With Edwards withdrawing from the Democratic race and Romney suspending his campaign yesterday, the field has narrowed considerably,, essentially to McCain and Huckabee for the Republicans and Obama and Clinton for the Democrats. It looks like McCain will win the Republican nomination, but the Democratic race is still hotly contested. Obama has won more states, but Clinton has more delegates at this time. How do you think the race will go next?

I've heard that if it goes to the superdelegate stage, then HRC seems to have it in the bag. Either way, the result will be termed historic.

I'm just hoping for a miracle. :D

Meh! I want to vote 'None of the above' is that ok? :p

I'm a republican but Obama is the best choice of them left, since Romney dropped out IMO.
The democrats are going to win, and for me that's a very bad thing. Their winning will be good for soem people's incomes, but it will ravage mine... :(
Why I say that is because it seems like hillary will win, but if it was obama who won i'd be okay with that. I don't want mccaine or huckabee though... despite the fact that I'm a Christian, Huckabee doesn't seem that smart with economy, and mccaine seems to want the goverment like in the 1980's, and his CPAC speech didn't get though to me, just seemed to be more promises that wouldn't be fulfilled.

It looks like McCain will win the Republican nomination, but the Democratic race is still hotly contested.Depending on what happens with Romney's delegates, Huckabee could win every primary between now and the convention and still not catch up. McCain's lead is commanding.

Obama has won more states, but Clinton has more delegates at this time. How do you think the race will go next?90% of Clinton's delegate lead is made up of super delegates, who can change their minds 100 times between now and the convention. Granted, since they are committed it isn't likely that they will, but we'll just have to wait and see how things shape up between now and then.

The democrats are going to win, and for me that's a very bad thing. Their winning will be good for soem people's incomes, but it will ravage mine... :( Really? You make more than $250,000 dollars per year? Obama wants to eliminate income tax for those that make under $50,000 a year. If you fit in the latter category rather than the former, it would seem that would be a very good thing for your income.

Depending on what happens with Romney's delegates, Huckabee could win every primary between now and the convention and still not catch up. McCain's lead is commanding.

Huckabee is out of the running for anything other than a spot in a McCain administration. Heard there were ~1200 rep delegates left, and you need >1000 to get nomination.


Really? You make more than $250,000 dollars per year? Obama claims to want to eliminate income tax for those that make under $50,000 a year. If you fit in the latter category rather than the former, it would seem that would be a very good thing for your income.


Fixed. More populist empty promises. Makes you wonder how he's going to make up for all the lost revenue. Who's he going to try to soak to get it. The "rich"? Last time a luxury tax was attempted, the rich just held onto their money and put many businesses out of work. Yeah, go Obama! [heavy sarcasm]

Fixed. More populist empty promises. Makes you wonder how he's going to make up for all the lost revenue.

Simple. He doesn't. :)

EDIT: I mean, the deficit hawks are dead. Even McCain will decide to keep some tax cuts, and I'm no certain he'll actually do any real budget cuts. We're going to run up deficits and national debts for a very, very long time. Oh well. I hope America doesn't have any problems....

I've heard that if it goes to the superdelegate stage, then HRC seems to have it in the bag. Either way, the result will be termed historic.

So, for the young people out there. Presidents are either Bush or Clinton. Eitherway, people who have been living in the White House for a long long time.

Well, unless Obama can win... but so far it seems like HRC is getting a bit ahead. Oh, it is also interesting to see the Demographics of the vote.

I'm hoping Obama gets nominated, If for no other reason that he seems more likely to beat McCain. McCain seems like the best kandidate the republicans could have chosen, though his age could be a problem if Huckabee becomes vice pres.

Look like Obama is on track for a sweep this weekend. I'm willing to bet that he'll sweep again on Tuesday. HRC might be able to take back some ground in March, but between pumping $5 million personal dollars into her campaign and firing her campaign manager today, I think there might be blood in the water.

@mur'phon: When McCain wins the nomination, he won't take Huckabee as a running mate. He'll need to choose someone that will boost his numbers within a demographic he can't win by himself. Since Huckabee failed to capture the evangelical vote, I imagine McCain will look for someone from the far Religious Right to bolster his conservative credibility.

I imagine McCain will look for someone from the far Religious Right to bolster his conservative credibility.

How reasuring......... :xp:

Frankly, no matter who gets nominated on either side, the choices are going to alienate 40-50% of the eligible voters. The Dems are too far to the left and the Reps will be seen as too far to the right, even though they are drifting leftward themselves (but not as fast as the dems). Given hrc's neagtives, will Obama look elsewhere for a veep if he manages to edge her out?

How reasuring......... :xp:Indeed. Perhaps you can take some comfort in knowing that it won't be Ann Coulter. Maybe Newt Gingrich? He actually showed up pretty favorably in early polls despite the fact that he never indicated that he was going to run. Might have to worry about a Democratic congress looking for some payback though if that happens. Hmmm.

Huckabee theoretically could win the nomination, but he'd have to win something like 80% of the remaining vote. He hasn't been able to do in any of the states he's won. I don't know if McCain would take someone just to make the "Religious Right" happy. I wouldn't be surprised to see Romney or even Giuliani on the ticket as VP nominee. He's looking to win, and if the US public is disenchanted with the extreme right and want to move left, as it appears to me they want to do, then McCain would have a better chance of winning with a more moderate candidate. He's going to have to appeal to independents and more conservative Democrats in order to win the Nov. election.

Obama swept (http://youdecide08.foxnews.com/2008/02/09/obama-wins-nebraska-democratic-caucuses-huckabee-takes-kansas-gop-contest/) this weekend's primaries and caucuses. Clinton has 1136 delegates right now, and Obama has 1108. I don't remember ever seeing a primary this close, particularly after a Super Tuesday election. I don't remember seeing a candidate who has so utterly captivated his followers and voters like Obama has, either. My aunt, who has adored him since his speech to the National Democratic Convention 4 years ago, is inspired by him, and other supporters I talk to feel the same. If he wins the nomination I could easily see him as President. I don't think McCain can create that level of inspiration across a wide cross-section of the public, and he'll have to fight the disenchantment with Bush's brand of Republicans.

Ann Coulter (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,327605,00.html) said she'd campaign for HRC if McCain wins. Her segment on Hannity and Colmes (look for the one 'Not Backing Mac') (http://www.foxnews.com/hannityandcolmes/index.html) is just...I don't know what...., and I laughed through parts.

the democrats are pretty much screwed everyone hates clinton and we're not going to have a black muslum for president because of the redneck vote

Ann Coulter (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,327605,00.html) said she'd campaign for HRC if McCain wins. Her segment on Hannity and Colmes (look for the one 'Not Backing Mac') (http://www.foxnews.com/hannityandcolmes/index.html) is just...I don't know what...., and I laughed through parts.
Didn’t these political mouth pieces have a field day when Alec Baldwin said something about it was “time to leave” if Bush got into office. Now these same “political extremists” are making just as stupid comments because the American people are going with McCain instead of someone more conservative.

It sounds like someone needs their blanket and bottle to me.

I want a picture of Ann Coulter supporting Hillary Clinton.

Moreover, she lies less than John McCain. I'm a Hillary girl now. She lies less than John McCain. She's smarter than John McCain, so that when she's caught shamelessly lying, at least the Clintons know they've been caught lying. McCain is so stupid, he doesn't even know he's been caught. :lol:

the democrats are pretty much screwed everyone hates clinton and we're not going to have a black muslum for president because of the redneck vote
Um, if everyone hates Hillary Clinton, then why are so many people voting for her? And Barack Obama is a professed Christian.

Huckabee theoretically could win the nomination, but he'd have to win something like 80% of the remaining vote. He hasn't been able to do in any of the states he's won. I don't know if McCain would take someone just to make the "Religious Right" happy. I wouldn't be surprised to see Romney or even Giuliani on the ticket as VP nominee. Anything is possible. I don't know why he would though considering that Romney would be a controversial pick and picking Rudy wouldn't help him win any votes that he couldn't get himself.

He's looking to win, and if the US public is disenchanted with the extreme right and want to move left, as it appears to me they want to do, then McCain would have a better chance of winning with a more moderate candidate. He's going to have to appeal to independents and more conservative Democrats in order to win the Nov. election. I suppose that's one way of looking at it. Considering the number of times I've heard "record turnout" over the last few weeks, it may be that "the left" has decided not to sit on the sidelines when "the right" goes to the polls. Similarly, McCain is going to great pains to paint himself as a conservative (take his speech at CPAC, for instance). If the scenario you suggested is closest to reality, then I think he's making a huge mistake by courting the right so openly.

Clinton has 1136 delegates right now, and Obama has 1108.Obama has the lead in pledged delegates. Clinton's lead is entirely superdelegates which may or may not change their mind before the convention. Regardless, if Obama does well again tomorrow, he'll take the lead in both pledged delegates and superdelegates.

I don't remember ever seeing a primary this close, particularly after a Super Tuesday election. I don't remember seeing a candidate who has so utterly captivated his followers and voters like Obama has, either. My aunt, who has adored him since his speech to the National Democratic Convention 4 years ago, is inspired by him, and other supporters I talk to feel the same. If he wins the nomination I could easily see him as President. I don't think McCain can create that level of inspiration across a wide cross-section of the public, and he'll have to fight the disenchantment with Bush's brand of Republicans. I think you're right. This will definitely be an old school vs new school fight if those two go to the general election.

Ann Coulter said she'd campaign for HRC if McCain wins.Yep :)

That's one way to make sure that Hillary won't get my vote.

the democrats are pretty much screwed everyone hates clinton and we're not going to have a black muslum for president because of the redneck vote Snopes vs. Smear campaigns (http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/muslim.asp)

EDIT: Apparently Hillary doesn't see changing campaign managers as "significant" (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080211/ap_on_el_pr/clinton). :rolleyes:

I didn't vote because I didn't know what to do. My mother said go with the lesser of two evils but who determines which is more evil. I am registered as a declined to state so I could vote Republican if I wanted. Unfortunately I am ticked off at both parties so I really can't back any corner. I may be liberal in principle on some issues but some I am conservative. To be honest I don't know about Obama or Clinton. If either one is chosen it would have to take some serious convincing to get me to vote for either of them.

Well, you could always hold your nose and vote for McCain, as he's slighty less liberal than either of the 2 of them. Another election lacking a clear choice in candidates and possible even direction. Big surprise. :rolleyes:


Um, if everyone hates Hillary Clinton, then why are so many people voting for her? And Barack Obama is a professed Christian.

Probably b/c they'd vote for Goofy or Satan if they headed the democrat ticket. And, yeah, the same could be said of the other side too. Still, if you believe polls and such, hrc has VERY high negatives amongst the general population and that's not good when you're going into an election. It has a tendency to suppress your own side's votes or increase the turnout on the other side (or both). As to what a politician professes........they'll often say whatever it takes to get elected.

Personally I see the country as screwed on all fronts. All potential runners have some sort of agenda or group their pushing/backing. It's a matter of degree.

Hillary I'd have to say is the most definite no vote. This woman effectively sees Mario Brothers in the same light as Grand Theft Auto and will have no problem backing political agenda to heavily restrict interactive media (ie. Video Games). Plus the woman is a raging lunatic with her point-point clap-clap approach to celebration.

McCain, he used to be the one common face of the Republican party that I could always have at least a little bit of moral support for. The man would hold his ground and stuck to his principles rather well. However this race he seems to have kinda staggered, probably with all the BS flinging by a scared Republican party trying to get someone into the big race with a chance to win. I would be giving it to Ron Paul for the Republican nomination if American politics actually made sense and people actually did what they say they believe, however McCain I'm giving my tally to on this, despite any opinions on his ability to hold an office now.

Obama. I don't really have too large of an opinion on him, I'm not sure he'd be great for the job, however I have no reason to believe he'd be outright bad for it. All in all, I have to give him my vote in this race. He doesn't have a very extended history in politics and definitely no expertise in global resolution of issues/etc. However he has potential, which is more than I can say for the others.

All in all, Obama seems like the breathe of fresh air from this stagnant upper-class-ruled whitewash event in our lives.

I am registered as a declined to state so I could vote Republican if I wanted. Unfortunately I am ticked off at both parties so I really can't back any corner. I may be liberal in principle on some issues but some I am conservative. To be honest I don't know about Obama or Clinton. If either one is chosen it would have to take some serious convincing to get me to vote for either of them.
I've decided that I am voting in the Republican Primary in Texas March 4th. Since Texas will definitely be a red state come November this will be my only chance to have my vote counted. I also don’t care if the Democrats nominated Obama or Clinton as I will vote for either come this November. So I will make Ann Coulter day and vote for John McCain.

For the first time in my life I am in political heaven as I like all three of the front runners.

Clinton scares the heck outa me.... Obama might be a good president, but you know darn good and well there's gonna be a lot of white supremicists out there that are gonna want him dead. A vote for Obama would be like a vote for his VP because the likelihood is that he won't complete a full term. It would be nice if I'm wrong about it, but there are just too many racists out there that would not want to see a black president. It is a shame really. I'm pretty sure that was one of the reasons that Powell decided not to run a while back.

Actually, the best chance the Republicans have is for McCain to have a VP other than Romney(I liked him too). He is not very popular amongst a large section of the GOP. Primarily the more hard right. If he doesn't find someone popular with that group, then he may convince them to stay home on election night. That's where Huckabee comes in. Hard religious background, and really a pretty likable guy(if not a bit Jim Neighbors like). I really wish the GOP would get off the HARD religious right. I would have liked to see what Romney could do(even if he was a bit too Ken Doll perfect... I swear it was amazing to see him with a hair out of place haha).

I didn't vote because I didn't know what to do. My mother said go with the lesser of two evils but who determines which is more evil. I am registered as a declined to state so I could vote Republican if I wanted. Unfortunately I am ticked off at both parties so I really can't back any corner. I may be liberal in principle on some issues but some I am conservative. To be honest I don't know about Obama or Clinton. If either one is chosen it would have to take some serious convincing to get me to vote for either of them.


This situation is simple to diagnose.....vote Libertarian. I'm a Libertarian, so I can see where you're coming from. Sure, I'm backing Ron Paul, but its no big secret that he's still a Libertarian at heart. If Ron doesn't get the Republican nomination and sticks to his guns by not running as a third party or an independent, then I'll be voting for the Libertarian nominee. Don't vote for the lesser of two evils, because in the end, you still wind up with a devil in the White House. You can never go wrong if you vote your conscience.

Then, again, the proverbial road to hell is paved with good intentions. :xp:

Well, apparently Leno, Letterman, and Stewart aren't enough pop press, so now we move to the WWE. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbaxHjxOlo4). :D (thanks to Niner for linkage!)


Latest status of the Primaries--McCain's got enough delegates to make him the presumptive nominee for the Republicans, and Obama and Clinton are fighting it out for delegates for the Democratic nomination. Obama has more overall votes and states but they're quite close, and Clinton just won by a good 10 percentage points or so in PA. It looks like neither one will have enough delegates when the Democratic National Convention takes place--that's going to make things very interesting to be sure.

DO YOU SMELL
WHAT
BARACK
IS
COOKING



>_>

The status of the pledged delegate count (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwd88C25J-0)

Of course, after arguing for months that this election was all about delegates, Hillary is now saying that the "real" metric to watch is popular votes (which she clearly winning via Hillary-math (TM)).

EDIT:
Well, apparently Leno, Letterman, and Stewart aren't enough pop press, so now we move to the WWE. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbaxHjxOlo4). :D (thanks to Niner for linkage!) Wow. I think I just threw up in my mouth a little bit.

DO YOU SMELL
WHAT
BARACK
IS
COOKING



>_>


I'm trying not to. want to avoid achille's reflux problem. ;)

Well i deffinitly dson't want Mccain. Obama seems like a good choice, but I can't say I really know what his plan with the economy is. Hilary on the other hand... I can't trust Hilary. If you want Bill Clinton's economy-running style, why don't you just elect him a third time. Hilary obviously isn't up for the job, because all i see is her saying she's going to do things, (same with barrack), but I just can't trust her. It's that cheesy smile, the lies in the Clinton administration, and all that sucking up to the public that I simply can't trust... Right on CNN She says 'I love Indiana!'. Sure it may be her home state but seriously, that is definitly sucking up to the public... I just can't trust her, you know what I mean? She's only saying things liek that to get votes-everything she says sounds completely planned out as what the public wants to hear. I don't really like Barrack either but we've only got three choices left and we have to choose one of them...

She's only saying things liek that to get votes-everything she says sounds completely planned out as what the public wants to hear.

Unlike the others..................
Its an election, the candidates will say anything to get elected.

Unlike the others..................

:rofl: Precisely one of the reasons I didn't vote in the primary. "Blasphemy!", you say? Well, no. :p

1. I despise primary elections in general--but I'm not so dumb as to not vote in a primary out of the principle of the thing. :p

2. I live in Massachusetts, and I'm a registered Independent, which means--as of this year--I can vote in either primary. Voting in the Republican primary was kind of pointless, because everyone knew Romney was going to drop out. So that leaves the Democratic primary.

3. It wouldn't have mattered who I voted for, because it's all going to come down to the superdelegates' votes (one of the reasons I despise primary elections).

4. And even if my vote did matter, I doubt that either Clinton or Obama has any shot at beating McCain in November.

5. And even if they did, I don't like Clinton or Obama any more than I like McCain, since the two of them seem so bent on violating the Constitution in order to enforce their beliefs on the country. And McCain isn't any better.

Rant over. :p

Obama seems like a good choice, but I can't say I really know what his plan with the economy is. Now (http://www.barackobama.com/issues/economy/) you do. ;)

If you want Bill Clinton's economy-running style, why don't you just elect him a third time.Because it would violate the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution.

2. I live in Massachusetts, and I'm a registered Independent, which means--as of this year--I can vote in either primary. You could have re-registered with a party and then switched back...like I did :)

3. It wouldn't have mattered who I voted for, because it's all going to come down to the superdelegates' votes (one of the reasons I despise primary elections). And the reason it's going to come down to superdelegates? Because not enough voters broke for one candidate or another :D

Not that your one, single vote would have turned the tide, but if everyone that subscribed to this school of thought voted, then it might not have been up to the supers after all :)

4. And even if my vote did matter, I doubt that either Clinton or Obama has any shot at beating McCain in November.:lol:
Let's think this through.

The Republican race has pretty much been over for a few months now. No one is going after McCain. He's "running" unopposed. He's eating a free lunch. His numbers are never going to be better than they are right now.

In contrast, Barack and Hillary are beating the snot out of each other. They are on the war path daily. They can't sneeze without someone posting it on YouTube. Their numbers are most likely never going to be worse than they are right now (<= obviously conjecture).

And what do we see? We see McCain (at his best) pretty much tied with the Dems (at their worst). Obama pulled in 40 million in Feb. Hillary 20 million. McCain 12. With all due respect sir, what fantasy world do you live in where McCain looks like the clear winner in November? :D

5. And even if they did, I don't like Clinton or Obama any more than I like McCain, since the two of them seem so bent on violating the Constitution in order to enforce their beliefs on the country. Huh?

PS: You do know that Barack was a constitutional law professor right? ;) One of the things that made me decide on Obama is that he wants to bring us back to the Constitution. So I'm not sure why you think he wants to "violate" it.

5. And even if they did, I don't like Clinton or Obama any more than I like McCain, since the two of them seem so bent on violating the Constitution in order to enforce their beliefs on the country. And McCain isn't any better. When did Clinton, Obama or McCain ever put forth a law or make a campaign promises that would violate the Constitution? Just because the current administration seems to believe the oath of office is merely words, does not mean the next person to take that oath to uphold the Constitution will not actually take that oath seriously.

P.S. Have you looked at the Economic Numbers lately? Foreign Policy, Religious Freedoms and National Security are important to people, but with the economy in a downturn and people worried about their next pay check, people will vote for their pocket books. “It’s the economy, stupid” got Bill Clinton into the White House and it will get Obama or Hillary into the White House next year.

Well, apparently Leno, Letterman, and Stewart aren't enough pop press, so now we move to the WWE. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbaxHjxOlo4). :D (thanks to Niner for linkage!) Makes mental note not to click on anymore of Jae’s links. :D

Is Ron Paul running as an independent? After this display he may get my vote. My problem with Mr. Paul is my question of his sanity, but obviously he is just as sane as these three.

Does their appearance on WWE mean that all three candidates support steroid and HGH usage?

PS: You do know that Barack was a constitutional law professor right? One of the things that made me decide on Obama is that he wants to bring us back to the Constitution. So I'm not sure why you think he wants to "violate" it.

Yeah, that's really reassuring. :rolleyes:

Problem the dems face, though, is that fairly significant fractions of one candidate's voting block have said they'd vote for McCain if their candidate got hosed at the convention. Outside of Ann Coulter, haven't heard many reps say they'd vote hilary/obama if McCain's their candidate.

Does their appearance on WWE mean that all three candidates support steroid and HGH usage?If you eat chicken nuggets at McDonald's does it mean you support mistreatment of chickens? Let's not get jumpy just because they're politicians. :p

Because it would violate the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution.

It was rhetorical... I'm only saying that Hilary is not as good with math as her husband is, and her being president wouldn't be the same as him being president.

her being president wouldn't be the same as him being president.Why? Because they're actually two different people? :p

Because they're actually two different people? :pWith Hilary we wouldn’t be worried about what is happening in the Oval Office with the interns. We would have to worry about what Bill was doing in the Lincoln Bedroom with them.

It was rhetorical... I'm only saying that Hilary is not as good with math as her husband is, and her being president wouldn't be the same as him being president. What facts do you have that she wouldn’t be a better President than her husband? Remember Bill and Hilary Clinton married in 1975 and must share many of the same values. If you believe FoxNews or Rush Limbaugh she ran Bill Clinton’s White House. Funny the have changed their tune over the past 8 years and now say she has no experience. Personally, I do not believe she will get the Democratic Nomination over Obama, but if elected to the White House I see Hilary Clinton Presidency being very similar to her husbands, only with more self-control.

If you eat chicken nuggets at McDonald's does it mean you support mistreatment of chickens? Yes, and if you buy gas you are supporting Muslim extremist. Wait someone at the door. I will not be back for a while the man at the door is saying something about Guacamole…maybe Guantanamo or something like that.

You could have re-registered with a party and then switched back...like I did :)

You misunderstand; that used to be the case. Starting this year, a registered Independent actually can vote in the primary.

And the reason it's going to come down to superdelegates? Because not enough voters broke for one candidate or another :D

Not that your one, single vote would have turned the tide, but if everyone that subscribed to this school of thought voted, then it might not have been up to the supers after all :)

Actually, believe it or not, Clinton won by one vote in my district. :D But you're absolutely right. That's where points 4 and 5 come in. ;)

The Republican race has pretty much been over for a few months now. No one is going after McCain. He's "running" unopposed. He's eating a free lunch. His numbers are never going to be better than they are right now.

In contrast, Barack and Hillary are beating the snot out of each other. They are on the war path daily. They can't sneeze without someone posting it on YouTube. Their numbers are most likely never going to be worse than they are right now (<= obviously conjecture).

And what do we see? We see McCain (at his best) pretty much tied with the Dems (at their worst). Obama pulled in 40 million in Feb. Hillary 20 million. McCain 12. With all due respect sir, what fantasy world do you live in where McCain looks like the clear winner in November? :D

Eh, you do have a point, but still, the longer Clinton and Obama tear each other up, the better McCain's chances are. All he has to do is sit back while they kill each other for him.

When did Clinton, Obama or McCain ever put forth a law or make a campaign promises that would violate the Constitution?

They all run on platforms of immigration reform, the war in Iraq, repairing the economy, etc. None of these are the responsibilities of the president, and in order to accomplish any of these, they will have to increase the powers of the executive branch to more ridiculous proportions than they already are.

If they want to do all these things, they should stay in the senate.

They all run on platforms of immigration reform, the war in Iraq, repairing the economy, etc. None of these are the responsibilities of the president, and in order to accomplish any of these, they will have to increase the powers of the executive branch to more ridiculous proportions than they already are. The Commander and Chief should take no responsibility for the armed forces? Look at Article Two of the Constitution to verify all of these fall under the President authority. Any action taken by congress in regards to any of these platforms must be signed into law or vetoed by the President. I understand that checks and balance has been a foreign concept over the last eight years, but it is how our founding fathers (the ones that actually wrote the Constitution) envisioned our government working. I see all three of these candidates restoring the government back to the power structure intended by our founding fathers and relinquish the power seized in the name of fear by the current administration.

"The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States."

Oh, the Commander in Cnief has every right to direct the armed forces--in times of war. And only Congress has the power to declare war. Tell me, when was the last time Congress declared war?

"The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States."

Oh, the Commander in Cnief has every right to direct the armed forces--in times of war. And only Congress has the power to declare war. Tell me, when was the last time Congress declared war? And which of the three is responsible for the troops being over there? Are you advocating the next president do nothing? Are they just to leave our troops over there to find their own way home? Sorry, but I’m President now and since the war is unconstitutional you have to make your own way home. I can’t get my hands dirty. The troops are already in service the only way around that is to elect a President that can turn back time.

I fail to see how any person entering the Presidency would not be violating the Constitution under your definition. Getting rid of the office of President seems to be the only alternative, but that too would violate the Constitution.

I wonder if there is such a thing as a Declaration of Dependence, perhaps we can draft one of those. Would the British take us back or perhaps the Canadians? :D

You misunderstand; that used to be the case. Starting this year, a registered Independent actually can vote in the primary. Huh? So then why didn't you vote again?

Actually, believe it or not, Clinton won by one vote in my district. :D But you're absolutely right. That's where points 4 and 5 come in. ;) Except neither point 4 or 5 are accurate :)
(Well, half of 5. Not liking either candidate isn't subject to right or wrong).

Eh, you do have a point, but still, the longer Clinton and Obama tear each other up, the better McCain's chances are. All he has to do is sit back while they kill each other for him.Perhaps. We only have a few more weeks until this thing is over, so I don't share your opinion that McCain's big chances are still ahead of him. Also, considering Hillary's "kitchen sink" strategy, all of McCain's talking points have largely lost their significance, IMHO. Is the Jeremiah Wright nontroversy going to suddenly have a new lease on life just because it's coming from McCain in a general election? I seriously doubt it, but that's only my opinion.

They all run on platforms of immigration reform, the war in Iraq, repairing the economy, etc. None of these are the responsibilities of the president, and in order to accomplish any of these, they will have to increase the powers of the executive branch to more ridiculous proportions than they already are. Using this same logic we could argue that appointing cabinet positions is "violating of the constitution in order to enforce their beliefs on this country" as well. :rolleyes:

McCain is also running on a platform of immigration reform, Iraq, and the economy, yet you only specified the two democratic contenders in your original point. Why is that?

If they want to do all these things, they should stay in the senate.Where they can be one voice amongst the masses instead of practicing genuine leadership. Cynicism, ftw!

Oh, the Commander in Cnief has every right to direct the armed forces--in times of war. And only Congress has the power to declare war. Tell me, when was the last time Congress declared war?I want to say WWII, but it actually may have been Korea. Do I win anything if I guessed correctly? :D

Perhaps. We only have a few more weeks until this thing is over...
My prediction is the Democratic nominee will be decided sometime between August 25 and 28. I want to say WWII, but it actually may have been Korea. Do I win anything if I guessed correctly? :DThe last formal declaration of war was WWII. The last time Congress authorized a military engagement was October 16, 2002 H.J. Res. 114 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d107:H.J.RES.114:)

You get half a cookie (http://www.blubberbuster.com/images/cookie_half.jpg).

McCain is also running on a platform of immigration reform, Iraq, and the economy, yet you only specified the two democratic contenders in your original point. Why is that?

Because I was only talking about the Democratic primary. ;) Even back then it was clear Romney was going to drop out, so there was no point in voting in the Republican primary. But yes, McCain's platform is no more relevant than Clinton's or Obama's. They aren't just making promises they won't keep; they're making promises they can't possibly keep.

I want to say WWII, but it actually may have been Korea. Do I win anything if I guessed correctly? :D

Yup, it was WWII all right. You get half a cookie. :D

EDIT: Bah, mimartin beat me to it.

My prediction is the Democratic nominee will be decided sometime between August 25 and 28. If this thing goes to the convention, I'm going to blame you, drive to Texas, and toilet paper your house.

The last formal declaration of war was WWII. The last time Congress authorized a military engagement was October 16, 2002 H.J. Res. 114 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d107:H.J.RES.114:)

You get half a cookie (http://www.blubberbuster.com/images/cookie_half.jpg).
That doesn't count! Voting to turn the decision over to someone else is not the same thing as making the decision. I want all my cookie! (om nom nom nom)

Not only does it not count, but as I recall, that was not a vote to go to war, but a vote to call for a vote to go to war if certain conditions were met (namely, among other things, if weapons of mass destruction were found). Such conditions were never met, because of course there were no WMDs in Iraq, and Congress never voted for war.

Of course, not a single Congressmen could have possibly been dense enough to think that by voting so, they weren't doing to go to war. Which was exactly the point; we got war in Iraq, but Congress was still able to deny ever voting for the war in case anything bad happened.

If this thing goes to the convention, I'm going to blame you, drive to Texas, and toilet paper your house.Don't let the rubber snakes scare you.:D

Hilary Clinton’s chief advisor was known as the comeback kid during his political career, so I just don’t see her getting out of the race until either Obama has the required delegates to win (impossible) or the DNC makes another decision about what to do with Florida and Michigan (not going to happen). So I guess that leaves when she hears Obama make his acceptance speech at the convention.
That doesn't count! Voting to turn the decision over to someone else is not the same thing as making the decision.Oh, I agree, but it is amazing how many wars the United States has been in when compared to how many time Congress has actually declared war. You may also want to inform Obama of the difference, I’ve heard him say more than once that his opponents authorized the war in Iraq.

I want all my cookie! (om nom nom nom)
The cookie verdict stands! You sir, hedged your bet by saying WWII or possibly Korea. Since Korea had no declaration of war or even a congressional authorization for military engagement I determined that you only deserved half a cookie. Now if you want to take this decision further I suggest we get a mediator, I suggest stoffe, as I believe she can be completely impartial (however, I would rather have Jae, considering the resent debate between you and her in another thread).

However, in the interest of peace and in the name of friendship. Here are your cookies (http://www.kattitudes.com/pix/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=6605&g2_serialNumber=1). :D