and it's not a false choice, it is the choice that the primary processes have given us.

[Zynx]

6. It's no mystery to me at all why the looniest 5% of the Left has never gotten anywhere.

They can never accept basic realities. They prefer to live in the theoretical.

Great post and I am glad to kick and rec it.

[Political Heretic]

8. Word.

[elocs]

13. Hallelujah and Amen to that! They don't live in the real world, that's for sure.

What does get old is how they pontificate and preach and lecture to the rest of us, acting like only they care for the Constitution and if any dare question them the response is so Republicanesque, "Why don't you love the Constitution?" So this week it is FISA, but you can bet that next week they will have some other bug up their butt about Obama.

[blondeatlast]

23. Exactly. nt

[GoldieAZ49]

7. I want

my pony


with these gas prices I am going to need it

[azmouse]

10. The choice is as easy as pie....

mmmmm.... pie!


Gobama!!! :patriot:

[samsingh]

11. is this a trick question?

[BlueStater]

12. Obama but that doesn't mean I'm not to criticize him when he deserves it. n/t

[Orsino]

58. Right. We can ignore the cries of "only two choices."

We always have a plethora of choices, and picking which one of us will be president is but one.

In the meantime, we can urge on our nominee--and on his opponent--the type of governance we want and need. We can choose how we will support the nominee, and how we will spread the good word.

"Only two choices" is failure talking. Success of the kind I want, and of the sorts that DUers would want, lies far beyond November, and will only come from all of us getting our hands dirty, paying attention, and criticizing.

[Ronald Reagen]

14. I want a president McCain

It's why I'm on a site for the democrats.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SOS]

50. It's spelled Reagan.

nt

[Blondiegrrl]

52. Kinda sad when they can't even get that much right, isn't it? n/t

[jgraz]

16. That's actually not true.

We have a choice between a coddled, weak, centrist Obama and an Obama who's had his feet held to the fire by progressive activists. I choose the second one.

[Median Democrat]

17. Again, With The Irrational Obama Hate...

Here is a link with Obama and McCain's actual voting record, positions, as well as congressional voting scorecards by a variety of grioups such as Planned Parenthood, the ACLU, Labor Unions, etc. Based on the facts, Obama is one of the more progressive U.S. Senators. For example, Planned Parenthood gives him a 100 percent rating. McCain? Zero. So, a "weak, centrist" Obama? Facts show otherwise.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6457458

[jgraz]

18. Again with the mindless Obama cheerleading

We can do this all day.

[Median Democrat]

20. Nice non-response and name-calling - Link?

Again, I backed up my argument. Its hardly mindless, unless you are referring to the ease in making you look foolish and biased. In the link I attached, there is Obama's voting record and proposals.

What do you disagree with? Do you disagree with Planned Parenthood's appraisal of his voting record? (Silence)

So, yes it is pretty easy, even mindless, responding to your rants, which suggest that the only person who is not progressive is you, because you continue to attack a candidate whose actual record is among the most progressive in the Senate.

Facts baby. Put up or shut up.

[jgraz]

22. Wow, you just skipped over that whole "critical thought" part of public education.

Please review some basic logic, particularly "non sequitur", "straw man", "false choice" and (most importantly) "complete bullshit". Then maybe (maybe) we can have a rational discussion.

[Median Democrat]

27. Great Way To Chicken Out - I'll Give You Another Chance

I am even going to hold your hand. However, I predict that you are going to do a Rush Limbaugh type wuss out when asked to back up your assert that Obama is not a progressive, but a "weak, centrist." It is quite enjoyable seeing false progressives throwing around GOP talking points, then getting shup up and being reduced to name calling in front of everyone.

First, here is a nice website contrasting John McCain and Obama's policy proposals. I already gave you the link to Obama's past votes and the congressional scorecards.

http://obama-mccain.info/compare-obama-mccain-taxes.php

Second, here is a nice easy list of issues. You can either you voting record (not just 1 vote) or proposals to make your argument that he is not a progressive.

1. Tax Policy?

2. Health Care?

3. Immigration?

4. Iraq?

5. Energy?

6. Education?

7. Guns?

8. Abortion?

9. Social Security?

10. Environment?


Now, I expect you to pull a Rush Limbaugh and try to BS your way out of this, but maybe you will surprise DU by actually trying to back up your claim that Obama is not a progressive, and that he is a "weak, centrist."

See, I am giving jgraz links, facts, voting records, scorecards, you name it. Yet, despite all this handholding, I am predicting that jgraz tries to BS his way out of this, which exposes him as the troll that jgraz is, who has no facts to back up his shrill little arguments.

[jgraz]

28. I'll pass. You wouldn't understand the answers anyway.

[Median Democrat]

32. ROFL

Did I call it or what? :rofl:

[jgraz]

36. No, you didn't call it

Most people on this board are intelligent enough to understand that jumping through hoops to win an argument is a sucker's game. If you can't make a logical statement that stands on its own without having to "quiz" your fellow DUers, then you really have nothing of value to say.

Now, the fact that you insist on referring to his voting record also shows that you have no clue whatsoever how a presidential campaign works. McCain's voting record SUCKS. How many times has Obama brought that up? None?

Why is that? Because arguing about voting records is a straight lose. A *veteran* slammed McCain on his voting record on *veteran's issues* and I'll bet you that we never hear a PEEP from the Obama camp about it. Again, if you have to run on voting records, you are going to lose.

Since Obama has gotten the nomination, he's gone to the right on guns, the death penalty, Israel, choice (yes, THAT choice), separation of church and state, the Fourth Amendment, the rule of law and... I'm sure I'm forgetting a few. THAT is weak centrism. THAT is how Democrats have lost 7 out of the last 10 presidential races.

Now the real question is: why can't you understand that?

[kctim]

39. You are correct

I am a moderate and just recently decided to give Obama a chance because of his recent moves to the center.
We may disagree about moderate Dems being the reason Democrats have lost, but I certainly agree with you about voting records.

[Median Democrat]

40. Scroll Back - Question Was President Obama or McCain - Not Election Strategy

Nice attempt to set up a straw man, and say that you were referring to the presidential race, rather than a President Obama or a President McCain.

Now, if your point is that you misunderstood the point of the original post, which asked who you would prefer as President, I understand. However, if you are sticking to your original claim that Obama would be a weak, centrist PRESIDENT, then the voting records are absolutely relevant.

You continue to make Rush Limbaugh type arguments to justify your failure to back-up your argument that Obama would be a "weak, centrist," President. First, by engaging in name calling. Second, by changing the scope of your original response to refer to the campaign, rather than the actual presidency, which was the point of the original post (that's post #1).

Want to try again? All I've read from you is name calling, as well as your self-congratulatory statements about how intelligent and logical you are while ala Rush Limbaugh. Hopefully, you will grace this board with some facts to support your contention that Obama would be a "weak, centrist" President, notwithstanding his progressive voting record.

Of course, I eagerly await your next attempt to duck the question ala Rush Limbaugh. Maybe you will now quote Rumsfeld and explain your continued absence of back-up by saying that "absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence."

I have not had so much fun since debating freepers ripping Obama, and remarkably similar.

:bounce:

[jgraz]

41. No, your binary, black-and-white thinking was Obama or McCain

I was trying to introduce some higher-function reasoning to the conversation. Looks like I failed.

[Median Democrat]

42. He Ducks Again!

Rush Limbaugh is on the rupes, running out of excuses for why he can't prove up his claim that Obama will be a "weak, centrist" President.

Ladies and gentleman, should we give him another try? Lets see how many more creative excuses can jgraz come up with for failing to back up his assertions?

Gee, I am starting think, dare I say it, that you don't have squat?

To confirm that your claim is BS, just make another insult or duck the opportunity to prove your claim that Obama will be a "weak, centrist" President.

[jgraz]

43. Sigh. This country is fucked.

Please tell me you have Fetal Alcohol Syndrome. It would make me feel a lot better than if you actually were a functional product of the American educational system.

[Median Democrat]

44. Another Duck! Thanks for the concession!

:rofl:

Say hi to the folks at Free Republic.

[jgraz]

45. Are you seriously too thick to tell right from left?

At least get the schoolyard taunts right. It's embarrassing to see this level of stupidity on a Democratic site.

[Median Democrat]

Thanks for playing!

:rofl:

[Median Democrat]

46. Thanks for playing!

:rofl:

[jgraz]

47. And onto the ignore list it goes.

Only because DU doesn't offer a "Too Stupid to Shit Yourself" list.

[Median Democrat]

48. Thanks for playing! Have a nice day!

Again, no facts to back up your attacks on Obama! Thanks for exposing youself as a Freeper!

[jgraz]

49. And, of course, it has to add one more post

Sweetheart, no one is reading this thread but you and me, and I've got you on ignore.

But thanks for completing the picture. :rofl:

[Clintonista2]

55. Amazing

About 3 weeks before Clinton dropped out, I began to wonder what posters like you would do. Without Clinton to endlessly trash, how would they cope? I'll admit it, it's been great watching you meltdown Jgraz.

[Median Democrat]

61. Yes, I saw jgraz trashing Hillary On His Journal, Too

Why is he on DU-P? Also, if he had me on ignore, how did he respond to my post? The dude's journal has anti-Obama and Hillary posts. Go figure what passes for a Democrat these days.

[Clintonista2]

63. Yup, he was one of the worst Clinton bashers

He used his support of Obama as an excuse to trash her. Now that she's out of the race, the only one left to trash is Obama.

[AZBlue]

25. There's only one Obama. But go ahead, swallow those GOP talking points some more.

[jgraz]

30. More black and white thinking?

Things you agree with: Democratic
Things you don't like or don't understand: GOP.

You know, most adult human brains have more than two settings. You may want to have that looked at.

[AtomicKitten]

19. President Obama for me, please. K&R

:patriot:

[SeattleGirl]

31. Obama, baby!!!!!

:bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

[last_texas_dem]

33. President Obama

Now if someone could actually demonstrate how criticism of Obama = support for McCain, I might understand ridiculous threads like this one better...

[MonkeyFunk]

34. So that means what, exactly?

That we must shut up, fall in line and never express any doubt or difference of opinion, ever?

You guys are funny - the demands to shut down any and all disagreement seems to be a hallmark of some supporters here, and it's downright scary. It's zealotry.

[barack the house]

35. Exactly it's for obama supporters to get out the $$$ gain him the WH. And then take it from there

We nominated him we take him to the WH that is part of the deal.

[Flying Dream Blues]

38. Great picture, barack the house! nt

[johnlucas]

51. How about neither?

They may be YOUR only two choices but they are not mine.

The entire electoral process needs an overhaul from top to bottom. There are no penalties for broken promises and passing of bad legislation. Once a person is in office really nothing happens to them either way...no matter how badly they perform.

"Vote 'em out!" is the refrain. But what does that really accomplish? These folks still get their benefit packages after office and are still financially well off. They can wreck the entire land with their stupidity but as for they themselves it's easy street.

When government doesn't truly fear the force of the people, they will say and do anything.
The only reason we even get these speeches and facetime is to keep up a suspension of disbelief that mutes and waters down any true active anger at how the nation's managers betray them. It's just PR. These folks in office do whatever the hell they want because they know there will be no penalty for their actions. A little media "naughty naughty" on the fingers ain't gonna get the job done.

A revolution is brewing and maybe just maybe letting one more Republican wreck what's left will awaken people to the crappy state of how this place is run. People just don't have the heart to do anything about anything when they're comfortable. It took $4.00+ gas prices, rising food prices and foreclosed homes just to get people to pause and say "hmm something isn't right here." Still Bush has a 23% approval rating. Why isn't that single digit by now? Because some people are still comfortable enough not to be ready to revolt.

It takes disenfranchisement for people to act and that's a fact. Too many people have settled for liars and thieves running the essential jobs for the country. For too long.

If you don't say what you mean and mean what you say, stop talking.

I'd much more respect a politician who says "I will do anything you want me to provided you have the dollars to pay me." or "I will do whatever the poll numbers tell me to, so make sure you talk to your local pollsters."
We don't accept lies in other professions. We don't accept lies in our food safety or in our medical care or in our homebuilding. Why do we accept it from the people who control the laws which affect all of our lives?

If Barack Obama cannot be consistent with what he purports to stand for, then he doesn't deserve to be president. I didn't like that kind of attitude from Hillary which is why I voted against her and for Obama even giving Obama donations from money I don't have very much of to make sure he got past her phoniness in order to get to the nomination. If he becomes her, what did I vote for?

If Barack Obama ends up not much more different than John McCain it doesn't make a d*mned difference who gets elected.
The majority in this country ain't Democrats, ain't Republicans, but Non-Voters. And they are Non-Voters because they feel the election system is the most rigged contest this side of American Idol. They see politicians and politics as fake. They see the whole thing as a storefront for the big money from the big businesses that really run this land. They see it as a game and it is one they don't wish to play.

Part of me hopes gas goes up to $10.00 a gallon because sadly it might be the only way to get people fired up and ready to go for the long overdue revolution this country needs. Obama is supposed to represent the nice way of working through the system to bring change. Keep playing around and that old violent way of change is gonna take place. The key is when people stop being annoyed and become enraged.

John Lucas

[AZBlue]

54. In the reality-based world, those are the ONLY two choices. There is no "neither"

Now, changes you want to see can come about if those who want them work for them. And that's what democracy is about.

But let me ask you this - who do you think is closer to the future you want to see: Obama or McCain. And if you really can't stomach Obama, why are you here?

[styersc]

53. I want to see Progressive policies unite and heal the nation.

But you are right. There are only two choices and seemingly, my choice is not represented.

[Blue_In_AK]

64. I agree on both counts. n/t

[MarjorieG]

65. Really, really tired people thinking Obama isn't progressive, just because he wants broad appeal.

Selling progressive ideas of spending on people, infrastructure, climate change, health care, dumb wars is not easy, and we need a bigger mandate to do all this. He's making it all sound necessary, possible, but without the strident talk.

I am tired of the uber-liberals lock on what's good, bad, and what's reasonable politics.

[depakid]

56. The electorate disagrees with you

There are also third parties or no vote at all (44.7% of eligible Americans made that choice in 2004).

[AZBlue]

59. No vote = a vote for McCain.

Third party candidates do not have a chance in 2008 so, no, they aren't really a choice. They would be a vote for McCain too. In an election this important - no, this vital, anything but a vote for Obama is a vote for McCain - and a vote for the status quo.

[depakid]

60. How do you figure that?

Plenty of Republicans are disgusted with the choices, too.

Many of those folks wouldn't vote for a Dem anymore than (presumably) you'd vote for a Republican.

That's the danger in pandering to opposition groups- you create voter apathy or worse- feelings of betrayal.

That's just human nature- and with many folks, the more you beat them over the head with either/or arguments, the more stubborn and resistent they become.